Today, in order to do research in physics, multi-billion-dollar equipment is needed, and yet, we still haven't answered the basic questions, and every time we discover the answers, more profound questions emerge * The lecture of Prof. David Gross, winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics at the Nobel Prize Winners Conference held at the Technion * Third article in the series
David Gross, born in the USA, immigrated to Israel with his family in the 2004s. He completed his bachelor's degree at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and received his doctorate from the University of California at Berkeley. Gross shared a Nobel Prize in XNUMX with his two colleagues David Pulitzer and Frank Wilczak for the discovery of the asymptotic freedom of the strong nuclear force. The strong force is one of the three fundamental forces described within the standard model, the theoretical basis of elementary particles and their interactions. The three discovered that unlike the forces we are more familiar with, such as the electromagnetic force and gravity, the strong force between two particles increases as the distance between them increases.
Before officially opening his lecture, Gross stated that he had seen the development of science in the past decades, and that Israel was able to stabilize itself in such a short time as a leader in scientific fields, but added that "in recent years, the leadership takes the scientific excellence in Israel for granted and neglects the investments... in the leadership to do something".
The lecture dealt with the future of physics, but in order to get to the future Gross went through the past. "We have learned a lot in the last sixty years. We discovered the building blocks of the matter we see and the fundamental forces in nature that control them. Einstein explained gravity within the framework of general relativity, and the standard model explained the two nuclear forces. We have mapped the universe, both spatially and temporally. We have reached an understanding of the material in its various states up to orders of magnitude of a nanometer."
"The most important product of knowledge is the lack of informed knowledge, - the more we know, the more ignorance leads us to ask intelligent questions that can be answered by experiment and theory. Today we have a wonderful set of questions (much better than we had when I was a student) to answer. These questions in the fields of cosmology, astrophysics, solid state, particle physics, strings, biophysics and more, may guide physics in the next twenty-five years."
"Let's start with the question, how did the universe begin?" Light of different wavelengths allows us to observe our universe, which was 13.7 billion years old, 13.5 billion years ago. The Big Bang, the moment our universe was born, is the event where all our theories collapse. When I was a student, the question of the origin of the universe was not considered a serious question. Today it is a legitimate question that is at the forefront of research in cosmology and other fields. I have a feeling we can answer this question. Can we determine what the initial conditions of the universe were? Was there time before the big bang?"
More will be built on the science site
- Prof. David Gross in an interview with the Hedaan site: The Israeli government is acting stupidly when it harms higher education
- Ten Nobel laureates call on the government to reverse the cuts in higher education (first article in the series)
- The six characteristics necessary for successful research - Prof. Avraham Hershko - second article in the series following the event at the Technion)
"What is the content of the universe? Today we think it is made of seventy-five percent dark energy, twenty-one percent dark matter and only four percent matter in its familiar form. What are dark energy and dark matter? We cannot see dark matter, but we can feel its gravitational pull. Scientists ask if, given that dark matter passes through us every moment, can we detect it? Can we produce dark matter? It is possible that in the new accelerator in Geneva, the LHC, we will be able to produce dark matter particles. How do we know dark energy exists? The universe is expanding, and when we measured the rate of expansion we found that it was increasing. Dark energy may be Einstein's cosmological constant, which is equivalent to the energy of the void. You probably imagine the void as a rather boring nothingness, but know that within the framework of quantum mechanics the void is quite messy and dynamic. Consider a pendulum, whose low-energy state is standing still in classical physics, but in quantum mechanics we get from the uncertainty principle that its position cannot be completely fixed, it moves around the position and has energy. Similarly, the void also has energy."
"Why do different physical constants have certain values? It is possible that the explanation for the specific values will be obtained from the multiverse theory, that is, there is no need to wonder why the value of the cosmological constant is certain, since there are other universes where it is different and we live in this universe. I think such a theory should be the last resort. Einstein himself claimed that there are no arbitrary parameters in the universe."
"An important question that is asked many times is whether quantum mechanics is the ultimate description of nature or is it a temporary theory that will fail in some field? Roger Penrose [mathematician and physicist, DA] claims that quantum mechanics will collapse in the realm of thinking and awareness. It may collapse at very small distances, in large and complex systems or perhaps on the order of magnitude of the entire universe."
"When do the elementary forces unite into one force? From our current knowledge of these forces we can conclude that the forces combine at energies of ten to the power of 28 electron volts, obtained at very small distances between the particles in question, and gravity becomes a very strong force. What is that unified theory of everything that Einstein was looking for?"
"Are all particles different vibrations of strings? I hope I will be here to see the answer."
"The space-time question preoccupies us a lot. Are there more than three dimensions of space? What is the nature of space-time? What is it made of?"
"In the field of theoretical biology (although some biologists disagree with me on the existence of the concept), it is possible to ask if there is even a basic theory of biology as a whole? Can theoretical physics contribute to the field? Is new math necessary? New mathematics is often developed in conjunction with physics or to describe any natural phenomena. The field of genomics attracts a lot of attention, because it involves dealing with huge volumes of information. Will evolution become a quantitative theory that makes predictions? Will it be possible to describe a living creature based on knowledge of its genome? I imagine a question in a genomics test in the future, in which the student must draw a picture of the creature whose genome is attached."
