Comments on: Democratic Vote Squashes Anthropic Principle http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/ Random samplings from a universe of ideas Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:50:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Heresiarch http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-11030 Heresiarch Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:29:57 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-11030 Sorry if I missed something, but I don't see any reference to Lee Smolin's notion of Comological Natural Selection as a nonteleological alternative to Intelligent Design when accounting for anthropic coincidences. Basically, he taps Darwinian logic to come up with a model of the evolution of universes in which physical constants that skew universes toward black hole production give those universes an adaptive advantage in the ensemble of universes. More at <a>http://www.starlarvae.org/Star_Larvae_Cosmological_Natural_Selection.htm</a> Sorry if I missed something, but I don’t see any reference to Lee Smolin’s notion of Comological Natural Selection as a nonteleological alternative to Intelligent Design when accounting for anthropic coincidences. Basically, he taps Darwinian logic to come up with a model of the evolution of universes in which physical constants that skew universes toward black hole production give those universes an adaptive advantage in the ensemble of universes. More at http://www.starlarvae.org/Star_Larvae_Cosmological_Natural_Selection.htm

]]> By: Gordon Chalmers http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1151 Gordon Chalmers Mon, 08 Aug 2005 13:53:15 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1151 Anonynmous I was referring to the apparent mass formula listed in the "Anthropic..." comments, and why somebody should check with a narrow microscope its possible values for unusual phenomena in data. The recursion theory work is actually quite useful, I believe. In order to demonstrate it, I am writing a computer program doing exactly what my papers spelled out in simple details; I will probably set surprisingly good benchmarks for laptop computing in quantum field computing. Furthermore, I am kind of optimistic to get somewhat closed form solutions to the coupling dependence of any scattering process and in most field theories, including those containing bare interactions which have higher dimensions. I cant explain why people dont use these arguably not new techniques, but perhaps as usual people dont always like to put in a lot of time that either they are unwilling or unable to spend on projects that seem relatively unknown. I really believe that the standards of computing will change in general, and that once the first computer program is finished this will be obvious. It is important enough that somebody should carry this line of work to its end. Anonynmous

I was referring to the apparent mass formula listed in the “Anthropic…” comments, and why somebody should check with a narrow microscope its possible values for unusual phenomena in data.

The recursion theory work is actually quite useful, I believe. In order to demonstrate it, I am writing a computer program doing exactly what my papers spelled out in simple details; I will probably set surprisingly good benchmarks for laptop computing in quantum field computing. Furthermore, I am kind of optimistic to get somewhat closed form solutions to the coupling dependence of any scattering process and in most field theories, including those containing bare interactions which have higher dimensions.

I cant explain why people dont use these arguably not new techniques, but perhaps as usual people dont always like to put in a lot of time that either they are unwilling or unable to spend on projects that seem relatively unknown. I really believe that the standards of computing will change in general, and that once the first computer program is finished this will be obvious. It is important enough that somebody should carry this line of work to its end.

]]> By: Alejandro Rivero http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1146 Alejandro Rivero Mon, 08 Aug 2005 08:44:21 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1146 There are some "tipo guadiana" running projects to put some order in loops using computational techniques. Check for instance Kreimer, who uses sometimes knot theory, sometimes Hopf algebras. There are some “tipo guadiana” running projects to put some order in loops using computational techniques. Check for instance Kreimer, who uses sometimes knot theory, sometimes Hopf algebras.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1141 Anonymous Mon, 08 Aug 2005 06:29:35 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1141 Against my better judgement, out of late-night curiosity, I'll bite: what are you talking about, Gordon? You seem to have a lot of papers on the arXiv suggesting that recursion relations and considerations of unitarity and analyticity allow perturbation series to be computed. Of course I'm willing to believe that, based on the work of Bern, Dixon, Kosower, and the others who've recently jumped on the twistor-inspired bandwagon. But it's still hard work to figure out how to use these things, and if you really have a general algorithm, why hasn't e.g. Bern (your old advisor, apparently?) started using it? Apologies to the owners of this blog -- maybe Gordon should start his own blog to evangelize -- but I'm somewhat curious about whether in the tens of papers he's posted there might be some actually useful stuff. Against my better judgement, out of late-night curiosity, I’ll bite: what are you talking about, Gordon? You seem to have a lot of papers on the arXiv suggesting that recursion relations and considerations of unitarity and analyticity allow perturbation series to be computed. Of course I’m willing to believe that, based on the work of Bern, Dixon, Kosower, and the others who’ve recently jumped on the twistor-inspired bandwagon. But it’s still hard work to figure out how to use these things, and if you really have a general algorithm, why hasn’t e.g. Bern (your old advisor, apparently?) started using it? Apologies to the owners of this blog — maybe Gordon should start his own blog to evangelize — but I’m somewhat curious about whether in the tens of papers he’s posted there might be some actually useful stuff.

