Friday, January 15, 2010

AWT and CP symmetry violation

In AWT CP symmetry violation is a consequence of dispersion of energy through Aether foam with increasing number of dimensions. While the energy spread along space-time brane in symmetric way, with increasing mass/energy density the fragmentation of time dimensions occurs.  Quantum foam gets more dense with increasing energy density in similar way like soap foam under shaking and it changes itself into foam with small spherical bubbles similar to fluid, which results into collective motion of particles involved. The constituents of quark-gluon plasma are strongly coupled, causing their collective flow. This coupling is basically well known Yukawa coupling, which can be explained by presence of Higgs field. As I explained already here, formation of top-quark pairs can be interpreted like formation of Higgs bosons, which are of the same rest mass and mechanism of dilepton decay channel.

The fragmentation of quantum foam into smaller bubbles leads to fragmentation of time arrows and violation of jet symmetry during RHIC/LHC collisions of heavy atom nuclei. The same fragmentation can be observed near rotating black holes (Kerr solution leads to multiple event horiozons) and polarization of CMB at 40 MPc+ scale. The symmetry violation during jet formation could be explained by omnidirectional space-time expansion during torus spinning - the inner part of ring always rotates faster, so it's dragged into axis direction.
The violation of jet symmetry can be understood as an example of CP symmetry violation, which was observed first at the case of spin polarized and cooled cobalt-60 nuclei (1956), which are emanating electrons in asymmetric way. The same stuff we can observed at the case of jets of black holes (like the famous M87 and Centaurus A, which are asymmetric in similar way, like jets emanated by quark-gluon plasma during collider experiments. The second jet should be formed by jet of supersymetric particles, fotinos in particular. The absorption of jet demonstrates, how easily the QG plasma can be feeded by matter under formation of strangelets or even black holes.

In this connection it may be significant, CMB cold spot is unpaired too (if the observable Universe is formed by black hole, we could see through polar jet into hyper-universe). The observed parity violation of galaxies and CMB Doppler anisotropy should be correlated to CMB cold spot direction, too. Because jets of black holes are exaggerated example of gravity brightening, we could observe CP symmetry violation by difference of polar temperatures and curvatures at the case of giant rotating stars, too. In this connection it's interesting too, even Earth globe has a pear shape, which deforms Earth ellipsoid by elevation of about two hundred meters at north pole. It's interesting, Christopher Columbus considered it in 17th century already, while promoting westward voyage to Cathay (China) or Zipangu (Japan).

Is light of pulsar spreading in superluminal speed?

This post is a reaction to recent PW article Pulsar bursts move 'faster than light'. It's not true, this phenomenon was described in an astronomical object first - the same effect was disputed before years for motion of bright areas in jet of M87 galaxy, where it has supposedly the same explanation. As a dense aether proponent I appreciate readers, who are trying to think "out of box" - but in this case, this particular observation has really nothing to do with Aether and "violation of Lorentz symmetry" - but with peculiar way, in which light of pulsars propagates through environment filled by particles of interstellar gas. The animation bellow illustrates it by computer simulation:

This phenomena is related to way, in which light is propagating through so-called metamaterials. The uncertainty about exact source position is the reason, why we cannot talk about information exchange between observer and object, because the amplitude of light travels through interstellar gas in noncausual way. After all, it's not wave itself (group velocity), but an amplitude of light (phase velocity), which is traveling here by superluminal speed in analogy to motion of laser spot along surface of moon. The supersonic sound wave "spreading" was observed during spreading of ultrasound pulses through dense polystyrene dispersions in water, too.

A more intriguing question could be, whether longitudinal component of CMB noise - i.e. superluminal gravitational waves could be interpreted by analogous dispersion of light waves on Higgs field forming vacuum. In this moment I'm unable to decide, whether such perspective is relevant to reality and if it could lead to some new testable predictions. It could be somehow related to so called block-universe concept, by which reality in motion occurs by inhomogeneous spreading of information through Aether lattice at rest - which I personally consider biased toward atemporal perspective of Universe.

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Lie E8 group and quantum criticality

Exceptional Lie E8 group shot to fame in 2007, when the US freelance physicist Garrett Lisi posted a paper on the arXiv preprint server suggesting that E8 could map out all known particles and their mutual interactions. However a well before in 1988 the Russian physicist Alexander Zamolodchikov showed that E8 symmetry could also describe the spectrum of spin excitations that occur in 1D Ising ferromagnets. Radu Coldea of Oxford University and colleagues at the Helmholtz Zentrum Berlin (HZB) have measured the energies of several of these quasiparticles by cooling the cobalt niobate to 40 mK and firing neutrons at it. When the experiment was done at zero magnetic field, five quasiparticles were spotted. Their energies are described by a mathematical formula derived three decades ago by Barry McCoy and Tai Tsun Wu.

