### Considerable progress in generalized Feynman diagrammatics

The following is expanded and somewhat edited response in Kea's blog. For reasons that should become obvious the response deserves to be published also here although I have done this implicitly via links to pdf files in earlier postings. My sincere hope is that at least single really intelligent reader might realize what is is involved;-). This might be enough.

I have been working with twistor program inspired ideas in TGD framework for a couple of years. The basic conceptual elements are following.

- The notion of generalized Feyman diagram defined by replacing lines of ordinary Feynman diagram with light-like 3-surfaces (elementary particle sized wormhole contacts with throats carrying quantum numbers) and vertices identified as their 2-D ends - I call them partonic 2-surfaces. Speaking somewhat loosely, generalized Feynman diagrams plus background space-time sheets define the "world of classical worlds" (WCW).
- Zero energy ontology (ZEO) and causal diamonds (intersections of future and past directed lightcones). The crucial observation is that in ZEO it is possible to identify off mass shell particles as pairs of on mass shell particles at throats of wormhole contact since both positive and negative signs of energy are possible. The propagator defined by modified Dirac action does not diverge (except for incoming lines) although the fermions at throats are on mass shell. In other words, the generalized eigenvalue of the modified Dirac operator containing a term linear in momentum is non-vanishing and propagator reduces to G=i/λγ , where γ is modified gamma matrix in the direction of stringy coordinate. This means opening of the black box of off mass shell particle-something which for some reason has not occurred to anyone fighting with the divergences of QFTs.
- Representation of 8-D gamma matrices in terms of octonionic units and 2-D sigma matrices. Modified gamma matrices at space-time surfaces are quaternionic/associative and allow a genuine matrix representation. As a matter fact, TGD and WCW can be formulated as study of associative local sub-algebras of the local Clifford algebra of 8-D imbedding space parameterized by quaternionic space-time surfaces. Central conjecture is that quaternionic 4-surfaces correspond to preferred extremals of Kähler action identified as critical ones (second variation of Kähler action vanishes for infinite number of deformations defining super-conformal algebra) and allow a slicing to string worldsheets parametrized by points of partonic 2-surfaces.
- Number theoretic universality requiring the existence of Feynman amplitudes in all number fields when one allows suitable algebraic extensions: roots of unity are certainly required in order to realize plane waves. Also imbedding space, partonic 2-surfaces and WCW must exist in all number fields and their extensions. These constraints are enormously powerful and the attempts to realize this vision have dominated quantum TGD for last 20 years.
- As far as twistors are considered, the first key element is the reduction of the octonionic twistor structure to quaternionic one at space-time surfaces and giving effectively 4-D spinor and twistor structure for quaternionic surfaces.

Quite recently quite a dramatic progress took place in this approach. It was just the simple observation -I should have made if for already half year ago!- that on mass shell property puts enormously strong kinematic restrictions on the loop integrations. With mild restrictions on the number of parallel fermion lines appearing in vertices (there can be several since fermionic oscillator operator algebra defining SUSY algebra generates the parton states)- all loops are manifestly finite and if particles has always mass -say small p-adic thermal mass also in case of massless particles and due to IR cutoff due to the presence largest CD- the number of diagrams is finite. Unitarity reduces to Cutkosky rules automatically satisfied as in the case of ordinary Feynman diagrams.

This is about momentum space aspects of Feynman diagrams but not yet about the functional (not path-) integral over small deformations of the partonic 2-surfaces. It took some time to see that also the functional integrals over WCW can be carried out at general level both in real and p-adic context.