"In the field of awareness and cognitive sciences, what are the processes underlying memory and awareness processes? Can we create a machine with free will? Can we measure the level of awareness of a one-day-old baby? We all agree that teenagers are (apparently) self-aware, a fetus in its earliest stages has no self-awareness, is the transition between them continuous?"
"In conclusion, let's talk about the dangers lurking in science. It is easy to see that the current methods of research and experimentation are becoming unfeasible. Accelerators, space telescopes, all these are huge projects with astronomical costs that require many years to complete. What new methods should be tested and adopted? And the last question: will physics still be important? Yes!"
23 תגובות
Wants to propose a new theory
Movement in jumps
The mass is in two states "matter" and "heyuli".
A. "Substance" = resting state.
B. "The July" = jumping at infinite speed, the distance of the jump determines the speed of the mass, when the distance of the jump = zero - the material will return to its place.
The connection between the masses is made in the jump phase, and matter that jumps in a different phase belongs to another universe. That there are parallel "universes" that do not feel each other.
The frequency of the jumps is the same in all the "worlds", therefore the synchronization is maintained in the phase of the jumps.
But if there is a change in phase, the mass moves to another "universe", or a black hole is created.
circumvention
If the movement was continuous, then the speed would be infinite, and the same for all moving bodies.
A Greek absurdity says that the horse will never catch the tortoise. Because every time the horse reaches the previous place of the turtle, time will pass, and during that time, the turtle will advance to a new place.
But according to the jumping model: the "jump" of a fast body is greater than the jump of a slow body.
And the big jump creates the bypass.
Interference
According to "Bernoulli's" law, bodies can collide,
The entanglement of bodies does not fit the linear motion model.
But in the movement in "jumps": the mass becomes "the July" and the July gets confused.
Heisenberg's uncertainty principle
It is not possible to know the exact position and the exact momentum of a particle at the same time.
Since interaction exists only in the jump state of "July".
Force of attraction between masses
The "July" spreads in space and returns to the place of equilibrium to be "matter".
The struggle of "July" with "July" creates the "gravitational force" between the masses.
This is how the "gravitational force" of the earth is created.
Photoelectric effect
The "July" that does not return to "matter" becomes an electromagnetic wave.
In the same way, an electromagnetic wave can record in "matter".
An electromagnetic wave that comes out of a moving body
An electromagnetic wave that leaves a body in motion remains at the "speed of light".
We would expect the speed to be the speed of light + the speed of the launching body.
But since the magnetic wave is "created" when the mass is in a state of "matter" (at rest), therefore the wave has no "memory" of the movement of the mass, and is not affected by the speed of the mass.
The orbit of the electrons around the nucleus
The "orbital" around the nucleus is a line that describes the place where there is a probability of finding the electron, for example an orbital in the shape of an 8.
In continuous motion the electron had to be found equally along a circular path,
But moving in orbital jumps describes the probability of finding the electron in the parking places of the "matter".
Mickelson Morley experiment
The experiment claimed that the speed of light waves does not change in relation to the speed of the earth.
This means that the phase of the wave at the end of the track was the same in every direction.
The experiment assumes that the phase of the wave depends on the speed, but it has already been proven that the frequency of the wave changes according to the speed of the observer, therefore it is impossible to draw conclusions from the phase of the wave to the speed of the wave.
It seems that until the results from CERN are received, physics is quite stuck.
Regarding the question "the fetus in its earliest stages has no self-awareness, is the transition between them continuous" in my opinion the transition is gradual, meaning discrete and not continuous, and this is of course due to the fact that every process that takes time is discrete because time itself is discrete in my opinion.
Fibonacci:
Don't you feel a certain contradiction between your statements and your claims?
String theory is mostly pure math and that math is correct.
The problem is that until we test her prediction we will not know if it is correct as a physical theory.
the eyebrows
Indeed, the mathematics departments in the world in terms of cost-benefit ratio express the highest ratio in all the natural sciences and to the gods of the spirit as well.
All they need is paper and pencils and trash cans. The great innovations of the last 200 years began with mathematical developments of various kinds. The great fiscal theories could have been created because of Riemann, because of Poincaré, Hilbert, Galois, but Lee Gauss and more, not necessarily in that order and not only because of them. Without various developments in the theory Differential geometry bunches, PDE, number theory, and more, there were no relativity, quantum, the standard model, string theory, economic models, astrophysics, and more.
Fibonacci:
1 . I don't know the slang rhyme, and it was necessary to straighten the generations (thank you for sharing the world of children, there are certainly some for whom it was a long time ago).
2. And as for the replica investments that were expressed in a number of responses, there was no decision for Copernicus, who needed to invest a lot of capital in order to formulate the heliocentric Torah; Likewise on the subject of relativity.
As a standard for a step up in scientific discovery, one can propose the ratio between the essence of the change and its benefit to humanity, to the sums of money invested in it in order to bring it into being.
