Essay Abstract

I explain how the Universe is mathematical, in direct contrast to simply being described by mathematics. With no handwaving, I demonstrate which mathematical fundamentals dictate eternal laws or rules in Nature that are absolute. I propose that the lepton and quark states represent specific discrete symmetry subgroups of the Standard Model local gauge group and from first principles derive the neutrino聽 mixing matrix PMNS and the quark mixing matrix CKM as well as the weak mixing angle. These derivations by themselves should be sufficient to verify that fundamental mathematics dictates the fundamental physics. However, I show also that many other physical properties follow directly from the fundamental mathematics such as particle mass values, maximal parity violation, exact color symmetry, particle decays, and the existence of anti-particles. Moreover, one can now combine the Standard Model gauge group with Lorentz transformations to form the unique discrete group Weyl E8 x Weyl E8 = 'discrete' SO(9,1), a 10-D mathematical result related to our 4-D physical world. In fact, all of physics seems to be dictated by the Monster Group and its j-invariant function. I suggest that a discrete mathematical lattice at the Planck scale leads to a possible source of quantum mechanics and an emergent gravitation via a particle model that derives Feynman's path integral approach. Therefore, I provide a coherent case for fundamental mathematics dictating the fundamental physics of our one Universe with no need for the questionable default to an anthropic approach, landscapes, and multiverses. The existence of a 4th quark family at the LHC will lend further credence to my discrete geometrical approach and our mathematical Universe.

Author Bio

I am a physicist retired from UC Irvine but continuing my physics research. I pursue alternative geometrical approaches toward understanding the Standard Model, with many key ideas presented in my essay. The discovery of a 4th quark family would verify my emphasis on discrete symmetries. In astrophysics, transforming the general relativistic Hamilton-Jacobi equation and applying the Schwarzschild metric leads to angular momentum quantization per unit mass for all orbiting bodies. A check of 79 multi-planetary systems verifies this prediction. In fact, I can show that the Oort Cloud dictates the allowed large planet spacings in our Solar System!

Download Essay PDF File

Dear Franklin,

Integers 108 and 1748 appear in the combination of invariants for the octahedron and the icosahedron (in Klein's lectures) and you claim that they have physical significance for the ladder of particle masses, may be. Then, in a nutshell, you do a fantastic jump writing that since the j-invariant is related to the Monster group [this is called Monstrous Moonshine, and in passing one has j(i)=1728] then the universe is mathematical. Dyson had "the sneaking hope" that the Monster would play a role in the structure of the universe, I see that you are suscribing to his hope. You will just have to substantiate your arguments a lot, in my opinion. I wish you good luck.

Michel

Dear Franklin Potter,

It was interesting to know how a veteran, still in the game, views the unfinished game. You say, "I argue that this j-invariant connection dictates the lepton mass ratios to be 1:108:1728, values very close to the actual charged-lepton mass values 0.511:105.7:1776.8." Thus, in fact, what you have provided is just a correlation between mathematics and physics at the particle level. Can this be sufficient reason to assume that 'fundamental mathematics dictates the fundamental physics'?

A mathematical relation can have different physical interpretations. The difference may be sometimes very thin. I would explain the above relation as follows: 'Given the fundamental properties of matter, mathematics dictates the structures'. Regarding laws, my opinion is that the physical world has no laws of its own. The laws applicable to it are mathematical, and these are "eternal and absolute".

You ask, "Have I convinced you that the fundamental particles as well as we humans are mathematics instead of simply being described by mathematics?" Here also a slight change: Given the fundamental properties of matter, the mathematical laws dictates the emergent structures, and now human structures are present in the universe (the laws not just describe, but dictate).

I request you to read my essay A physicalist interpretation of the relation between physics and mathematics and visit my site finitenesstheory.com. I would appreciate your comments.

Dear Franklin Potter,

Enjoyed your modelling of the SU(2) and the SU(3) world. Regarding your comment "If my predicted 4th quark family is discovered, I would like to hear your argument denying so!", you wont hear a denial from me as I agree with you.

Not sure if you get a chance, but my essay also revolves around modelling the particles of the standard model and if you get a chance to have a look, I would enjoy your comments.

Your essay was a great read and thank you for putting it forward.

Regards, Ed Unverricht

Dear Dr. Potter,

In the abstract of your essay you wrote: "I explain how the Universe is mathematical, in direct contrast to simply being described by mathematics."

Your explanation of an abstract universe is quite erroneous. This is how the real Universe is occurring:

Please behold the true nature of the real Universe. Accurate writing has enabled me to perfect a valid description of untangled unified reality: Proof exists that every real astronomer looking through a real telescope has failed to notice that each of the real galaxies he has observed is unique as to its structure and its perceived distance from all other real galaxies. Each real star is unique as to its structure and its perceived distance apart from all other real stars. Every real scientist who has peered at real snowflakes through a real microscope has concluded that each real snowflake is unique as to its structure. Real structure is unique, once. Unique, once does not consist of abstract amounts of abstract quanta. Based on one's normal observation, one must conclude that all of the stars, all of the planets, all of the asteroids, all of the comets, all of the meteors, all of the specks of astral dust and all real objects have only one real thing in common. Each real object has a real material surface that seems to be attached to a material sub-surface. All surfaces, no matter the apparent degree of separation, must travel at the same constant speed. No matter in which direction one looks, one will only ever see a plethora of real surfaces and those surfaces must all be traveling at the same constant speed or else it would be physically impossible for one to observe them instantly and simultaneously. Real surfaces are easy to spot because they are well lighted. Real light does not travel far from its source as can be confirmed by looking at the real stars, or a real lightning bolt. Reflected light needs to adhere to a surface in order for it to be observed, which means that real light cannot have a surface of its own. Real light must be the only stationary substance in the real Universe. The stars remain in place due to astral radiation. The planets orbit because of atmospheric accumulation. There is no space.

Warm regards,

a month later

Dear Franklin,

I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of NOTHING.

All I ask is that you give my essay WHY THE REAL UNIVERSE IS NOT MATHEMATICAL a fair reading and that you allow me to answer any objections you may leave in my comment box about it.

Joe Fisher

16 days later

Wow..

From the binary dihedral groups to the Monster and Weyl E8 x Weyl E8 in only a few simple steps! This is worthwhile perspective not available anywhere else. I think you realize the aims of the contest organizers, in great measure. I hope your model bears out. Let's hope for evidence of a 4th quark family, when they re-start the LHC. I hope this contest has brought some more visibility to your work. Dr. Planat, who responded above, has expertise in some areas that overlap with your work in a non-trivial way, and I expect to be comparing notes with him on research of mutual interest after the contest wraps up.

All the Best,

Jonathan

    I think I used the word hope too many times..

    Glad you could participate Frank.

    Regards,

    Jonathan

    Hi Jonathan,

    Thanks for reading my essay and for your comments. I found your essay quite informative also. As you noticed, the detection of two additional quarks at the LHC will verify my discrete symmetry approach within the framework of the Standard Model, thereby simplifying our understanding of fundamental particle physics immensely and its universal physical consequences instead of adding more complications and mathematical speculations. My goal is simply to understand Nature at the deepest levels possible and to make testable predictions which have yes/no answers. If the effort leads to dictating that we humans are mathematics, so be it!

    Write a Reply...