Essay Abstract

In light of Gödel's undecidability results (incomplete theorems) for math, quantum indeterminism indicates that physics and the Universe may be indeterministic, incomplete, and open in nature, and therefore demand no single unification theory of everything. The Universe is dynamic and so are the underlying physical models and spacetime. As the 4-d spacetime evolves dimension by dimension in the early universe, consistent yet different models emerge one by one with different sets of particles and interactions. A new set of first principles are proposed for building such models with new understanding of supersymmetry, mirror symmetry, and the dynamic phase transition mechanism - spontaneous symmetry breaking. Under this framework, we demonstrate that different models with no theory of everything operate in a hierarchical yet consistent way at different phases or scenarios of the Universe. In particular, the arrow of time is naturally explained and the Standard Model of physics is elegantly extended to time zero of the Universe.

Author Bio

Wanpeng Tan is Research Associate Professor in Department of Physics at University of Notre Dame, USA. B.A. from Beijing University and Ph.D. from Michigan State University. Publications: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5930-1823 Web: https://physics.nd.edu/people/faculty/wanpeng-tan/ Blog: http://sites.nd.edu/wtan/

Download Essay PDF File

This looks very interesting Dr. Tan...

I note several points of agreement with what you say in the abstract. I have long felt that nature is grander than any one all-encompassing theory can describe. I will definitely have to read this essay for detail and comment. You have made me think already.

All the Best,

Jonathan

Thank you for your kind comments, Johanthan.

I accidentally found this website a few days ago and decided to write this article based on my recent works. So I am brand new here and it may take a while for me to get used to it. But feel free to send me your comments and/or questions.

Thanks,

Wanpeng

Dear Professor Tan

I agree with you that the initiators of interpretations of events should be aware that their interpretation is just one of the many that are present and also must be aware that there are more to come because new interpretations of new events and information will arrive.

As you say we are moving from strictly determinism to more and indeterminism, what will be the next we have to accept that we just don't know.

I like your remark that determinism must be an emergent phenomenon (illusion) and that the indeterminism of quantum is fundamental. You are touching here my interpretation of the emergent phenomenon we experience as reality. The reality we are experiencing is already past so deterministic. The quantum is touching the source of this emergence, so indeterministic (future).

When you are explaining the approaches like Higgs field, supersymmetry, Inflation, the BB, Susy etc., I think that all these approaches are only temporal (deterministic) explanations, the interpretations you are adding are realistic and have a solid foundation, however, there may arrive earth-quakes. (no BB?)

Zero-dimensional is in my perception a very important understanding. In my interpretation, I name it Total Simultaneity, the origin of ALL emergent phenomena. The birth of the time arrow is in my perception originating from the zero-dimensional ALL through consciousness (Time is then a restriction compared to the ALL in ONE. Without consciousness, there is no time-experience.

You write: "Original fluctuations at the Planck scale are so chaotic that the original baby-sized spacetime is by no means smooth or causal. But this time inflation process can ensure a causally smooth time dimension afterwards". I fully agree. When we are approaching the zero-dimensional point, (my Point Zero), we are approaching the infinity probabilities representing emergent phenomena (realities). So we are approaching but cannot reach it. In our reality, this is the cause of chaos and entropy.

In your conclusion, I like especially two remarks: "In the end, our free will might be tied to indeterminism", and your end-quote " Quantum indeterminism may be the fundamental reason that drives us to be open-minded, our research to follow open science practices, and our world to be open, collaborative, and prejudice-free to overcome the "barriers" between us.". That is why I hope that you can find some time to read my essay and leave a remark. My perception is more philosophic as yours, but based on the same reality.

Best regards and good luck

Wilhelmus de Wilde

    Dear Wanpeng,

    I recently derived the cosmic matter density from the inherent curvature of a tessellated 3-sphere. Do you think I should write up an essay on the computability of this and the dark energy density, or is that not what this essay contest is about?

    A short paper showing the derivation can be found at:

      Dear Wilhelmus,

      Thanks so much for your thoughtful comments. I'll read your essay later.