]]> By: Gordon Chalmers http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1139 Gordon Chalmers Mon, 08 Aug 2005 04:41:16 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1139 I suppose if one could solve the theory to a 1000 loops or more then a better test could be made. I suppose if one could solve the theory to a 1000 loops or more then a better test could be made.

]]> By: Gordon Chalmers http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1130 Gordon Chalmers Sun, 07 Aug 2005 23:09:45 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1130 Two anomalous bumps in data would probably be significant. Almost all publicly known particles fit that formula, with a similar uniform prediction at the next sub-leading order. Two anomalous bumps in data would probably be significant. Almost all publicly known particles fit that formula, with a similar uniform prediction at the next sub-leading order.

]]> By: Gordon Chalmers http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1129 Gordon Chalmers Sun, 07 Aug 2005 22:43:26 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1129 Question to the experts: How much time would it take exisiting techniques to check the current public data for the existence of a potentially background smeared massive particle at 270 masses (give or take a hundred values)? Question to the experts: How much time would it take exisiting techniques to check the current public data for the existence of a potentially background smeared massive particle at 270 masses (give or take a hundred values)?

]]> By: Gordon Chalmers http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1119 Gordon Chalmers Sun, 07 Aug 2005 18:42:30 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1119 Perhaps one should check the experimental data again on the values of the mass formula, i.e. for apparent information on particles. Because they could be specified, this check might be time and cost effective. Perhaps one should check the experimental
data again on the values of the mass

formula, i.e. for apparent information on
particles. Because they could be specified,

this check might be time and cost effective.

]]> By: Alejandro Rivero http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1118 Alejandro Rivero Sun, 07 Aug 2005 16:43:00 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1118 Thanks for the hint, Joanne. I haven't heard of the "Altarelli Cocktail". I was aware of the preannouncement, in Nature, of a Top Quark because Tony Smith keeps track of every top-related problem in his website. The article was title "CERN again on top", or something so. From your explanation I see that my small joke (that the tau can be perfectly a SUSY particle, if one wants to see the muon as susy to the charged pion) is unrelated to the UA* tales. Thanks for the hint, Joanne. I haven’t heard of the “Altarelli Cocktail”. I was aware of the preannouncement, in Nature, of a Top Quark because Tony Smith keeps track of every top-related problem in his website. The article was title “CERN again on top”, or something so.

From your explanation I see that my small joke (that the tau can be perfectly a SUSY particle, if one wants to see the muon as susy to the charged pion) is unrelated to the UA* tales.

]]> By: Moshe Rozali http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1095 Moshe Rozali Sat, 06 Aug 2005 18:17:44 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1095 Clifford, What I find cute in this particular idea is not that SUSY is hidden, but that the optimistic scenario of finding lots of superpartners is in effect, though they are not superpartners really. best, Moshe Clifford,

What I find cute in this particular idea is not that SUSY is hidden, but that the optimistic scenario of finding lots of superpartners is in effect, though they are not superpartners really.