Density of magnetic domains increases with increasing magnetic field in simmilar way, like density of gas fluctuations under pressure. At certain moment, the nested density fluctuations are formed in similar way, which we can observe during condensation of supercritical vapor. As the strength of the field was increased to the quantum critical value of 5.5 T, the ratio of energies of the first two quasiparticles approached 1.618. This number is the "golden ratio" and is precisely what should be measured if the quasiparticles are described by E8 – a prediction that was made more than 20 years ago by prof. Zamolodchikov.

As explained previously by concept of quantum foam, root system of E8 Lie group solves trivial question: "Which structure should have the tightest lattice of particles, formed by energy exchange of another particles?". And such question has perfect meaning even from classical physics point of view! Such question has a perfect meaning in theory, describing the most dense structure of inertial particles formed by energy exchange between another particles, which we can ever imagine, i.e. the interior of black hole, which is forming the vacuum. Therefore it's not so strange, both one of heterotic string theories, both Garretts E8 theory is dealing with E8 group and Horava's theory deals with quantum critical point. The animations bellow are illustrating, how most compact particle packing is related to golden mean ratio observed in critical point. By AWT the E8 is based on the geometry of most compact packing geometry possible and most dense particle packing happens when packing density along surface and volume becomes exactly balanced.

E8 is based on the geometry of most compact packing geometry possibleMost dense particle packing happens when packing density along surface and volume is exactly balanced

Golden mean ratio is closely related to densest particle packing in similar way, like the E8 group geometry. We can expect,  certain random arrangement of particles is more compact, then another ones, so energy spreads in slowest way and the cosmic space appears largest in it.  In natural systems golden mean minimizes the surface/volume ratio, i.e. it defines most effective object packing in situations, where many particles are involved. In such objects energy spreads in slowest possible way (because they're so compact), which means, these objects are most stable and atemporal, i.e. they're of highest fitness and they can survive easier. Human brain is just an engine for particularly slow but atemporal energy spreading (i.e. without dispersion). Solitons (not just those in human brain) consist of waves, where frequency and energy of components follows golden mean ratio, too. Evolution is analogous to travel in dispersive environment, so we can imagine particles and planets as a most compact solitons, which survived the travel through CMB noise in most successful way.

The most compact arrangement or repulsing particle corresponds so called Wigner phase inside of cold plasma crystals. Another system, which could exhibit E8 symmetry are nested density fluctuations, which occurs inside of condensing supercritical vapor temporarily. During this the nested density fluctuations of mutually repulsing particles should be formed, which leads into compact structure of kissing hyperspheres, described just by root vector system of Lie's E8 group.

We can apply the above principles to area of scientific research too. Research follows both information spreading along well defined gradients/surfaces of knowledge, i.e. formal theories, both intuitive holistic thinking through bulk of knowledge independently to existing theories (so called "crackpottery", but I rather call it a "mutations" in evolution of knowledge). After then the most effective strategy is just the approach, where the formal and intuitive approaches are balanced in golden mean ratio. So we shouldn't expect, only blind combinations of equations will lead to some TOE fast - intuitive insights and ideas are important here, too.

AWT and cellular automata model

This post is a reaction to recent NS article 'I'm an information pack rat', which deals with personality of Stephen Wolfram. But who first had the idea that the universe is a cellular automaton? Konrad Zuse? Edward Fredkin? Certainly not Stephen Wolfram. Apparently it's not the first case of foreign ideas "packed" by Wolfram [Jim Giles, Nature 417, 216 - 218 (2002)].

In 1969  Konrad Zuse published a book called Rechnender Raum (translated later as "Digital space") theorizing, that the universe was a cellular automaton. Juergen Schmidhuber discusses this on his website: Zuse's Thesis: The Universe is a Computer, that  Konrad Zuse had the idea that the universe is running on a grid of computers as early as 1967. On the other hand, Plamen Petrov, being unaware of Zuse's work at the time, earlier dubbed this idea Fredkin's Thesis. Recently Schmidhuber observed, "Even earlier, Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz (who not only co-invented calculus but also built the first mechanical multiplier in 1670) caused a stir by claiming that everything is computable". Although it's clear, that Leibniz did not formulate the notion of a cellular automaton as such.
On the other hand, apparently Wolfram does not intend to imply that the universe is a classical cellular automaton--at least if you read the fine print.  In the Notes for Chapter 9 on pages 1026 and 1027 of his book Wolfram does acknowledge the work of Zuse and Fredkin in a single sentence. Then he goes on to say that  "no literal mechanistic model can ever in the end realistically be expected to work." I take this to refer to classical cellular automata. In his usual modest way he says, "...what must happen relies on phenomena discovered in this book--and involves the emergence of complex properties..."

It is not the first time that Wolfram has annoyed complexity researchers, who feel that he routinely fails to recognize the contributions made by others. "He tends to acknowledge people in two-point type," says one researcher. Indeed, A New Kind of Science lacks conventional references to prior work - although scientists and mathematicians including Cook are acknowledged in the book's notes section.

