On 21 Jul 2014, at 01:33, Richard Ruquist wrote:
My only comment is that SUSY is associated with string theory, not MW.
String theory includes QFT as a low energy equivalent w/o SUSY
and QFT does not predict MW. But then I am just another dummie.
No problem Richard, the future belongs to the gentle dummies :)
String theory is still quantum mechanics, and so get automatically the
MW (unless we add a collapse postulate, although I don't even see how
that could be done, like in QFT. So I tend to separate the super-
symmetry question from the MW.
MW is a consequence of just 3 things: linearity of the wave equation
(unitarity), linearity of the tensor products, the superposition
principle. Then we can define a "World", by the closure of set of
events for interaction, and we get the MW, for QM and all its
consistent extension (with "special hamiltonians").
Bruno
Richard
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 6:22 PM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote:
Does no one have any comment / answer / information on this?
On 20 July 2014 15:38, LizR <[email protected]> wrote:
We've just been watching "Particle Fever" - a documentary about the
LHC (from 2007 to the discovery of the Higgs boson last year). In
it, at least a couple of people (Monica Dunbar and David Kaplan,
IIRC) say that a 115GeV Higgs would be a clear sign of
Supersymmetry, while a 140GeV (or greater) would indicate a
Multiverse (meaning a String Landscape, I assume). The measured
value is 126GeV, which apparently leaves everything open for now.
They seem quite certain that there is a dichotony - SUSY vs MV - and
that the MV answer would effectively be "the end of physics", I
assume because the fundamental physics underlying the string
landscape is only accessible at scales/energies far beyond those
accessible to any currently conceivable experiment.
I can't quite see this, so perhaps someone could elaborate. That is,
it seems to me unlikely that there is a theory that is going to say
the ratio of electron to proton masses is exactly what it is
(1:1836.15267245 or so, I believe) and that this emerges from simple
principles. Since the proton is a composite "particle" a better
example might be the ratio of the electron to muon masses, which I
believe is around 1:206.7682821476077.
When the chemical elements were being discovered, it became clear
that there were simple principles underlying the apparently
complexity. There were what seemed like completely different
substances, which turned out to be related by simple numbers, e.g.
if you take something like 2 grams of hydrogen and 16 grams of
oxygen and mix them you get 18 grams of water. (Or whatever the
correct figures are.) The point being that these small integer (or
almost-integer, but they couldn't measure them accurately enough to
realise that at the time) values indicate something simpler
underlying the observed complexity, whereas 1:1836.15267245 or
1:206.7682821476077, it seems to me, don't.
And so on for the various other dimensionless ratios that abound in
the Standard Model, plus the fact that we see neutrinos with only
one handedness, the absence of antimatter and various other apparent
symmetry breakings
This seems to me to indicate that a multiverse could easily be
involved, and that the (ahem) string of apparently random values we
observed emerge from something like there being 10^500 ways to knot
a piece of string in 11 dimensions.
What I don't understand is why this would not also allow
supersymmetry to exist? Or why would SUSY rule out a multiverse, as
the people in the film seemed to think? Or maybe I misunderstood them.
Anyone out there with the ability to explain advanced physics to
dummies?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