- The p-adic generalization of Fourier analysis allows to algebraize integration- the horrible looking technical challenge of p-adic physics- for symmetric spaces for functions allowing the analog of discrete Fourier decomposion. Symmetric space property is indeed essential also for the existence of Kähler geometry for infinite-D spaces as was learned already from the case of loop spaces. Plane waves and exponential functions expressible as roots of unity and powers of p multiplied by the direct analogs of corresponding exponent functions are the basic building bricks and key functions in harmonic analysis in symmetric spaces. The physically unavoidable finite measurement resolution corresponds to algebraically unavoidable finite algebraic dimension of algebraic extension of p-adics (at least some roots of unity are needed). The cutoff in roots of unity is very reminiscent to that occurring for the representations of quantum groups and is certainly very closely related to these as also to the inclusions of hyper-finite factors of type II
_{1}defining the finite measurement resolution. - WCW geometrization reduces to that for a single line of the generalized Feynman diagram defining the basic building brick for WCW. Kähler function decomposes to a sum of "kinetic" terms associated with its ends and interaction term associated with the line itself. p-Adicization boils down to the condition that Kähler function, matrix elements of Kähler form, WCW Hamiltonians and their super counterparts, are rational functions of complex WCW coordinates just as they are for those symmetric spaces that I know of. This allows straightforward continuation to p-adic context. Incredibly simple!
- As far as diagrams are considered, everything is manifestly finite as the general arguments (non-locality of Kähler function as functional of 3-surface) developed two decades ago indeed allow to expect. General conditions on the holomorphy properties of the generalized eigenvalues λ of the modified Dirac operator can be deduced from the conditions that propagator decomposes to a sum of products of harmonics associated with the ends of the line and that similar decomposition takes place for exponent of Kähler action identified as Dirac determinant. This guarantees that the convolutions of propagators and vertices give rise to products of harmonic functions which can be Glebsch-Gordanized to harmonics and only the singlet contributes to the WCW integral in given vertex. The still unproven central conjecture is that Dirac determinant equals the exponent of Kähler function.

Ironically, twistors which stimulated all these development do not seem to be absolutely necessary in this approach although they are of course possible. Situation changes if one does not assumes small p-adically thermal mass due to the presence of massless particles and one must sum infinite number of diagrams. Here a potential problem is whether the infinite sum respects the algebraic extension in question.

For a more detailed representation of generalized Feynman diagrammatics see the last section of the pdf article Weak form of electric-magnetic duality, electroweak massivation, and color confinement. For Feynman diagrams and WCW integration see the article How to define generalized Feynman diagrams? summarizing the basic formulas. See also the chapter Does the Modified Dirac Equation Define the Fundamental Action Principle?.

## 45 Comments:

I thought I would comment on Keas blog but it went too specific, so here it is :)

Nima in http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0903/0903.2110v2.pdf

At p. 26. A Feynman diagram with 4 operators at one end. Four forces struggle to interact with the wave-function and squash it. This is the criticality. But there should be forces invoking on these operators too, leading to the criticality (branched arrows?). This is what the holography is about. It is circular.

(He has also an squashing at the particle level.) At p.24 this interference is in between the particle and the wave. And at p. 23 one wave and twoparticles.

Could this also be seen as an matter - antimatter competition?

p. 30. infinity twistors and full twistor transforms are using different enlargement/squashing degrees? This is the hierarchy problem in TGD? There should be more variability in the hierarchies? The p-adic is just one possibility (the book page). The wiggling arrow between the wave and particle can also be other primes? Or even other algebraic numbers? The arrows are more than one? Or a branched arrow? Look at the arrows in p. 28. There are always an infinite (p-adic?) interaction between similar points and a squashing between wave and particle points.

This points to the interaction is not in our material world so much, more on the virtual wave-side?

p. 33 Tree-Level Holography. equations can be thought of giving a completely holographic definition of N = 4 SYM and N = 8 SUGRA at tree level.

This is the number 24 again.

At p 41 is an interesting picture where twistors can enlarge or squash the figure, by a degree of two? If p-adics is used this enlargement is hierarcial with growing distances?

From p.5.

we will not commit to any particular choice of W’s and Z’s for the

external particles; indeed we will let the amplitudes themselves guide us to the basis where

they look simplest. However as we will see, the BCFW recursion relations directly motivate

a transformation into twistor space where one of the BCFW particles is transformed to the

W representation and the other to the Z representation, and we will very generically be

looking at amplitudes with a mixture of W’s and Z’s. We are immediately rewarded for

doing this by looking at the three and four-particle amplitudes, which look incredibly simple

in a mixed W/Z representation.

For clarity.

