Alien Calculus, New Mathematics And Particle Physics

[Cheerful Charlie]

New mathematical ideas solving deep particle physics problems. OK math heads, this is interesting.

‘Alien Calculus’ Could Save Particle Physics From Infinities | Quanta Magazine

In the math of particle physics, every calculation should result in infinity. Physicists get around this by just ignoring certain parts of the equations — an approach that provides approximate answers. But by using the techniques known as “resurgence,” researchers hope to end the infinities and...

www.quantamagazine.org

 

[Jarhyn]

It makes me wonder if this math will in fact be used to uncover some part of the nature of prime numbers and number theory, on account of the fact that precise answers yielded by such interactions of physical particles and that they achieve fast operation.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Sometimes, math leads to interesting facts. Max Plank's mathematics was created to solve how to calculate black body radiation correctly. This gave us quantas. Which Einstein demonstrated were real, not just mathematical tricks. Problems with the physics of the Big Bang was solved by Inflation theory greated by Guth. Which were demostrated to be true. So where all this will lead will be worth watching.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Sometimes, math leads to interesting facts. Max Plank's mathematics was created to solve how to calculate black body radiation correctly. This gave us quantas. Which Einstein demonstrated were real, not just mathematical tricks. Problems with the physics of the Big Bang was solved by Inflation theory greated by Guth. Which were demostrated to be true. So where all this will lead will be worth watching.

Can you point to the citation in which inflation was "demonstrated to be true"? Thanks.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

WMAP Satellite that mapped out the backround microwave radiation. That demonstrated Alan Guth's prediction of that based on inflation theory was correct. It has since ben confirmed by more accurate satellite mappings.

 

[Shadowy Man]

WMAP Satellite that mapped out the backround microwave radiation. That demonstrated Alan Guth's prediction of that based on inflation theory was correct. It has since ben confirmed by more accurate satellite mappings.

Citation please. I don’t believe that WMAP confirmed inflation. There was a ground-based instrument called “BICEP” that claimed to confirm inflation but was shown to not have when the satellite Planck data came out. Currently, I believe there is no definitive proof of inflationary theory, but I’m happy to be corrected if you can provide a proper citation.

 

[Swammerdami]

New mathematical ideas solving deep particle physics problems. OK math heads, this is interesting.

Yes. However, only three years younger than the 45th President, my cognitive skills, like his, are on the decline. And I was never a REAL mathematician anyway.

I think the problem facing physicists are sums like the infamous

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + ... = -1/12​

That specific example is child's play of course, but what if you don't have such simple numbers -- or even any numbers at all since you first need to construct an infinite maze of Feynman diagrams?

A graphic summarizing the problem trivially.

Even an ordinary proton is such a maze. I'm happy to give up, but if any of our mathematicians can shed further light, I will listen.

More than a century after Ernest Rutherford discovered the positively charged particle at the heart of every atom, physicists are still struggling to fully understand the proton.

High school physics teachers describe them as featureless balls with one unit each of positive electric charge — the perfect foils for the negatively charged electrons that buzz around them. College students learn that the ball is actually a bundle of three elementary particles called quarks. But decades of research have revealed a deeper truth, one that’s too bizarre to fully capture with words or images.

“This is the most complicated thing that you could possibly imagine,” said Mike Williams, a physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “In fact, you can’t even imagine how complicated it is.”

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

WMAP Satellite that mapped out the backround microwave radiation. That demonstrated Alan Guth's prediction of that based on inflation theoryï was correct. It has since ben confirmed by more accurate satellite mappings.

Citation please. I don’t believe that WMAP confirmed inflation. There was a ground-based instrument called “BICEP” that claimed to confirm inflation but was shown to not have when the satellite Planck data came out. Currently, I believe there is no definitive proof of inflationary theory, but I’m happy to be corrected if you can provide a proper citation.

From Scientific American
.....
When the results from the Planck satellite were announced, they were held up as a confirmation of cosmic inflation," says Avi Loeb, Professor of Astronomy from Harvard University and Vagnozzi's co-author on the new paper. "However, some of us argued that the results might be showing just the opposite."
.....

Their theory involves something called Gravitons. But these have not been detected, and at this point in time cannot be technologically detected. So until such time as that can be accomplished and actually is detected, it is a moot point. The Plank satellite confirms the WMAP findings in greater detail. "Some of us" is not a general consensus. Of course we have theories about Roger Penrose's CCC model, conformal cyclic cosmology, but I find that very dependent on unproven maybes to be able to disprove the Multiverse concept, which derives from observable cosmological phenomena. These theories seem to me about as fragile as Hoyle's steady state cosmology became.

YMMV

 

[Shadowy Man]

WMAP Satellite that mapped out the backround microwave radiation. That demonstrated Alan Guth's prediction of that based on inflation theoryï was correct. It has since ben confirmed by more accurate satellite mappings.

Citation please. I don’t believe that WMAP confirmed inflation. There was a ground-based instrument called “BICEP” that claimed to confirm inflation but was shown to not have when the satellite Planck data came out. Currently, I believe there is no definitive proof of inflationary theory, but I’m happy to be corrected if you can provide a proper citation.

From Scientific American
.....
When the results from the Planck satellite were announced, they were held up as a confirmation of cosmic inflation," says Avi Loeb, Professor of Astronomy from Harvard University and Vagnozzi's co-author on the new paper. "However, some of us argued that the results might be showing just the opposite."
.....

Their theory involves something called Gravitons. But these have not been detected, and at this point in time cannot be technologically detected. So until such time as that can be accomplished and actually is detected, it is a moot point. The Plank satellite confirms the WMAP findings in greater detail. "Some of us" is not a general consensus. Of course we have theories about Roger Penrose's CCC model, conformal cyclic cosmology, but I find that very dependent on unproven maybes to be able to disprove the Multiverse concept, which derives from observable cosmological phenomena. These theories seem to me about as fragile as Hoyle's steady state cosmology became.

YMMV

That’s not a citation to the literature and certainly not a ringing endorsement for the confirmation of inflation.

My understanding is that inflation is constrained by B-mode polarization in the CMB and the best we have right now are upper limits.

 

[Swammerdami]

Am I wrong that in Penrose's model of cyclic conformal universes, the inflation is just a (place-holding) illusion for the conformalized previous cycle(s)?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Hard to say. Multiverse or Cyclic? Here is a sort of debate between Guth and Penrose on all of this. I did not find Penrose persuasive.