Re: Quantum Gravity 208.8: Hartle, Hawking, and Witten Restore Superstrings and Black Holes and Quantum Gravity
- From: "Murphy" <Murphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 09:12:01 GMT
What testable predictions have been made by quantum gravity and subsequently
verified?
None.
No one can verify if black hole is real. Very convenient escape for a
physicist who does not have to worry about getting his/her theory falsified.
If your theory is not falsifiable by experiment, it is not even a physical
theory. It is not even wrong let alone right.
"OsherD" <mdoctorow@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e7f12a10-2c88-487f-a7a4-b60fbd124a5f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From Osher Doctorow
After I wrote the previous postings of this Section, James B. Hartle
and S. W. Hawking and Thomas Hertog came out with one paper on arXiv,
while Alexander Maloney and Edward Witten came out with a second paper
on arXiv, both of which appear to rescue Quantum Gravity,
Superstrings, Black Holes, and the lot from many of the criticisms
that have been directed toward them.
The papers are respectively "The no-boundary measure of the universe,"
and "Quantum gravity partition functions in three dimensions,"
respectively arXiv: 0711.4630 v1 hep-th 29 Nov 2007, 4 pages (2
columns), and arXiv: 0712.0155 v1 [hep-th] 2 Dec 2007, 71 pages.
These papers make use to varying degrees of:
1) probability
2) complex variables
3) phases (gas, liquid, solid, etc.)
4) semiclassical wave function
By the way, Witten and Maloney acknowledged Neil Turok of Cambridge
University U.K. for important discussions in their paper, and Turok is
almost unparalleled in physics for creativity.
What I want to emphasize here is that although Hawking and Witten for
example have elaborate machinery in their various theories including
the ones in these papers, their papers basically stand on their own
using (1)-(4) above as fundamental variables and explanations (with
the appropriate conditions and combinations).
This is, in my opinion, a considerable step forward that puts their
theories on as good a footing as Local Quantum Physics if not better.
Notice that phases and probability are closely related as this thread
has argued, that imaginary versus real variables arguably relate to
different phases as this thread as argued, and that the semiclassical
wave function also relates to different phases.
What the papers mentioned do NOT require is the elaborate machinery of
algebraic topology and algebraic geometry, and this is also the case
for Local Quantum Physics. It might be thought that Superstring
theory is automatically algebraic geometry and/or algebraic topology,
but it can just as readily (in fact, more readily) be derived from the
Holographic Principle which in turn is a special case of the
Probability zero optimization of Probable Causation/Influence (PI).
Hawking is of course at Cambridge University U.K., while Hartle is at
U.C. Santa Barbara and Thomas Hertog is at U. Paris 7 France, and
Alexander Maloney is at McGill University Canada and Edward Witten at
the time of writing this paper is at the Institute for Advanced Study
Princeton USA where he also acknowledges discussion with Nathan
Seiberg who is Neil Turok's "USA analog".
Osher Doctorow
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Quantum Gravity 208.8: Hartle, Hawking, and Witten Restore Superstrings and Black Holes and Quantum Gravity
- Next by Date: Re: Building Space
- Previous by thread: Quantum Gravity 208.8: Hartle, Hawking, and Witten Restore Superstrings and Black Holes and Quantum Gravity
- Next by thread: Re: Quantum Gravity 208.8: Hartle, Hawking, and Witten Restore Superstrings and Black Holes and Quantum Gravity
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
