Notices
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Amplituhedron

  1. #1 Amplituhedron 
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    193
    https://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/20130917-a-jewel-at-the-heart-of-quantum-physics/

    W
    hat do you think of this? Win or bust?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Junior
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Posts
    236
    I expect that Roger Penrose would be pleased to see his "twistor" theory appear. However, it was a little odd that Penrose doesn't appear to have been mentioned in the article.

    As for win or bust - I have no idea.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    794
    I don't think it...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Gere View Post
    I have been following the developments here for some time, and I must say it is most fascinating. I won't pretend to be able to judge whether or not there is something to it ( a lot of it is over my head ), but I do believe that the general direction - reducing physical phenomena to geometric concepts - is most definitely worth pursuing. As for the the amplituhedron, what is needed is a generalisation from the specific case of the N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills model to general Yang-Mills theories before we can tell if there is anything to it. A lot of work is still needed here; however, the simplification in calculating scattering amplitudes is certainly striking, and even more so are the ramifications for basic understand of physics. Let's keep a close eye on it
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Meaning of meanings 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    1
    I believe the Amplituhedron is the start of a new kind of physics. That may be a grandiose claim, but I am very excited indeed to find out what results will come of it. I have been studying this shape and trying to learn the physics and maths properly for many years and I realised last May that my model is itself what I consider a "piece of time". My model is made of matchsticks and qtips, and I built it because I visualised the matrix geometry of quantum mechanics in some deep meditations to explore what might be missing, if anything. My conclusion was that nothing is missing but that the symmetries are not rotational but rather an elastic recoil, like a yoyo or the rotational torque in a slinky (when one end is held and the other dropped and enough of a tug is there to return the lower end).

    I came at the idea from a different perspective, but in May started mailing Mathematicians and Physicists and trying to talk to someone suggesting that Grassman exterior calculus if applied to spinor representations should construct all the geometry and scattering amplitudes of the standard model and explain the redundancies in the model and why it contains singularities, which I also believe to be fundamental and literally central to and fleshing out this problem. We do not understand what a singularity is. Beyond the Spinor and Grassman connection there is a question about what connection means.

    The truly extraordinary thing about this object is that we have no words to describe it. My work focuses on what I call "chamfers" which I believe are related to different orders of stationary point in the theory of infinite sets. I am also starting a blog about my research which after some months and the confirmation of the Amplituhedron I now feel is making real progress. Probability, time, space are not applicable to the Amplituhedron and yet they are generated by it. The structure of the Amplituhedron is not made from angles or distance, but rather the geometry which aligns singularities such that they are viewable as one object from some perspective. I am quite sure that these alignments have a far far deeper significance for number theory as well as physics. What we are talking about when we use the term "energy", "space", even "number" and "axis" or "dimension" may be up for grabs. New definitions need to be laid down or preferably discovered to exist in a set of clear mathematical operations to describe what the Amplituhedron really is.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,288
    It would be very exciting if it was true.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    193
    someone ban druidseer
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •