On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 12:12 AM Lawrence Crowell < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Saturday, June 26, 2021 at 4:36:47 PM UTC-5 Brent wrote: > >> On 6/26/2021 9:15 AM, John Clark wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jun 26, 2021 at 7:43 AM Tomas Pales <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> *> While the anthropic principle might be used to explain why the laws >>> have been stable in the past (because this stability is probably necessary >>> for the evolution of living or conscious organisms such as humans), it >>> doesn't seem to explain why we should expect that the laws will continue to >>> be stable in the future.* >> >> >> But the world is not stable. >> >> >> But presumably the *laws *are stable. Why? Because that's the way we >> want them. If they weren't stable (or even time invariant) we wouldn't >> call them laws of physics. They'd be initial conditions or historical >> accidents. >> >> Brent >> >> > The instability of the deSitter vacuum means gauge theories are not > stable, and in fact are just local gauge redundancies that are not global > in space or time. > Do you have any actual evidence that the deSitter vacuum is unstable? Or is this just a speculative idea based on the idea of a string theory landscape? Bruce -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLRokT%3D6Q%2BzKS7ZrXT5UXDEc7bvRsk1pazvB8JLc1KeZDg%40mail.gmail.com.
