Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

jakeXT

(10,575 posts)
Tue Jun 4, 2013, 02:39 PM Jun 2013

Nobel Laureate Says Physics Is in Need of a Revolution


In the early 1970s, David J. Gross exposed the hidden structure of the atomic nucleus. He helped to reinvent string theory in the 1980s. In 2004, he shared the Nobel Prize in Physics. And today he struggles mightily to describe the basic forces of nature at the Planck scale (billions of times smaller than a proton), where, string theorists hope, the equations of gravity and quantum mechanics mesh.

Gross, H. David Politzer and Frank Wilczek were awarded the Nobel for discovering asymptotic freedom, more colloquially known as the strong force that binds the components of the atomic nucleus, the protons and neutrons. Forty years ago, their counterintuitive calculations plugged an important gap in the Standard Model of physics, which describes the 61 known elementary particles. This theoretical work revitalized the nearly moribund quantum field theory and gave birth to QCD (quantum chromodynamics), the theory of the strong interactions.

These days, Gross enjoys challenging young physicists as they chalk equations at the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, the think tank funded by the National Science Foundation that he ran from 1997 until stepping down last year. He is eager for younger scientists to surpass his achievements, to break the impasse of under-determination that currently troubles particle physics, whereby competing theories predict the same physical results and may therefore be immune to experimental verification within the lifetime of the universe.

Gross characterizes theoretical physics as rife with esoteric speculations, a strange superposition of practical robustness and theoretical confusion. He has problems with the popularizing of “multiverses” and “landscapes” of infinite worlds, which are held up as emblematic of physical reality. Sometimes, he says, science is just plain stuck until new data, or a revolutionary idea, busts the status quo. But he is optimistic: Experience tells him that objects that once could not be directly observed, such as quarks and gluons, can be proven to exist. Someday, perhaps the same will be true for the ideas of strings and branes and the holographic boundaries that foreshadow the future of physics.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/06/qa-david-gross-physics/
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Nobel Laureate Says Physics Is in Need of a Revolution (Original Post) jakeXT Jun 2013 OP
I'm pretty sure it's something fundamental that we can't wrap our heads around... hunter Jun 2013 #1
So the farther you get from HERE/NOW, the hazier... Thor_MN Jun 2013 #2
I think of it that way to simplify things, not to make them more complex. hunter Jun 2013 #3
So, Colonel Sanders was right? krispos42 Jun 2013 #4
I think too many of them, especially the cosmologists, Warpy Jun 2013 #5
61? My count is at 36. DetlefK Jun 2013 #6

hunter

(38,328 posts)
1. I'm pretty sure it's something fundamental that we can't wrap our heads around...
Tue Jun 4, 2013, 05:28 PM
Jun 2013

... and my intuition tells me it has to do with time.

My favorite "esoteric speculation" is that the past is determined by the present just as the future is. The landscape in either direction gets fuzzy and indeterminate whichever way you go. The past is not written in stone. Causality works both ways, rooted firmly in the present. Actions occurring now spread through the future and the past. Both the past and the future are shifting about to accommodate the present.

 

Thor_MN

(11,843 posts)
2. So the farther you get from HERE/NOW, the hazier...
Tue Jun 4, 2013, 06:36 PM
Jun 2013

Seems completely compatible with a multiverse...

hunter

(38,328 posts)
3. I think of it that way to simplify things, not to make them more complex.
Tue Jun 4, 2013, 06:53 PM
Jun 2013

All there really is is now. There are probable pasts and probable futures, but none of them exist except as they are related to the present.

Warpy

(111,359 posts)
5. I think too many of them, especially the cosmologists,
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 03:30 AM
Jun 2013

are too wedded to thinking in three dimensions.

We can see along only one axis of time, into the past. Everything we look at happened in the past, from pictures on our computer screens that happened a few nanoseconds ago to distant galaxies that looked like that billions of years ago.

Once you realize you're able to look in only one direction along the fourth dimensional axis, the forever expanding universe makes a little more sense.

In a big bang-big crunch oscillating universe, we could be five minutes away from another big crunch and all we'd see are hazy, incredibly distant and nearly burned out galaxies rushing away from us.

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
6. 61? My count is at 36.
Wed Jun 5, 2013, 04:46 AM
Jun 2013

the six quarks + antimatter-counterparts -> 12
the six leptons + antimatter-counterparts -> 12
electromagnetism: photon -> 1
weak interaction: Z0, W+ and W- bosons -> 3
strong interaction: gluons -> 8

I see no need to add virtual particles or quark-mixing or neutrino-mixing.

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Science»Nobel Laureate Says Physi...