Fibonacci:
Another interesting thing: I understand that you already know that string theory is incorrect!
I suggest that you try to explain it to all the morons who deal with it.
Tell them something like "Your theory can't be true because testing it requires too expensive equipment."
Let's see how many of them you will be able to convince.
Fibonacci:
And what are the things we have become accustomed to? Maybe it's that experiments are done cheaply?
I don't understand your disdain for an entire scientific community where there are many people much more talented than you and who think that tools like the LHC are exactly what is needed.
I must also say that you didn't say anything regarding the arguments I put forward and you only tried to portray me (to insult? After all, it can't achieve any other goal because there is no real argument here) to someone whose predictions were wrong.
If the theories we have are accurate to many digits after the point, tools with such measurement capability are needed to check which of them better predict the results of the experiment. Do you disagree with that?
It would not be wise to draft a Torah that gives results that are fundamentally different from those obtained from the existing Torahs because as mentioned - the existing Torahs predict with great precision and a Torah that predicts something fundamentally different will simply be wrong. Therefore the next development that is needed is in the ability to measure. You didn't say anything that contradicted it - you just tried to offend.
Michael
Not bad, don't agree. At the end of the 19th century, they thought that science had already ended and there was no longer a need for new theories. However, there is no point in hitching the wagon too soon. All the experimental equipment will not help for a theory that does not yet exist for it. It is very possible that the realization of new theories will require completely different equipment, it may be very cheap to produce. There will be many things, and it is certain that we will not stay with the concepts we are used to In order for us to know what we are doing at all, we need someone with a new thought and paper and pencil.
The eyebrows and Fibonacci:
I do not agree with you.
Einstein's theory also required experiments before it was accepted and in fact until the experiment on the bending of light in a solar eclipse there were many who did not accept it. Luckily for us, the experiment of Einstein's theory was possible within the framework of the energies we can produce and the measurements we are able to perform, but here it was already "on the scales" because speeds close to the speed of light and clocks accurate enough to prove the distortions of time are things that, until not long ago, they did not know how to produce.
As we progress and since we haven't dealt with nonsense so far and the theories we have are already quite good and predict the results of the experiments with great accuracy, much more complex technologies are needed to test new theories.
For example - it is quite possible that the string theory - a theory invented "with pen and paper" as you say - will turn out to be correct. The effort they put into formulating it is essentially the same and greater in scope than what Einstein did in formulating the theory of relativity, but unfortunately, the measurements we are able to perform with the existing technology cannot decide whether this theory is correct or not.
If we don't develop better measuring tools (and LHC is just such a tool) we will never know if the beautiful theories we developed using "nir and pencil" are correct.
the eyebrows
The moment, bombs to the eyebrows is a children's slang rhyme God forbid associated with terrorism.
I agree with you that real innovations will come from using paper and pencil and not necessarily from investing billions of euros. As long as someone doesn't have a new idea, more and more investments will be required to take advantage of ideas that are becoming obsolete. The theory of relativity is already a century old and the standard model is about 50-60 years old. This is certainly not the end of the verse. New theories will certainly arise to replace them as they replaced their predecessors. It is possible that it will come from the direction of super-symmetrical string theories of sorts and something else entirely is possible. The human mind is not silent on its guard.
To Michael:
A simple distinction between a first level scientific discovery such as that of Copernicus and Einstein, which did not require huge investments in order for those blessed with the aforementioned talent, to reach something that fundamentally changed human ways of life, and the many investments that were required (and rightly so) in order to bring their idea to life .
The Sipa of the article also refers to this aspect in the wording below:
"In conclusion, let's talk about the dangers lurking in science. It is easy to see that the current methods of research and experimentation are becoming unfeasible. Accelerators, space telescopes, all these are huge projects with astronomical costs that require many years to complete. What new methods should be tested and adopted? And the last question: will physics still be important? Yes!"
And with the bombs, if you have a phenomenon of mixing scientific thought with violence (bombs?), before the phenomenon worsens, maybe you should consult an expert.
By the way, in the time of Copernicus and Galileo there was a different kind of violence, and it did not help her.
For Michael and Fibonacci:
And I was terminated, for reasons that he cannot specify, mainly disconnection from the Internet, and the very short amount of time I have at my disposal when it is available.
So maybe another time.
Maybe bombs to back up
Eyebrows:
What are you trying to say?
Human incubators:
Eventually grow out of the necessity of the events/circumstances, which if not, Einstein needed an atomic reactor for E=mc², and Copernicus before him a shuttle for the heliocentric theory.
What's new
It's not bad, you missed the creation of the universe a little, made another one for you. Everything is trial and error.
My mistake .
Avi,
"Let's start with the question, how did the universe begin?" Light of different wavelengths allows us to observe our universe, which was 13.7 billion years old, 13.5 billion years ago. The Big Bang, the moment when our universe was born"
This section is unclear and incorrect in terms of tenses, I will ask to correct it, thank you.
trainer. Thank you.
Indeed an article that raises various questions about the things that were said
Fascinating lecture.
Thanks for the article.
Good article.