      Best,

      Wanpeng

      Shawn, I am new at FQXi. I am not sure that I can answer your questions. But I guess that you can always submit your essay as far as your topic is related to some limit that physical laws seem unable to reach.

      Wanpeng

      Your paper was interesting. There are a few points I thought I would mention. Supersymmetry requires a zero energy vacuum. If the energy of the vacuum has positive expectation then SUSY is broken, The vacuum energy during inflation was enormous and so SUSY was likely highly broken.

      That your group is U(6)Ã--SU(3)Ã--SU(2)Ã--U(1) means this may connect to some aspects of string theory with E6 ⸧ SU(6) and then with exceptional group realizations. Your approach though appears to be to hide these into simpler groups. I have been considering something similar with the stretched horizon of black holes according to simple groups that under perturbations give complex groups.

      Anyway if you get the time see if you can read my essay.

      Thanks LC

        Dear Dr. Tan,

        Most of your paper is way over my head, so I am not in a position to appreciate it properly, though I agree with its spirit. One thing in particular you said resonates with me: "An immediate implication of quantum indeterminism is that our world has to be dynamic with phase transitions. It is hard to imagine that a static universe is not deterministic unless one assumes different laws at different locations, which, however, defeats the static assumption for spacetime." What is interesting is that this statement is a purely logical deduction. That is, the universe MUST be dynamic if it is indeterministic (or, conversely, only a static universe could be deterministic). To me, this sheds light on the meaning of determinism, which I hold to be no more than a property of mathematics (determinism = logical implication), rather than a possible inherent property of matter. Nevertheless, the APPEARANCE of determinism could emerge (as in GR) to the extent matter conforms on the large scale to that mathematical description.

        All best wishes,

        Dan Bruiger

          16 days later

          Dear LC, Thanks for your interest.

          You are right about exact SUSY requiring zero vacuum energy. As such, two of my models SMM2 and SMM4 for 2-d and 4-d spacetime, respectively, follow the exact N=1 gauge SUSY. On the other hand, during the phase transitions or spontaneous symmetry breaking processes, the corresponding SMM2b and SMM4b models will break the exact SUSY due to the emerging mass scales and vacuum energies. Therefore, these models are called pseudo-SUSY as non-zero mass terms leading to new energy scales but the matching of degrees of freedom between bosons (gauge and pseudo-Goldstone) and fermions is still observed.

          Indeed, there is some connection with string theory (not as a theory of everything). You might find some related discussion in my preprint: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/8qawc

          Best,

          Wanpeng

          Thanks for your interest, Dan.

          The past efforts on theory of everything seemed to focus too much on a static picture of attempting unifying all forces and particles. While the realistic world and the Universe keeps telling us it is dynamic.

          What I did not talk about in the essay is the degree of indeterminism. My gut feeling is that it is right on the boundary between indeterminism and determinism. As such, determinism can emerge naturally in some aspects of our world. See http://sites.nd.edu/wtan/2020/03/07/from-quantum-indeterminism-to-open-science-open-society-and-open-world/ for further discussion.

          Wanpeng

          16 days later

          Somehow my reply did not get posted. I am trying again.

          Thank you, LC for your interest.

          You are right about exact SUSY requiring zero vacuum energy. The two models of SMM2 and SMM4 for 2-d and 4-d spacetime, respectively, follow the exact N=1 gauge SUSY. On the other hand, during the phase transitions or spontaneous symmetry breaking processes, the corresponding SMM2b and SMM4b will break the exact SUSY and become pseudo-SUSY due to the emergence of new mass scales and vacuum energies. But the matching of degrees and freedom between bosons (gauge and pseudo-Goldstone) and fermions is still observed, and that is why it is called pseudo-SUSY).

          Yes, there seems to be some connection with string theory (but not as a theory of everything). Please see my other preprint for more discussion on that: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/8qawc

          Best,

          Wanpeng

          Why FQXi blocking my replies to Lawrence B. Crowell? It occurred twice. Can somebody help me?