No doubt, Stephen Wolfram is reinnnesance personality of modern era. But I don't share ideas concerning cellular automata model of reality - in my opinion the appearance of Universe follows from principles of energy & information spreading in completely random particle system, i.e. it's randomness at its very very best. The problem of Stephen Wolfram is, he is overspecialized and biased to complexity perspective - so I'm perceiving his ideas as abstract and ad-hoced. After all, completely random Universe requires less strong postulates from Occam's razor perspective.

But we still could understand such stance from perspective of Simillia simillibus observatur theorem of AWT: every expert tends to see Universe in the light of its own specialization. Relativist would see it relativistic, aetherists like me would see it through particle field and computer scientist and mathematician would see it as a huge simulation or cellular automata model. It's logical, because every density fluctuation of Aether would interact with another fluctuations, which are similar in shape, size, energy density and so on.

Sunday, January 10, 2010

Does gravity not exist on behalf of holografic memory?

This post is a reaction to recent article On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton of dutch theorist Erik P. Verlinde. Albeit Verlinde is string theorist, his finding has basically nothing to do with string theory and it's logical connection to holographic model proposed is extremely vague here. When random gas exhibits entropic behavior, it still doesn't make it a hologram, some memory the less and it requires a huge portion of fantasy to interpret it in such a way.

Maybe string theory or holographic theory are related to entropy quantity in some abstract way (albeit I can see nothing entropic in their postulates with exception of vagueness) - but the connection of Aether gas concept to entropy is still much more straightforward and transparent (entropy quantity original derivation was based on Boltzmann gas concept). This is simply how analogy differs from vague homologies: by absence of additional manifolds in causal space.

"Starting from first principles and general assumptions Newton's law of gravitation is shown to arise naturally and unavoidably in a theory in which space is emergent through a holographic scenario. Gravity is explained as an entropic force caused by changes in the information associated with the positions of material bodies. A relativistic generalization of the presented arguments directly leads to the Einstein equations. When space is emergent even Newton's law of inertia needs to be explained. The equivalence principle leads us to conclude that it is actually this law of inertia whose origin is entropic".

If it smells like entropy, and it behaves like entropy, it's probably a Boltzmann gas...;-) We simply cannot have an abstract entropy quantity existing as such without underlying physical system (usually inertial particle gas or fluid), which maintains the laws of statistics. Emergence is just another postmodern word for ancient Aether model, described by gas (thermodynamics) or by fluid (hydrodynamics) models. Eric expressed it unvillingly in interview with the newspaper de Volkskrant:

"On the smallest level Newton's laws don't apply, but they do for apples and planets. You can compare this to pressure of gas. Molecules themselves don't have any pressure, but a barrel of gas has."

The same, just more vague conclusion former string theorist Lubos Motl got on his blog:

"I find it somewhat unlikely that "bulk physics" may be really derived without any "bulk physics".

While Motl's intuition was exceptionally right in this particular case, the above approach is exactly, what the string theory or quantum gravity did all the time (the formal strings or quantum loops, i.e. Aether density fluctuations are the same temporal aspect of dense gas behavior, like entropic character of energy shielding, i.e. the gravity). We should realize, comments of Mr. Motl aren't Aether theory motivated in any way - but by fact, Verlinde's rather insightful work has nothing to do with string theory. Mr. Motl just feels some competition of his pet string theory in the air. But the true insights concerning formal entropy models of elementary particles were achieved before few years in GUITAR theory of Quantoken.

Concerning "Newtonian physics", Newton believed, gravity force is indirectly proportional to distance with compare to R. Hooke, who claimed the inverse square law on background of former Alhacen's work. Just the Aether model of Newton's friend Nicolas Fatio de Duillier convicted Newton to change his opinion on behalf to inverse square law - we can see, Newton's physical intuition was far not so brilliant, as it's believed usually. Duillier's model was later extended by Le Sage and so far we have no other working theory of gravity based on physical, i.e. not completely abstract ad-hoced model, separated from observable reality.

The apparent inability of physicists to distinguish trivial particle system beneath all these noble abstract ideas about thermodynamics, entropy and emergent holographic scenarios is striking. Even worse, it's a sort of modern religion or political decision - supposedly the both. Other extrapolations of this work assigned to Verlinde (?):

"Gravity does not exist. The whole universe is a giant holographic memory that gets more and more filled with data as time evolves. This filling of the cosmic memory we interpret as gravity. What if the memory gets full? Than you find yourself in a black hole."

are bringing logical questions, whether these ideas are really consistent with present model of black hole as a physical singularity or whether gravity doesn't apply to interior of black hole, or whether it can not exist something, which we can measure reliably. After all, such naively abstract ideas separated from reality are typical for both many formal theorists of present era, both their layman interpreters.