In http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0907/0907.5418v1.pdf Nima says in the discussion:

We are still missing a real understanding of the physics behind our conjecture. A clue is perhaps provided by the nature of the space in which it is formulated. Instead of spacetime, for n-particle scattering the dual is naturally formulated in an n-dimensional space. Thinking along “holographic” lines, we may have expected a theory living on the boundary of spacetime or a close cousin like twistor space. However we are finding that our dual picture isn’t associated with a space in which particles live at all; instead most of the action takes place in the Grassmannians G(k, n). All the kinematical information associated with spacetime goes into specifying special directions in this n-particle space, which pick out out a smaller G(k − 2, n − 4) Grassmannian naturally embedded in the larger one. Thus, while our duality is trivially “holographic” given that we are working directly with on-shell variables, space-time emerges in a less directly “holographic” way than we are accustomed to in AdS/CFT, beginning instead from a picture where there is no space of any sort and the arena in which the dynamics takes place is determined by the number of particles.

When I looked through this I saw the biological receptors, the hexamer and pentamer rings etc. The degrees of freedoms can be synchronized and coordinated so a 'wave of one-ness' is going through the organism, creating temporal supraconditions. I think the twistors (dark matter) may interfere with the matter in such circumstances. And the matter would invoke on the criticality so the created reaction would be as the old organism demand. That's why sick tissues is generated sick again and again, through every cell division. To get a regeneration this criticality from the tissues must be counteracted on by an interference on the dark matter or virtual particle side.

Then it would be in agreement with the alternative medicine thinking.

I laid a comment on a comment on Keas blog.

Twisted Inflation; http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.5385 found on a search on Van Raamsdonk.

For field values in these directions much larger than the supersymmetry-breaking scale, the flatness of the potential is nearly restored. Starting in this nearly flat region, inflation can occur as the theory relaxes towards the origin of field space. Near the origin, the potential becomes steep and the theory quickly descends to a confining gauge theory in which the inflaton does not exist as a particle. This confining gauge theory could be part of the Standard Model (QCD) or a natural dark matter sector;

In http://arxiv.org/abs/1005.3035 his first ref is T.Banks. :)

Cit. We argue that quantum entanglement between microscopic degrees of freedom plays an essential role in the emergence of a dual spacetime from the nonperturbative degrees of freedom. In particular, in at least some cases, classically connected spacetimes may be understood as particular quantum superpositions of disconnected spacetimes.

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0907/0907.2939v2.pdf

Now I must stop demanding your attention!!!

Your ideas begin to have response, but they are not clearly spoken in your terms.

I feel like an clumpsy elephant in a glasshouse :) I know so little about this, but I followed Keas links and came to this

https://indico.nbi.ku.dk/getFile.py/access?resId=2&materialId=slides&confId=71

He talks of hexagons and alike:) Maybe it can be used to explain chemistry, although I thought it was so microscopic first :)

This sounds close to the geometric way I have seen things through the decades (and recently the approach by Peter Rowlands, algebraically in his book Zero to Infinity.)

I call it quasic theory - it is rewarding to find the world closer to how I see it.

pesla.blogspot.com

To Ulla:

Twistor ideas were only the starting point leading to the progress in the understanding what generalized Feynman diagrams could be. The really great news about which I am desperately shouting at the noisy market place of ideas are following.

a) These individual diagrams are free of infinities for a reason which even a child able to integrate can understand;-). Cutkosky rules garanteing unitarity apply.

b) For a given process their number is finite by the p-adic thermal massivation (and assuming that generalized SUSY cancels self energy loops).

c) This approach strongly suggests the solution of the really horrible looking problem of p-adicizing the real worlds of classical worlds.

All this shouting is about something which sounds rather technical and begins to make sense only with basic background in QFTs and after one has understood the underlying motivations, which come from ideas like physics as infinite-D geometry of WCW and number theoretical universality.

Generalized Feynman diagrams are not identical to ordinary ones and standard twistor approach as such does not work. The notion of twistor must be modified.

All these results are physicist's very humble and very non-rigorous counterparts for what mathematician would call existence theorems.

Twistor approach to N=4 SUSY is about a system in which one has only gluons and their superpartners. As such this system is not physically very interesting- it is an extremely useful product of theoretical experimentation. Nothing to do with chemistry.

This idea about classically connected space-time as quantum superpositions of disconnected space-times is interesting. One of the ideas which have been in TGD for decades albeit in different and more realistic form and has generated no fuss (possibly because the author does not speak native American English and even worse -speaks native Finnish;-)).

