How are we able to solve problems which earlier researchers have struggled with but have not found a solution? Is this magic?
Our method is simple:
A. Check if a proposed physical model obeys principles which people generally feel that a physical model should satisfy.
B. Consider also second order effects and the "backreaction" of the system.
C. Also, check if we understand the logic in the reasoning and calculations which are based on the physical model.
We are staunch supporters of the "consensus" in physics. We are not contrarians. More precisely, we support generally accepted principles of physics in item A. We do not support models which break these principles.
Some generally accepted principles:
1. Conservation of momentum. Unruh radiation seems to break this.
2. Conservation of energy. Hawking radiation may break this. Certain cosmological models break this.
3. Conservation of the speed of the center of mass. Certain self-energy diagrams in quantum electrodynamics may break this.
4. Non-existence of singularities and infinite physical values. Traditional black hole models claim that the horizon is "infinitely strong" and there is a singularity at the center. They break this principle.
5. The behavior of a system should be determined by initial values. Roger Penrose proved that gravitational waves in general relativity have an "unusual causal structure". They break this principle.
6. Unitarity. Hawking radiation breaks this. Many-worlds interpretations of quantum mechanics may respect this, but interpretations based on some kind of a "collapse" do not.
7. A physical process is always reversible. This is associated with unitarity. The traditional model of a one-way black hole horizon breaks this.
8. Information must not leak into an invisible "shadow world". This is associated with 5 and 6. The Dirac hole model of vacuum polarization with invisible negative energy electrons breaks this.
9. There should be no closed causal loops. Certain cosmological models break this.
10. We should not extend the physical model past the infinite value of the global time coordinate of the universe. Gullstrand-Painleve coordinates for the event horizon break this. In physics we do not use "nonstandard models" of arithmetic.
Item C says that we must be able to understand the reasoning. We do not understand the reasoning of the "proof" of the spin-statistics theorem in Wikipedia. The proof uses rotations of the spins of spin-z 1/2 particles. Our recent blog post about spin rotations may clarify various errors in the proof.
So far we have not found a good model for the electron spin and the magnetic moment. Our toolbox is not magical. It cannot solve all problems.
Another open problem is how Nature implements conservation laws. Are "events" some kind of transactions?
No comments:
Post a Comment