Если верить Мумону, понимание дзенских коанов не требует проверки. Это все равно как встретить отца на людной улице. Тебе не нужно ничье подтверждение, что это действительно он.

Анекдоты

В 2011 году эксперимент под названием OPERA (Oscillation Project with Emulsion-tRacking Apparatus) в итальянском городке Gran Sasso (у нас в Москве в "Европейском" оттуда рубашки продают) объявил, что засек нейтрино, летевшие быстрее скорости света. Благодаря чему стал международным посмешищем - все знают, чем кончилась эта история. 

Недавно что-то мне напомнило про эти интересные времена, и пришло в голову, что неплохо было бы собрать в одном месте все анекдоты определенного типа. 

So the neutrino leaves. 

We don't serve faster than light neutrinos here in Gran Sasso, says the bartender. 

Neutrino orders a cappuccino and walks into a bar.  

A photon checks into a hotel. 

Do you need help with your luggage, sir? asks the receptionist. 

No thank you. I am traveling light. 

A Higgs boson comes to the church. 

No bosons are allowed here, says the priest. 

The boson answers, But without me, you can't have mass. 

A neutrino walks into a bar. 

Would you like a drink sir? - asks the bartender. 

No thank you, I'm just passing through. 

И на закуску:

Oops, says an atom, I think I've just lost an electron. 

Are you sure?

I'm positive.

The Final Theory - Part 2

(from Christoph Schiller’s “MOTION MOUNTAIN” vol. VI, www.motionmountain.net)

If a description of motion claims to be final, it must explain all aspects of motion. But a full explanation must be unmodifiable. This is an important point that is rarely discussed.

Theoretical and mathematical physicists are fond of generalizing models. If you have a description of a part of nature, they will try to find more general cases. For any candidate unified description, they will try to explore the model in more than three dimensions, with more than three generations of quarks, with more involved gauge symmetries, with different types of supersymmetry, with more Higgs doublets, or with additional heavy neutrinos.

If a description of nature is final, generalizations must be impossible. If a candidate unified theory could be generalized, it would not be final.

Where does this fondness for generalization come from? In history of physics, generalizations often led to advances and discoveries. In the past, generalizations often led to descriptions that had a wider range of validity. As a result, generalizations became the way to search for new discoveries. Indeed, in the history of physics, the old theory often was a special case of the new theory. This relation was so common that usually, approximation and special case were taken to be synonyms. General relativity and the standard model must be approximations of the final theory.

But can either general relativity or the standard model of particle physics be special cases of the final, unified theory? Or, equivalently: Can the unified theory be a generalization of existing theories? The answer is no. The two existing theories cannot be special cases of the final theory. If the unified theory were a generalization of the two existing theories, it could not explain any of the open issues! Indeed, given that general relativity or the standard model of particle physics cannot explain the open issues in physics, any generalization of them cannot either. Generalizations have no explanatory power.

In short, the final, unified description of motion must neither allow generalization nor must it itself be a generalization of either the standard model or of general relativity. The unified theory cannot be generalized and cannot be specialized; the unified theory must be unmodifiable. This requirement is extremely strong; you may check that it eliminates most past attempts at unification. For example, this requirement suggests to eliminate grand unification, supersymmetry and higher dimensions as aspects of the final theory: indeed, these ideas are modifiable and they generalize the standard model of elementary

particles; thus, these ideas lack explanatory power. In short, a theory that is not final cannot be unified.

Of the few candidate descriptions that satisfy the requirements, it seems that the simplest is the one that uses featureless fluctuating strands. In this approach, strands, not points, are assumed to be the fundamental constituents of vacuum, matter and radiation.

Nature is made of unobservable, fluctuating strands. Everything observed in nature – vacuum, fermions, bosons and horizons – is made of strands. Strands are the common and extended constituents of nature. Even though strands are unobservable, all observations are due to strands. To describe all observations, the strand model uses only one basic postulate or fundamental principle: Planck units are defined through crossing switches of strands.

Every observation is a sequence of crossing switches of unobservable strands. In turn, crossing switches are automatic consequences of the shape fluctuations of strands. We will show below that all the continuous quantities we are used to – physical space, physical time, gauge fields and wave functions – result from averaging crossing switches over the background space.

Nature is built from fluctuating featureless strands. The strands are featureless: they have no mass, no tension, no stiffness, no branches, no fixed length, no ends, and they cannot be cut or pushed through each other. Strands have no measurable property at all: strands are unobservable. Only crossing switches are observable. Featureless strands are thus among the simplest possible extended constituents.

Strands are one-dimensional curves in three-dimensional space that reach the border of space. In practice, the border of space has one of two possible meanings. Whenever space is assumed to be flat, the border of space is spatial infinity. Whenever we take into account the properties of the universe as a whole, the border of space is the cosmic horizon. Imagining the strands as having Planck diameter does not make them observable, as this measurement result cannot be realized. In low energy situations, a vanishing strand diameter is an excellent approximation. In a purist definition, strands have no defined diameter at all – neither the Planck length nor zero. Funnels might be a better visualization of this puristic definition. To keep the introduction as intuitive as possible, we stick with the idea of very thin strands.

Events are observable crossing switches of unobservable strands.

A tangle is a configuration one or more strands with a particular topology.

We will discover that the classification of tangles leads to the elementary particles that make up the standard model of particle physics. We will also discover that strand fluctuations and the induced crossing switches in every physical system lead to the evolution equations and the Lagrangians of quantum field theory and of general relativity. In this way, strands describe every physical process observed in nature, including all known interactions and every type of motion.