In TGD framework the idea is slightly different. I speak of partonic 2-surfaces (or by holography space-like 3-surfaces) at the ends of generalized Feynman diagrams. They are indeed disjoint and quantum states associated with them are entangled. In particular, time like entanglement is in question for M-matrix and for generalized Feynman diagrams associated with it. Four to two! This is the first difference.

Here comes second difference: 3-D light-like-surfaces/4-D space-time surfaces connecting these disjoint partonic 2-surfaces/space-like 3-surfaces provide the space-time correlate for this entanglement. Entanglement has space-time correlate: this is second central notion which does not seem to be present in the proposal (on basis of the citation), which as such is from my point of view incorrect.

The disjointness of partonic 2-surfaces is absolutely essential for the integration over WCW to work.

Here is extreme simplification for entanglement geometry correlation: take two points and entangle the corresponding states and represent entanglement by connecting them by line.

Why these fellows do not introduce geometric entanglement in the manner I do it (as I bravely speculate without time to read the article!), is brually simple. They speak about spacetimes as abstract manifolds and have not yet quite realized the space-time--Feynman diagram connection;-). When one starts to babble about space-times as 4-surfaces, the TGD based view pops up within few decades;-)

Can you give your wiev on emergent space? Seen in the light of Feynman diagrams it seems nonsense talk to me. Also particles not seen or measured must have some kind of (wave?)structure. Measurement, also kinematic interference from the environment, must relax that structure, tough very slightly?

To talk of abstract, thought vectors or spinors (not baryonic or non-baryonic) is the same as to say Feynman diagrams are fantasies?

Kea said the emergent space was no creation, but interference is the same as measurements and that is entanglements and creation. Also Verlinde talked of emergent space.

The pattern (clumped) of dark matter also talks for this wiev?

Am I completely sailing out in the blue?

Sorry to disturb you with this.

I must lagh at myself. You wrote it just above :) I have some difficulties to read :) and especially to understand :)

I do not believe in emergent space. The notion is hopelessly poorly defined and means giving up the vision about geometrization of physics which has been enormously successful.

This emergence idea is to some degree present already in string theory and M-theory in the sense that gravitation is assigned to strings in 10-/11-D space-time rather than 4-D space-time at fundamental level and the mysterious spontaneous compactification is hoped to lead to the observed 4-D physics. It did not work as we know now. The extreme elegance and beauty of Einstein's theory is replaced with endless construction of ad hoc models and the great question is now whether this theory (I should actually talk in plural) can make at least single clearcut prediction.

TGD is based on generalization of the geometrization program. Geometrize not only classical physical but also quantum physics and do this in terms of the geometry of "world of classical worlds". There is also a generalization of the concepts of space-time and imbedding space: manysheeted space-time, p-adic variants of imbedding space, p-adic space-time sheets, booklike structure of the imbedding space to describe dark matter in terms of a hierarchy of Planck constants. The basic observation is that infinite-D geometry is extremely unique from the mere requirement of mathematical existence. Unfortunately a wrong person discovered this so that colleagues prefer to wander in M-theory landscape!

One particular fascinating aspect of geometrization of quantum physics is the reduction of Feynman graphs to space-time geometry and the power of geometrization becomes manifest when combined with zero energy ontology inspired view about virtual particles. The solution to the divergence problem of QFT theories is the dream of any young theoretician and this approach realizes this dream.

Discreteness often claimed to be the nature of space-time in Planck length scales and it is claimed that continuum somehow emerges from discreteness. This is self deception. In TGD discreteness is not fundamental but serves as a space-time correlate for a finite measurement resolution. The resulting theory is much more interesting manner than misty attempts postulates about discrete fundamental structures. Number theoretical quantum field theory emerges as a new discipline: something which I leave for younger ones when time is mature.

A stupid question more. What exactly define the Planck length scale when it has this ability to 'collapse the wave' and come into illumination. Is it a result of the dark (p-adic?) reduction, or is the collapsing property inherent in the Planck scale? Some condensing/braiding property? Does it suit the particle/atomic shell scale hierarchy?

The wavy imaginary portion of the Feynman diagram must be 'eternity' and the open Universe potentials constrained/reduced by as instance p-adics, environmental energies etc. The environment must be utterly important as old patterns determining the new creation. Just as Sheldrake said. Consciousness is like this Planck scale reduction?

