I just tried to post my new paper of “First Principles of Consistent Physics” on arXiv.org. Unfortunately it was put on hold immediately and I then submitted it to the OSF eprint server. This is quite an exciting paper to me. It proposes new foundations and guiding principles on fundamental physics and cosmology based and improved upon my early blog “first principles of physics“. It should shed new light on further developments of the new mirror framework.Continue reading “New paper on first principles”
The approach of first principles has been pursued in the development and history of physics. Ever since the establishment of the Standard Model of particle physics in 1970s, the idea of going after theory of everything has become popular as the latest approach of first principles among theoretical physicists for unifying all particles and interactions. However, we seem to live in a dynamic world as indicated, e.g., since the discovery of an expanding Universe and it is definitely at odds with the static picture of an ultimate unified theory for physics.
The dynamic picture tells us that the time reversal symmetry has to be broken and it has to be the first (broken) symmetry. Whatever first principles we propose have to be able to naturally break this symmetry first in the very beginning. And there is no reason why the current 4-dimensional spacetime, in particular, its dimensions can’t be dynamic. It is probably more natural to consider that spacetime has evolved in a dimension-by-dimension way.
First of all, we propose and summarize the three first principles as follows:
- A measurable finite physical world is assumed.
- The quantum version of the variation principle in terms of Feynman’s path integral formalism is applied.
- Spacetime emerges via dimensional phase transitions (i.e., first time dimension and then space dimensions got inflated).
A lot of times science advances by incorporating or interpreting old ideas under new scenarios.
For example, Lorentz first proposed the so-called Lorentz transformation, but it was Einstein who correctly interpreted and applied it in his theory of special relativity. Yang and Mills first came up with the SU(2) gauge theory idea for studying nuclear isospin. But it was Glashow, Weinberg, Salam , and ‘t Hooft who found the best application of the idea to the electroweak interaction eventually leading to the most celebrated unification theory (called the Standard Model) for all three gauge interactions of the known elementary particles.
I just submitted a paper for the essay contest held at FQXi. I focused on topics from quantum indeterminism to no theory of everything, to a dynamic Universe with hierarchical underlying laws, all the way to the justification of our pursuance of open science, open society, and open world.
Gödel’s undecidability results (incomplete theorems) demonstrate that no consistent math system is complete, i.e., one can always construct statements that can not be proved or disproved within the same system. Hilbert’s dream of unification of all mathematics may be busted. Similarly, quantum indeterminism indicates that physics and the Universe may be indeterministic, incomplete, and open in nature, and therefore demand no single unification theory of everything. All my recent works on mirror matter theory and supersymmetric mirror models seem to support such an open world ideology.
Here is my new paper that provides a dynamic view on theory of everything. Normally arXiv should have it posted online on Feb. 4 but instead has put it on hold for nearly two weeks. So I have to submit it as an OSF preprint and to the archive of “crackpottery”[viXra:2002.0262] since arXiv is probably considering the paper a crackpot. It can also be downloaded from this page with all my papers on mirror matter theory (A persistent link of my mirror papers is also on the side menu). Below is the popular summary of this paper:
No single unification theory of everything. The universe is dynamic and so are the underlying physical models and spacetime. As our 4-d spacetime evolves dimension by dimension in the early universe, consistent yet different models emerge one by one with different sets of particles and interactions. A new set of first principles are proposed for building such models with new understanding of supersymmetry, mirror symmetry, and the dynamic mechanism – spontaneous symmetry breaking. Under this framework, the arrow of time is naturally explained and the Standard Model of physics is elegantly extended to time zero of the universe.
Modern physicists are used to a perturbative way to solve or understand problems in modern physics. In particular, since the invention of the powerful Feynman diagram technique by Richard Feynman, particle physicists are so fond of this perturbation tool and can seldom talk about physics without showing some Feynman diagrams.
However, there indeed exist some fundamental physical processes that can not be described by Feynman diagrams. These processes are typically called nonperturbative or topological transitions that have been studied since the discovery of “instanton” about half a century ago.
Unfortunately, perturbation theory is planted in the minds of a lot of particle physicists so firmly that they could not think in other possible topological ways. This has to be part of the reasons why some editors and reviewers have been so easy to dismiss my works. It may also be causing other physicists jumping on and off the bandwagon of my theory.
Nature’s supersymmetry (SUSY) is not what most physicists have thought about. It is not making a copy of all existing particles and giving these superparticles some fancy names like something-ino or s-otherthing.
The big mistake on SUSY has been to confuse some properties of SUSY with those of mirror symmetry which has not drawn deserved attention from the physics community. It is actually the mirror symmetry that makes a mirrored copy of particles in our known sector.