Monday, October 12, 2015

State of the Vision of Unified Theories

While we make progress in theory as to the general nature of the universe, clearly as in Sabine's cautious description of the possibility of a table top experiment that in principle could show if gravity is quantized the 'usual' description  of the grounding term "Quantum Gravity" especially with the concepts of 'Looping' in terms of a vague quantum formalism applied to models described by information in context (is there a 0 or 1 or something in between conceptually) means that such cosmology is neither Quantum nor Loopy - just as she points out that there seems to be a contradiction rather than inconsistency or like an uncertainty principle we cannot know both things describing the slit experiment in the paradoxical but complimentary probabilistic observations involved on this deep level of scale of which the string camp has its own take on that thought in principle unknowable (another vague quantum formalism).  This is a deep question of the nature of logic itself as matters of proof.  As she pointed out Poincare even if given a strict proof may not be the case when we consider the topology when we consider local regions and deeper ideas crossing boundaries at neutral or highly compressed regions near or at singularity. This is not to say in the stance of Nonnecessity more general a foundation for physics as known partitioning (quasication) that we have to modify or abandon either the quantum theory or the relativities. Moreover, we need not revert to classical logic nor abandon other logics like quantum logic for have for what is physicality a practical theory. But we do need a wider interpretation of what is open or closed in a wider general theory of our arrangement of all such models.  How is this different from the ideas of the abc conjecture? One cannot print a simulation of objects within objects within objects and so on in less that a finite number of steps unless we start with two facing mirrors to achieve this all at once.  But this is not a contradiction.  More like a contradiction superimposed on a tautology of which the tabletop phenomenology is both the mirror and the cyclic repetition as if one sided mirroring as seems the most general big picture of what is actual nature.  In view of this I find so many promising ideas as essential to consider but will be looked back on as very learned but still embarrassingly incomplete. Just as in DNA it seems previous but abandoned theories can still have the influence of who is the father, which is to say we go beyond our wrong questions of things like diversity and a tree of natural selection as a general description of the genome. In this sense our brains are the consummate table top experiment.

No comments:

Post a Comment