It would be interesting to have a summary of the quantum criticality factors somewhere :)

One thing more. When I read about leptons and baryons, I see nowhere the gluons, although they must be perhaps more important for the condensation. Gluons are the force that keep everything togeter. Are something forgotten here?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627611.000-muon-whose-army-a-tiny-particles-big-moment.html

Leptons and quarks are the really fundamental particles in TGD. Bosonic emergence means that bosons emerge as wormhole contacts with fermion and antifermion at opposite light-like throats- that is bound states of fermion and antifermion. This leads to a formulation of supersymmetry QFT limit using only the analog of Dirac action. No needed for Yang Molls part of the action and all couplings follow as predictions.

State function collapse is badly chosen term and creates a lot of misinterpretation. State function reduction takes place at the level of the space of quantum states- zero energy states in TGD framework. The idea that something collapses at space-time levels leads to astray.

Planck length scale as such has nothing to do with state function reduction.

Did you see this?

http://press.web.cern.ch/press/PressReleases/Releases2010/PR08.10E.html

- the first direct observation of a tau particle in a muon neutrino beam

In the theories that physicists use to explain the behaviour of fundamental particles, which is known as the Standard Model, neutrinos have no mass. For neutrinos to be able to oscillate, however, they must have mass: something must be missing from the Standard Model.

physicists have long known that there is much the Standard Model does not explain.

Lubos also has a story.

Different particles are only different states (families?) of the same particle, is said in the video. Like phases, or scaling :)

Btw I must formulate my earlier question in a better way. I'm not in mood now to do it.

Muons are popular now. This is also interesting. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627623.900-stellar-explosion-sends-shrapnel-our-way.html

Mixing of neutrinos involves new physics. This is known for a long time. In TGD this physics means the reduction of the mixing to the mixing of topologies assignable to the partonic 2-surfaces of leptons and quarks. Quantum superpositions of sphere, torus, and sphere with two handles. Number theoretic constraints and experimental input lead to quite restrictive model for CKM mixing of quarks. In the case of leptons one knows less but one obtains predictions also now.

It is almost two decades from this discovery of the fundamental mechanism behind the mixing and it is not recognized and particle physics continues in a state of stagnation. To me this is too high a price paid for the human vanity.

By the way, the comments of Lubos about Israel's barbaric attack against the boat bringing material to help the suffering people of Gaza made me almost vomit. Lubos is sick: it is not physical sickness, it is something much worse, he has lost his soul.

He made me almost vomit too. This is the worst he has ever written, although much is very bad. But it is not only that. Also the brave men and women who are applausing him make me feel sick.

Why can't people think themselves, when they have got a brain to use.

To comment on his blog and say this is useless. I have tried so many times. Hopefully he does not think of a politician carrier.

Also in biology things happen. Quantum biology is coming :D

http://zone-reflex.blogspot.com/2010/05/secret-behind-acupuncture-is-adenosine.html

Written in a hurry last night. No TGD link, although this ATP is much TGDish :)

More on muons and the D0-problem.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627622.700-matter-the-next-generation.html

A fourth gen? This turns out to be interesting. Also about magnetic monopole search on LiveScience.

Situation is indeed interesting from the point of TGD. In TGD family replication has topological explanation: in absence of mixing generations correspond to different handle numbers for sphere.

There is an excellent argument suggesting that only three generations are light particles but what "light" means: mass below the mass scale of order intermediate boson mass scale (M_89 and meaning mass of few hundred GeV) or above 10^(-4) Planck masses? I cannot speficy this. Therefore one possibility is that new top quark like particle represents fourth generation: sphere with three handles would be the topology of partonic 2-surface.

Second possibility is that p-adically scaled up copy of top quark with mass related to that of top by a power of sqrt(2) is in question behaving otherwise exactly like top. The mass estimate indeed satisfies this condition.

In TGD framework the quarks inside hadrons are predicted to appear in several p-adic mass scales. There is also empirical support for several mass scales in case of neutrinos. Electrons effective mass can vary by orders of magnitude in condensed matter physics and one can ask whether also variation of the p-adic mass scale is involved.

hi,

your comment starting with "I do not believe in emergent space. The notion is hopelessly poorly defined and means giving up the vision about geometrization of physics which has been enormously successful." just sounded chillingly elegant :).

