A Portal Special Presentation- Geometric Unity: A First Look: Difference between revisions
A Portal Special Presentation- Geometric Unity: A First Look (edit)
Revision as of 03:11, 11 April 2020
, 11 April 2020→Physics in the 21st Century
| Line 248: | Line 248: | ||
<p>[00:45:58] And here we have a Dirac equation. Again, coupled to a connection. | <p>[00:45:58] And here we have a Dirac equation. Again, coupled to a connection. | ||
<p>[00:46:12] One of the great insights is that the reason for the lightness of matter in the natural mass scale of physics has to do with the fact that this $\psi$ really should have two components and the differential operators should map to one component on the other side of the equation, but the mass operators should map to another. | <p>[00:46:12] One of the great insights is that the reason for the lightness of matter in the natural mass scale of physics has to do with the fact that this $$\psi$$ really should have two components and the differential operators should map to one component on the other side of the equation, but the mass operators should map to another. | ||
<p>[00:46:33] And so if one of the components is missing, if the equation is intrinsically lopsided, chiral, asymmetric, then the mass term and the differential term have difficulty interacting, which is sort of overcompensating for the mass scale of the universe so you get to a point where you actually have to define a massless equation, but then just like overshooting a putt, it's easier to knock it back by putting in a [[Higgs field]] in order to generate an as-if fundamental mass through the [[Yukawa couplings]]. | <p>[00:46:33] And so if one of the components is missing, if the equation is intrinsically lopsided, chiral, asymmetric, then the mass term and the differential term have difficulty interacting, which is sort of overcompensating for the mass scale of the universe so you get to a point where you actually have to define a massless equation, but then just like overshooting a putt, it's easier to knock it back by putting in a [[Higgs field]] in order to generate an "as-if" fundamental mass through the [[Yukawa couplings]]. | ||
<p>[00:47:15] Let me, for consistency, say "matter is asymmetric", okay. "and therefore light". | <p>[00:47:15] Let me, for consistency, say "matter is asymmetric", okay. "and therefore light". | ||
<p>[00:47:35] And then interestingly, he went on to say one more thing. He said, of course, these three central observations must be supplemented with the idea that this all [be] treated in quantum mechanical fashion or quantum field theoretic [fashion]. So it's a bit of an | <p>[00:47:35] And then interestingly, he went on to say one more thing. He said, of course, these three central observations must be supplemented with the idea that this all [be] treated in quantum mechanical fashion or quantum field theoretic [fashion]. So it's a bit of an after-market modification, rather than his opinion at the time, [or] one of the core insights. | ||
<p>[00:48:07] I actually think that that's in some sense about right. No. One of my differences with the [modern-day physics] community in some sense is I question whether the quantum isn't in good enough shape. We don't know whether we have a serious quantum mechanical problem or not. We know that we have a quantum mechanical problem, a quantum field theoretic problem, [but only] relative to the current formulations of these theories. | <p>[00:48:07] I actually think that that's in some sense about right. No. One of my differences with the [modern-day physics] community in some sense is I question whether the quantum isn't in good enough shape. We don't know whether we have a serious quantum mechanical problem or not. We know that we have a quantum mechanical problem, a quantum field theoretic problem, [but only] relative to the current formulations of these theories. | ||