| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« The Dead by Billy Collins | Main | The Unconscionable War »

November 22, 2007

A shape could describe the cosmos and all it contains

From The Economist:

E82Three decades of effort have been expended on string theory, which includes gravity but at the expense of having the universe inelegantly sprout hidden dimensions. Other potential avenues, such as loop quantum gravity, are also proving untidy. That a theory of everything might emerge from geometry would be neat, but it is a long shot.

Nevertheless, that is what Garrett Lisi is proposing. The geometry he has been studying is that of a structure known to mathematicians as E8, which was first recognised in 1887 by Sophus Lie, a Norwegian mathematician. E8 is a monster. It has 248 dimensions and its structure took 120 years to solve. It was finally tamed earlier this year, when a group of mathematicians managed to construct a map that describes it completely.

Dr Lisi had been tinkering with some smaller geometries. Soon after reading about this map, however, he realised that the structure of E8 could be used to describe fully the laws of physics. He placed a particle (including different versions of the same entities, and using particles that describe matter and those that describe forces) on most of the 248 points of E8. Using computer simulations to manipulate the structure, he was able mathematically to generate interactions that correspond to what is seen in reality.

More here.

Posted by Abbas Raza at 11:59 PM | Permalink

Comments

One word: Mandala.

Posted by: Damien | Nov 23, 2007 8:54:48 PM

Another word: Sheesh.

Posted by: Carlos | Nov 23, 2007 10:18:48 PM

That is some cool shit!

Posted by: beajerry | Nov 24, 2007 1:04:14 AM

Abbas, thanks for posting not just the article but the image as well. The Economist article doesn't appear to have any accompanying image of "E8"; odd for a story about geometry, no?

Damien; the mandala analogy works even better in the colour version of this structure. Check out;
http://aimath.org/E8/mcmullen.html
The site it comes from deals with the work that went into producing a visual representation of E8. Here's a quote from their home page;
"The magnitude of the E8 calculation invites comparison with the Human Genome Project. The human genome, which contains all the genetic information of a cell, is less than a gigabyte in size. The result of the E8 calculation, which contains all the information about E8 and its representations, is 60 gigabytes in size. That is enough space to store 45 days of continuous music in MP3 format. While many scientific projects involve processing large amounts of data, the E8 calculation is very different: the size of the input is comparatively small, but the answer itself is enormous, and very dense."
Yes, this very cool.

Posted by: Pete Chapman | Nov 24, 2007 3:00:32 AM

A rebuttal, of sorts, of Lisi

The very fact that the discussion got to ghosts simply means that someone deliberately emits fog. The core of the discussion has nothing to do with ghosts.

Moreover, when Garrett Lisi argues that something is OK because they're ghosts, he confuses all kinds of ghosts and completely misunderstands their properties.

For non-compact gauge groups, one creates negative-normed states, i.e. the "bad ghosts". These objects make a theory unphysical because probabilities are no longer positively semidefinite.

But these ghosts have nothing whatsoever to do with Fermi/Bose statistics. Even the bad ghosts coming from polarizations of gauge field with a non-compact group are always bosonic objects.

What he wants to suggest is that he might get fermions because the fermions are associated with the Faddeev-Popov "good" ghosts. Indeed, these good ghosts are fermionic, but their being fermionic is inseparable from the fact that they're unphysical.

So his theory has wrong "bad ghosts" and doesn't have fermions and even if he included anything like a "BRST", BRST method is not a method to generate new physical fermions. It is a technical method to deal with an existing gauge symmetry.

Combine it or recombine it in any way you want - it remains completely obvious that a normal gauge field without a *physical* (not just BRST) fermionic symmetry (supersymmetry) simply can't give you any fermions.

It can't give you any spinors of those gauge groups, whatever you get has wrong quantum numbers - kind of all of them etc. etc.

Garrett Lisi emits words that are very similar to those used in physics except that the combinations he creates out of these words are physically nonsensical - because he simply doesn't understand the words he is using. Apparently no one who reads these things can figure these things out.

How many people in the world solidly understand why these comments about ghosts and statistics are safely nonsensical? One million? 100,000? 10,000? At any rate, this set of people is completely unable to be heard.


Luboš Motl

Posted by: Carlos | Nov 24, 2007 10:42:51 PM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

3QD ADVERTISING


3QD on Twitter


Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google


Recent Comments

Eli on Wednesday Poem

Jonathan on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

JonJ on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

David Schneider on zizek does iran

Martine on Friday Poem

Lambness on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

aguy109 on Vocal Minority Insists It Was All Smoke and Mirrors

billy on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

J.Hawkins on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

J.Hawkins on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Christopher on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Norman Costa on Wednesday Poem

Elatia Harris on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

mary on Happy Bastille Day

Dr.R.P.Sehgal on India, China and the polemics of the East

Dave Ranning on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

billy on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Elatia Harris on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Elatia Harris on Pakistan's galleries on the go

Dave Ranning on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Elatia Harris on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

Ruchira on Pakistan's galleries on the go

Lambness on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

A on Tragic hero: Laurie Taylor interviews Terry Eagleton

John Ballard on Happy Bastille Day


Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.


The 3QD Prizes

Logo designed by Vicki Winters

Subscribe to this blog's feed