To summarise a few essential points discussed so far:

- there are no fairy fields

- there are no whackalinos

- rest mass quantum numbers may be grouped in Koide triplets

- these triplets may be packaged using the structure of neutrino mixing

- neutrinos and antineutrinos have different rest masses

- this is responsible for a number of observations, such as the CMB temperature of $2.75$ K, which corresponds to an antineutrino mass of $0.00117$ eV

- it is extremely unlikely that astrophysical gravitational waves will be detected at LIGO etc

- the destruction of the false Absolute requires a (higher dimensional) category theory framework, for which a full achiral set of Bilson-Thompson braids characterises the standard low energy particle spectrum

- Riofrio's $R = ct$ varying $c$ cosmology leads to many lines of evidence, such as supernovae redshifts, lunar laser ranging data, the Pioneer anomaly, resolution of horizon problem etc

- Graham D has many interesting things to say about the astrophysical consequences of such quantum gravity

- time to think about DAMA, condensed matter systems, quark gluon plasmas ...

8 years ago

As short as usually, but thanks. I must laugh at this. It was not exactly this I meant.

ReplyDeleteYesterday I saw that Matti also has joined the league with a changing light. He has long talked for a changing time... I think it maybe would be easier to get this picture evolve if more would be concentrated on the time. At least to me it was a 'bump' to realize time and light work together, also in other ways than in the far away redshift.

Alas, the fault of the laconic gene. Ulla, physicists would love to think about time this way, if only they could give up believing that quantum gravity should be defined in terms of the classical tools that they learned in school.

ReplyDeleteI try to make a summary myself, and the quantum chaos troubles me. You use group categorization, as instance a cube (3*9), but what makes the choise in a probalistic chaos? There are no fairy fields, but what are there? Spinors of diffuse energy? No topology should be there?

ReplyDeleteIf you have a field of high entropy and makes it move by more energy - what happens? Some say it will go to less entropy (networks are created (flotation), but that means more energy is created too). This is the potentials, or the mexican hat. It is hard to see how a regular network like a cube comes out; it would need some kind of regulation or topology behind. Energy is from environment, and created from the networks? Can the created energy have some clues? This assumes no particle is there to guide.

Ulla, you are making far too many lazy assumptions about ideas that I am not discussing. For instance, you should not confuse classical topology with the possibilities for topology in higher category theory. You talk of fields, but in physics the term field hinges on a background that does not exist, even mathematically.

ReplyDeleteWell, thanks for the help. It is exactly this difference I can't understand, possibilities for topology, and your answer is most revealing and helpful:)

ReplyDeleteWhen I talk of fields I think much of waves. The particle duality, but there are also other waves. Look at what Graham discuss about antimatter.

http://www.galaxyzooforum.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=6360fb5be86c0b93515c3dc96584dae0&topic=277933.msg496084#msg496084

The essence of dark matter, he thinks. Not bad.

Well, non mathematical people usually think of topology as something to do with holes in doughnuts. That is still true, but one must radically alter one's interpretation of the spaces (ie. the doughnuts) themselves, and we allow a more general notion of space. The braid pictures do not directly describe a physical space, but rather categorical objects. They are somehow closer to algebra and logic than to classical space. An old fashioned space is best thought of as an infinite dimensional category, built from paths, and paths between paths, and paths between paths between paths, and so on. That is, classical geometry is complicated precisely because it is 'unnatural'.

ReplyDeleteLook at what Kauffman thinks. Is something forgotten by physicists? Possibles are non-local, instantaneous and coherent also at long distances. This is QM.

ReplyDeleteSuits well with what Graham says.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2010/10/10/130480911/-instantaneous-constructive-and-destructive-interference-in-quantum-mechanics?ft=1&f=114424647

Thanx again for the linx! Things move forward with every single person joining Ulla's league of changing light. (League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and Women?) The word is spreading with every talk and meeting.

ReplyDeleteLuoise, it is not my league, it is yours :) And I have learned to trust Mattis thinking. It is usually me that is wrong, but the other way also happen sometimes. He has just hard to accept it :)

ReplyDelete