Set this world on fire :).

What is light? There should be some kind of resonance or similarity between the electron and the photon, before interference can happen. But the photon is massless. Only the em-force, or magnetism? How? A matrix? Coupled to gravitation? (I do not yet understand the new Michelson-Morley exp.) Like Nigels networks?

The neutrino is also said to be massless, but in this new light it has a small (em)mass? Maybe that small part is sufficient to give the minute (DM)signal. To wait for a statistic significance in this case is plain stupidity in my eyes.

From: Muon whose army? A tiny particle's big moment. NS.

"Passera and his colleagues wondered what effect the various possible Higgs masses would have on the muon's magnetic moment. To match the E821 result, their calculations suggest that the Higgs mass is far lower than 114 GeV," http://arxiv.org/abs/1001.4528

"muons may instead interact with virtual supersymmetric particles, or maybe a new flavour-changing particle that we haven't found yet. In such reactions, a mint-flavoured muon could decay into a lemon-flavoured electron, with no neutrinos required.

This suite alone forms most of the matter in the universe, but studies of colliding particles and cosmic rays have revealed four heavier quarks and two heavier electron-like particles, called the muon and the tau. Two new suites grew to accommodate them. Finally, add three neutrinos, one for each electron-type particle. That's matter as we know it, but all of that takes up just half of the castle. The other half is its mirror image, composed of each particle's antimatter counterpart. supersymmetry, would double the size of the castle with a new "superpartner" for every known particle."

From: Matter, the next generation. "Fourth-generation particles could also help explain the origin of the dark matter that seems to make up most of the universe's mass. Key to this idea is a heavy neutrino. Like the neutrinos in all the other generations of particles, this one does not interact with the electromagnetic force, making it transparent to light and hence invisible.

While the other three known neutrinos are too lightweight to account for a significant fraction of dark matter, heavier fourth-generation neutrinos might be able to clump together and form the seeds of galaxies." The matrix network again?

Also the gluon (strong force) is questioned. http://marcofrasca.wordpress.com/2010/06/02/and-you-are-calling-it-a-gluon-yet/

"But the problem is exactly in the self-interaction of the theory that, at very low momenta, becomes increasingly large and gluons (color=bound states), asymptotic states of Yang-Mills theory in the asymptotic freedom regime, are no more good to describe physics. So, what are good states at low energies?" http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.4600

I came in an icing dispute with Lubos on Tommasos blog. I'm just an idiot that tries to understand :)

To donkerhead: You can give some help too :)

hi,

I would say you'd better not insulting Lubos. He is just better in it, anyway. Maybe this is his hobby :).

It was not my aim. I just wanted to give the link, and reminded him on our earlier discussion on the topic :)

In fact Lubos is simpleminded :)

I read your darkbio.

If the twistor combine geometry with algebra and make spinors, how can the entropic level be described? In a chaos state all the vectors are different, in a coherent state they are similiar, with the same direction and force. In this state they are added (standing waves), in the former they are deleted (annihilated). Is the hierarchial problem a problem of coherence only? The tool to overcome this is the entangled qubit, seen as coherent causal diamonds and fractality?

Could this suit the bridge between Rakovic wiev and yours? Memory invoke on the entanglement?

BTW a book: Quantum aspects of life, http://www.worldscibooks.com/physics/p581.html

This qubit-causal diamond-fractality seen as relaxation is also why Carl's model with Feynman diagrams can't be functional? To reverse a relaxed state can't be done like that. It needs a big energy input first, like the Higgs search. Also time invokes. Have you any opinion on that?

He says: Another way of describing the idea is that in those bound states, you have to agree that certain things are as true in bound states as they are in perturbational quantum mechanics, especially superposition. Now standard quantum mechanics handles bound states beautifully, the real problem is only that Feynman diagrams and modern elementary particles is more of a perturbational way of looking at things. So I take the tools defined by what we know from perturbation theory and turn them around to apply them to bound states. http://carlbrannen.wordpress.com/2007/07/22/feynman-diagrams-for-the-masses-part-1/

If this is too stupid, delete it!

I cannot resist this:)

“One can best feel in dealing with living things how primitive physics still is.”