best,

Moshe

]]> By: Not Even Wrong » Blog Archive » Strings for Dummies http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1093 Not Even Wrong » Blog Archive » Strings for Dummies Sat, 06 Aug 2005 15:55:43 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1093 [...] There’s a posting at cosmicvariance.com by JoAnne Hewett about the panel discussion and Times article, and many comments, including some from yours truly. Jacques Distler proves that he thinks anyone who doesn’t agree with him about string theory is just ignorant (OK, maybe he just thinks that I’m the only one who is ignorant) with his trademark tactic when he’s on the losing side of an argument: take something perfectly accurate that your opponent writes, change the wording to something else that can be interpreted as inaccurate, then use this as evidence to back up a sneering put-down of your opponent. Jacques seemingly can’t help himself from doing this, for an all-time classic, check out his contribution to one of the first postings here, where he attacks me for saying that the standard model is a chiral gauge theory. [...] [...] There’s a posting at cosmicvariance.com by JoAnne Hewett about the panel discussion and Times article, and many comments, including some from yours truly. Jacques Distler proves that he thinks anyone who doesn’t agree with him about string theory is just ignorant (OK, maybe he just thinks that I’m the only one who is ignorant) with his trademark tactic when he’s on the losing side of an argument: take something perfectly accurate that your opponent writes, change the wording to something else that can be interpreted as inaccurate, then use this as evidence to back up a sneering put-down of your opponent. Jacques seemingly can’t help himself from doing this, for an all-time classic, check out his contribution to one of the first postings here, where he attacks me for saying that the standard model is a chiral gauge theory. [...]

]]> By: Clifford http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1084 Clifford Fri, 05 Aug 2005 23:34:21 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1084 I'd imagine it is possible, but I'm not an expert on employment matters. I'm going to move on from this now since I see no relation to the thread and clearly am not useful to you. Best, -cvj I’d imagine it is possible, but I’m not an expert on employment matters. I’m going to move on from this now since I see no relation to the thread and clearly am not useful to you. Best, -cvj

]]> By: Gordon Chalmers http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1082 Gordon Chalmers Fri, 05 Aug 2005 23:31:07 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1082 It seems to me possible that if I solve QFT in general, then I can get a job, either in academia or industry. It seems to me possible that if I solve QFT in general, then I can get a job, either in academia or industry.

]]> By: Gordon Chalmers http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1079 Gordon Chalmers Fri, 05 Aug 2005 23:14:29 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1079 The relation to the thread I thought was clear. Models are solvable, even on your laptop. The relation to the thread I thought was clear. Models are solvable, even on your laptop.

]]> By: Clifford http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1078 Clifford Fri, 05 Aug 2005 23:08:51 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1078 Now I'm really confused. Relation to thread, please? -cvj Now I’m really confused. Relation to thread, please? -cvj

]]> By: Gordon Chalmers http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1077 Gordon Chalmers Fri, 05 Aug 2005 23:04:50 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1077 Do you think that it is worth a job in physics, Clifford? Do you think that it is worth a job in physics, Clifford?

]]> By: Clifford http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1076 Clifford Fri, 05 Aug 2005 23:02:54 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1076 Gordon, I find myself unable to comment. I have nothing intelligent to say about it, so I figure saying nothing is best. Thanks for asking though! -cvj Gordon,

I find myself unable to comment. I have nothing intelligent to say about it, so I figure saying nothing is best. Thanks for asking though!

-cvj

]]> By: Gordon Chalmers http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1074 Gordon Chalmers Fri, 05 Aug 2005 22:37:38 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1074 Clifford, You dont want to comment on the possibility of many multi-loops on the laptop? Gordon Clifford,

You dont want to comment on the possibility of many multi-loops on the laptop?

Gordon

]]> By: Clifford http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1073 Clifford Fri, 05 Aug 2005 22:35:16 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1073 Moshe, that's interesting indeed! I'd heard that even for "normal" MSSM-type scenarios that depending upon parameters there might be ways of hiding it very well from LHC. But I might not have understood the discussion properly. JoAnne will no doubt set us straight. -cvj Moshe, that’s interesting indeed! I’d heard that even for “normal” MSSM-type scenarios that depending upon parameters there might be ways of hiding it very well from LHC. But I might not have understood the discussion properly. JoAnne will no doubt set us straight.

-cvj

]]> By: Gordon Chalmers http://cosmicvariance.com/2005/08/02/democratic-vote-squashes-anthropic-principle/#comment-1069 Gordon Chalmers Fri, 05 Aug 2005 22:22:57 +0000 http://cosmicvariance.com/?p=102#comment-1069 Its possible now to make a computer program to test to hundreds of loops of a cross section on your laptop. Its possible now to make a computer program to test to hundreds of loops of a cross section on your laptop.

]]>