          Wanpeng

          Dr. Tan:

          I agree that "...no single unification theory for describing all energy scales at the same time." can be built from the current General Relativity (GR) and Quantum Mechanics (QM) models. I also agree with the proposal that similar conclusions from the "phase transition" barriers could be extended to life and society.

          But here we part. I propose that a simpler model of one Theory of Everything could be formed by treating both GR and QM as applications which also must explain all the observations that the 2 don't explain. The STOE has had predictions confirmed, also. The STOE proposes determinism for big and small. The STOE proposes one equation for all the universe.

          I note your theory is basically proposing increased complexity rather than greater simplicity for the observed universe. This is a typical response for the accepted technicians. Mine is a radical, not accepted model. I think your model is just adding more parameters to the math rather than simplifying the principles. But take heart. Your thinking is probably going to rate very high in this contest so far. Indeed, I think your essay is the best in line with FQXi thinking and past rewards.

          However, I would be interested in your approach to the experiments that reject wave models of light interference. (photon models of interference not the wave-particle type). I have noted your other contributions (1-7 in your references).

          Hodge

            Dear Dr Wang,

            You write in your essay: "An immediate implication of quantum indeterminism is that our world has to be dynamic with phase transitions." I don't see why this has to be the case. I can perfectly well conceive of a world that contains a single hydrogen atom which just sits there and that's that. No dynamics, no phase transition, no nothing. Maybe you could clarify for me what you mean by that? With best regards,

            Sabine

              I am trying to post this reply for the third time...

              Thank you, LC for your interest.

              You are right about exact SUSY requiring zero vacuum energy. The two models of SMM2 and SMM4 for 2-d and 4-d spacetime, respectively, follow the exact N=1 gauge SUSY. On the other hand, during the phase transitions or spontaneous symmetry breaking processes, the corresponding SMM2b and SMM4b will break the exact SUSY and become pseudo-SUSY due to the emergence of new mass scales and vacuum energies. But the matching of degrees and freedom between bosons (gauge and pseudo-Goldstone) and fermions is still observed, and that is why it is called pseudo-SUSY.

              Yes, there seems to be some connection with string theory (but not as a theory of everything). Please see my other preprint for more discussion on that (e.g., page 7 and the end of Ref. [7])

              Best,

              Wanpeng

              Dear Hodge, Thanks for your interest.

              If you take a closer look, you'll find that my models don't really increase the complexity although it appears so. Instead, it uses some simple principles and provide more pleasing explanations for the complexity of physics, in particular, the Standard Model.

              Most importantly, various predictions are ready to be tested in laboratory experiments. These experimental tests will ultimately tell if my ideas hold water or not.

              Wanpeng

              Dear Sabine,

              I see your point about the jump I made in that statement which you seem to disagree. But I assume that we have a diversified yet consistent world. Determinism of a classic theory tends to give a "complete" picture and is hard to implement phase transitions to account for the complexity of our world. As a matter of fact, a lot of known phase transitions are deeply rooted in quantum theory. In this sense, I argue that quantum indeterminism may indeed be the reason behind our complex world via dynamic processes of phase transitions.

              On the other hand, if one imagines a simple or trivial world like a single hydrogen atom, I agree, the argument will not hold.

              Thanks,

              Wanpeng

              Thanks for your thorough and clear written essay. One of the best I have read so far. I fully agree with your ideas on indeterminism and the foolish search for a final unified theory.This clearly stems from a (quite arrogant) reductionistic approach typical of physicists. I have challenged this myself in the past, and I find very important your final remarks: " New phenomena and new laws can emerge under phase transitions like superconductivity and other cases. The very nature of quantum indeterminism makes it necessary for pursuing studies of all sub-fields of physics. It may be also why we have so diversified scientific fields ranging from physics, chemistry, biology, to human brains"

              I am not an expert in standard model and high energy physics (my work is on quantum foundations and quantum info), but it seems your arguments are sound. I have myself developed arguments for indeterminism (you might want to have a look at my essay and leave a feedback if you like). I wish you to get high in the rating (full score from me).

              Flavio