Quantum Gravity Topics 1

The literature of quantum gravity is bogged down in Bohr's incomplete
picture of the meaning of the quantum that posits no "there" there - no
objective reality. Bohm's picture, in collaboration with Einstein at
Princeton in 1951 restores objective reality. Lenny Susskind has
introduced the notion of the "landscape" into string-brane cosmology. I
already in 1996 introduced it at Tucson II as a way of picturing Bohm's
pilot wave theory of 1951.


http://stardrive.org/logo.gif

Example 1 single quantum particle is the ball on the "Q" Bohm-Quantum
Potential Landscape.

That is the effective conservative potential in

F = md^2r/dt^2 = -gradU

U = V + Q

V is the classical potential energy

Q = Bohm non-classical potential energy

Q = - [(hbar)^2/2m]|psi|^-1Grad|psi|

psi = |psi|e^iS

is the pilot wave

Pilot wave = Wheeler's BIT

Path of particle on U-landscape is Wheeler's IT

In

IT FROM BIT

Ignore for now entanglement of multi-particle systems where Q is
non-factorizable in configuration space.

Ordinary quantum theory, including delayed choice experiments with slow
neutrons is simple and visualizable classically. The quantum potential Q
has all the nonlocal quantum weirdness in it.

Ordinary quantum theory with "no cloning" signal locality (nonlocal
entanglement is not a stand-alone C^3) is the test particle
approximation. That is, the ball gets its marching orders from the
landscape on which it rolls, but it does not change the shape of the
landscape in a self-organizing globally self-consistent "intelligent"
adaptive fashion. "Test particle" means rigid fixed algorithm - not like
an adaptive neural net - not like an intelligent conscious universe.


http://qedcorp.com/APS/ureye.gif

Everything Linde did on Sunday at AAAS 2007 for eternal chaotic
inflation FORMALLY fits the above simple model where

psi = GIANT vacuum ODLRO condensate Pilot Wave of the Pocket Universe
"Higgs field" and V = 0.

(relation of cosmic inflation to SU(2) chiral weak force is there)

psi has 6D hyperspace Calabi-Yau "hair," i.e. moduli, fluxes, branes,
orbifolds defining the domain of the cosmic landscape.

Assumed homogeneous FRW metric "ball" a(t) = scale factor in first
approximation, with the ball as the proto-universe rather than the
particle in Bohm's simple case.

The "ball" is a 3-Geometry scale factor at the next level of
abstraction. Particle r is replaced by FRW scale factor a(t) in the
usual cosmological simplification.

On Feb 19, 2007, at 6:42 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving
hysterical naked,
dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an
angry fix

According to Peter Woit in "Not Even Wrong" Ed Witten is the Tim Leary
of physics destroying a whole generation of particle theorists on an
insane quest that boggles the rational mind. On the other hand, hearing
the Susskind-Linde Stanford Duet is very seductive music to the ears and
it is understandable how so many poor little lambs have been led astray.

It's still too early to say for sure. Susskind's imagery of 6D
Calabi-Yau spaces as "DNA molecules" whose moduli, fluxes, branes and
orbifolds pinpoint where we are on the cosmic landscape of the megaverse
is seductive as was Linde's impassioned soliloquy repeating Brandon
Carter's argument that the many Anthropic coincidences only make sense
if there is an actually populated landscape of causally disconnected
pocket universes outside each other's de Sitter dark energy past and
future horizons. Of course, a slight change in the rules of quantum
theory to allow entanglement "signal nonlocality" violating the
no-cloning theorem makes the pocket universes directly observable in
principle though severely impacting Lenny Susskind's notions of
information loss through horizons. So Lenny is stuck between a rock and
a hard place.

On Feb 18, 2007, at 8:20 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Lenny called his talk "Rats leaving the sinking ship." "ship" =
reductionism. However Lenny called "emergence" = "reductionism" in
reverse POV. I am not sure if I agree with that. I am not sure if ODLRO
"More is different" can be viewed that way. I say that with emergent
ODLRO bottom - up emergence (related to effective low energy field
theories in flows of renormalization group?) is not simply the flip side
of reductionism since it is non-perturbative).

Lenny wrote my basic equation that I use over and over again in Super
Cosmos to make some model calculations e.g. charge clusters

F = ma = GMm/r^2 + mc^2/\zpfr

For a simple Lorentz-Poincare electron

ma = @e^2/r^2 + (hbar/2)^2/2mr^3 + mc^2/\zpfr = 0 equilibrium

Solves the finite classical electron problem with /\zpf 0 dark matter
core.

i.e. @e^2r* + (hbar/2)^2/2m + mc^2/\zpfr*^4 = 0 stable equilibrium

with

@e^2 + 4mc^2/\zpfr*^3 0

@ + 4(mc^2/e^2)/\zpfr*^3 0

@ is shell shape factor.

Extending to charge cluster is trivial.

Linde - "multiverse is a feast with all dishes served"

Gravity energy + matter energy = 0

i.e.

Guv + /\zpfguv + kTuv = 0

Quantum fluctuations inflate when /\zpf stays constant from viscosity
like in damped oscillator - slow roll.

Jiggle of the Higgs scalar ODLRO field at bottom of landscape well heats
up the big bang creating on-mass-shell matter.

Coincidence problem means Weak Anthropic or else intelligent design.

On Feb 18, 2007, at 6:25 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:

Just got back from Hilton. Surprisingly Sean Carroll was there asked a
question but I forget what it was. Lenny looks great - very Regal
Shakespearean, but with the voice of Sid Caesar in The Show of Shows. He
even had a slide of Woody Allen. Linde is also a good Russian comedian.
Linde gave an impassioned impromptu answer at end to a question showing
is real motivation for the landscape multiverse before in early 80's
really identical to my own - more on that in another message. I have
almost finished Peter Woit's book "Not Even Wrong." Peter writes well
and is very convincing so it was propitious that I went to hear Lenny
and Linde speak on how inflation and string theory reinforce each other
in a way not totally disconnected from up-coming experiments like PLANCK
NASA Probe. Lenny says that even a positive space curvature of 10^-3
would be trouble for multiverse-inflation. Lenny admits to the basic
issues raised by Woit, but the situation is more complex. More on this
to come. The situation is not as bad as Woit paints it, but not as good
as Lenny wishes. When I spoke to Lenny personally he agreed that signal
nonlocality using entanglement (a violation of orthodox QM - see papers
by A. Valentini) would make the landscape directly observable, but it
would spoil other parts of his theory connected with no-cloning. Lenny
said he is not ready to move into that area of speculation - so I guess
it's up to me (also Cramer's retrocausality experiment will be crucial).
Someone mentioned Lee Smolin and Lenny said "who"? He pretended not to
know of Smolin's work - a joke. ;-)

PS Krauss showed how dark energy proves Worst Possible World, i.e. life
not sustainable. Some talk about string theory as religion.

Jack Sarfatti

"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research,
would it?"
- Albert Einstein
http://www.authorhouse.com/BookStore...x?bookid=23999
http://lifeboat.com/ex/bios.jack.sarfatti
http://qedcorp.com/APS/Dec122006.ppt
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...ausation&hl=en
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lub/sets/72157594439814784