Albert Einstein

Many colleagues have probably read Einstein's words but very few of then have taken them seriously. They really believe that biology is "just complexity", something too "dirty" to make possible rapid production of technically high standard publications. The first years are academic education and competition for funding have miraculous effect on young brains;-)!

The truth of Einstein's s statement came obvious to me 25 years ago in my great experience.

Young brains are still adaptive :) The cultural evolution has a miraculous constraining effect. It needs a massive energy input to break it, or the effect of a hard intellectual thinking, also constraining very much.

Life is so much more than physics. It's about biology too :)

You will not help me bridge the gap between Rakovic and your theory? Too busy with your intellectual thinking? Or is it your psychological state? I demand too much?

I think I got him :D. Lubos.

I am sorry, I simply do not have time for Rakovic.

I see no need for psychologizing. I am just working hardly and do not have time for prattling.

Prattling is a very rude word. Chatting sounds much nicer. Like that above.

It is very difficult for me. But I will try alone.

Now I will go to celebrate my sons dimission from school.

I cannot tolerate this endless psychologization. That someone works hardly does not mean that he is in some psychological state.

I'm sorry. I only used your own words.

You know you are my 'teacher'.

This means I have homework to do. Of course I know you work hard, more than anyone else, don't be silly. That's your state, called stress.

Your theory has in fact already won. No need for stress.

Now, I shall shut up and not irritate you any more. If somebody should be psychologized it is me :) You know that. I try hard. Sorry again.

http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/First_Images_Of_Heavy_Electrons_In_Action_999.html

have captured the first images of electrons that appear to take on extraordinary mass under certain extreme conditions.

the 'problem' of heavy fermions - why these electrons act as if they are hundreds or thousands of times more massive in a material composed of uranium, ruthenium, and silicon

the effects of heavy fermions begin to appear as the material is cooled below 55 kelvin (-218 degrees C). Then, an even more unusual electronic phase transition occurs below 17.5K.

Scientists had attributed this lower-temperature phase transition to some form of "hidden order." They could not distinguish whether it was related to the collective behavior of electrons acting as a wave, or interactions of individual electrons with the uranium atoms.

Figures at http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v465/n7298/fig_tab/nature09073_ft.html

article http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v465/n7298/full/nature09073.html

editor: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v465/n7298/edsumm/e100603-02.html

http://people.ccmr.cornell.edu/~jcdavis/

Dirac fermions: http://theory.lanl.gov/people/balatsky/Dirac%20materials%20LA-UR-08-04125.pdf

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1002/1002.0112v1.pdf

Recent discovery of the two-dimensional (2D) quantum spin Hall system[1–8], and its three-dimensional (3D) generalization, dubbed topological insulator, [6, 9–12] has established a new state of matter in the time-reversal symmetric systems.

the local density of states near the gated region has an asymmetric structure with respect to zero energy.

Look at it, much of your physic.

http://zone-reflex.blogspot.com/2010/06/simplicity-complexity-about-condensed.html

You can clearly see your physics :) And there are some videos about the covalent bindings. Look at them. They are not only attractions, but physical events.

I will not 'platter' any more, but I am curious of what you are working so hard with.

Is this linking ok?

Links do no harm but I have no time for them. I have been writing a series of 8 articles about TGD as infinite-D geometry and TGD as generalized number theory and am about to finish and start the induced updating.

This has been certainly the most productive and joyful month in my life. Everything is now finding its place and TGD is has now transformed from a bundle of more or less consistent ideas to a mature theory full of fascinating connections between various ideas. It will soon leave its humble home and start to conquer the wide world. I hope that my brain child will not forget its father who used 32 years of his life to help it to grow in wisdom;-)!

happy to hear that :)

So the 'boy' is really ready to leave now? Remember,'he' shall have the parad place in your home :) But he grows so big :) HUUGE size :)

Happy for you.

You are in good company. here a cit.I found. http://focus.aps.org/story/v24/st3

'A frustrated Feynman, however, failed during his talk to convince the attending physicists of the soundness of his methods. Elder statesmen such as Paul Dirac and Niels Bohr concluded that the young American simply did not understand quantum mechanics.'

Said in March 1948.

:D

Post a Comment

<< Home