Does the strand model reproduce all the paradoxical results of modern physics? Yes, it does. The strand model implies that vacuum cannot be distinguished from matter at Planck scales: both are made of strands. The strand model implies that observables are not real numbers at Planck scales. The strand model implies that the universe and the vacuum are the same, when explored at high precision: both are made of one strand. The strand model also implies that the number of particles in the universe is not clearly defined and that nature is not a set.

If strands really describe all of nature, they must explain the inverse square dependence with distance of the electrostatic and of the gravitational interaction. But that is not sufficient. If the strand model is a final, unified description, it must provide complete precision. First of all, the model must describe all experiments. This is the case, as will be shown below, because the strand model contains both general relativity and the standard model of particle physics.

www.motionmountain.net

The Final Theory - Part 1

(from Christoph Schiller’s “MOTION MOUNTAIN” vol. VI, www.motionmountain.net)

Requirements for a final theory

In our quest for the final, unified theory, we have deduced many requirements that such a theory must realize. All the requirements that we deduced are listed below. So far, this list is not found elsewhere in the literature.

Certain requirements follow from the property that the description must be final, others from the property that it must be unified, and still others from the property that it must describe nature. More specifically, every requirement appears when the expressions for the Compton wavelength and for the Schwarzschild radius are combined.

General requirements for a final and unified description of nature and of motion

Precision

must be complete; the unified description must describe all motion and explain all open issues of physics.

Modification

must be impossible, as the theory is final.

Fundamental principles

must be clear. (Otherwise the unified description is not falsifiable.)

Vacuum and particles

must not differ at Planck scales because of limits of measurement precision; vacuum and particles therefore must be described by common fundamental constituents.

Fundamental constituents

• must be extended and fluctuating, to explain black hole entropy, spin, space-time homogeneity and isotropy of space.
• must be as simple as possible, to satisfy Occam’s razor.
• must determine all observables.
• must be the only unobservable entities. (If they were observable, the theory would not be final; if more unobservable entities would exist, the theory would be fiction, not science.)

Non-locality

must be part of the description; non-locality must be negligible at everyday scales, but important at Planck scales.

Physical points and sets

must not exist, due to limits of measurement precision; points and sets only exist approximately, at everyday scales.

Evolution equations

must not exist, due to the lack of points and sets.

Physical systems

must not exist at Planck scales, due to limits of measurement precision; systems only exist approximately at everyday scales.

Universe

must not be a system, due to limits of measurement precision.

Planck’s natural units

must be limit values for each observable (within a factor of order one); infinitely large or small measurement values must not exist.

Planck scale description

must imply quantum field theory, the standard model of particle physics, general relativity and cosmology.

Planck’s natural units

must define all observables, including coupling constants.

Relation to experiment

must be as simple as possible, to satisfy Occam’s razor.

Background dependence

is required, as background independence is logically impossible.

Background space-time

must be equal to physical space-time at everyday scale, but must differ globally and at Planck scales.

Big bang

must not be an event, and thus not be a beginning, as this would contradict the non-existence of points and sets in nature.

Circularity of definitions of physical concepts

must be part of the final, unified description, as a consequence of being ‘precise talk about nature’.

Axiomatic description

must be impossible, as nature is not described by sets; Hilbert’s sixth problem must have no solution.

Dimensionality of space

must be undefined at Planck scales, as space is undefined there.

Symmetries

must be undefined at Planck scales, due to the limits to measurement precision.

Large and small scales

must be similar, due to the limits to measurement precision.

Looking at the requirements for a final theory, we note something astonishing.

Even though all requirements appear when quantum physics and general relativity are combined, each of these requirements contradicts both quantum physics and general relativity.

The final theory thus differs from both pillars of modern physics. A final theory cannot be found if we remain prisoners of either quantum theory or general relativity. To put it bluntly, each requirement for the final theory contradicts every result of twentieth century physics.

The dangers of buying a can of beans

Here goes the ultimate product warning, which according to certain well-informed lawyers should be printed on every can of beans and on every product package.


Warning: care should be taken when looking at this product: It emits heat radiation. Bright light has the effect to compress this product.

Warning: care should be taken when touching this product: Part of it could heat up while another part cools down, causing severe burns.

Warning: care should be taken when handling this product: This product consists of at least 99.999 999 999 999 % empty space.

This product contains particlesmoving with speeds higher than one million kilometres per
hour.

Every kilogram of this product contains the same amount of energy as liberated by about
one hundred nuclear bombs.

In case this product is brought in contact with antimatter, a catastrophic explosion will
occur.

In case this product is rotated, it will emit gravitational radiation.

Warning: care should be taken when transporting this product: The force needed depends on its velocity, as does its weight. This product will emit additional radiation when accelerated.

This product attracts, with a force that increases with decreasing distance, every other object
around, including its purchaser’s kids.

Warning: care should be taken when storing this product: It is impossible to keep this product in a specific place and at rest at the same time.

Except when stored underground at a depth of several kilometres, over time cosmic radiation
will render this product radioactive.

This product may disintegrate in the next 1035 years.

It could cool down and lift itself into the air.

This product warps space and time in its vicinity, including the storage container.

Even if stored in a closed container, this product is influenced and influences all other
objects in the universe, including your parents in law.

This product can disappear from its present location and reappear at any random place in
the universe, including your neighbour’s garage.

Warning: care should be taken when travelling away from this product: It will arrive at the expiration date before the purchaser does so.

Warning: care should be taken when using this product: Any use whatsoever will increase the entropy of the universe.

The constituents of this product are exactly the same as those of any other object in the
universe, including those of rotten fish.

The impression of a certain paranoid side to quantum physics is purely coincidental.

(c) Christoph Schiller, MOTION MOUNTAIN, www.motionmountain.net