Showing posts with label Oxford University. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Oxford University. Show all posts

Friday, January 15, 2016

“Why String Theory?” by Joseph Conlon (review)

Amazon link: this review is also posted there

The title suggests that Joseph Conlon’s book is a defence of string theory against its detractors; it is so much more than that.

He begins by reviewing the strengths and limitations of the Standard Model. The Standard Model is a somewhat ramshackle construction which, to the surprise of its constructors, has proven extraordinarily successful and resilient over the decades, culminating in the recent discovery of the predicted Higgs boson at the LHC. We know, however, that the Standard Model is wrong because it assumes a fixed spacetime (i.e. no gravity) - it has proved impossible to successfully quantise gravity within the framework of the Standard Model.

Conlon’s approach is historical. The first inklings of string theory came about through attempts to understand the strong nuclear force in the 1970s, where string harmonics emerged mathematically from observed scattering patterns. It later transpired that the ‘strings’ were an epiphenomenon of the correct quantum field theory – quantum chromodynamics – where the force lines did indeed tend to bunch up into strings. The glory years of QFT saw string theory relegated to a backwater.

The end of the seventies saw attempts to quantise gravity under the assumptions of supersymmetry.  It turned out that these ‘supergravity’ theories had severe problems which string theory seemed to solve in a very natural way. Suddenly people began to take notice and the string community rapidly expanded. These were the years of five different string theories, and the realisation that they were all different limits of one underlying theory – M-theory - an insight due to Ed Witten.

The author reviews quantum field theories, string theory and the AdS/CFT correspondence in his characteristically clear way. But after all this work, is there any direct experimental evidence for string theory? Chapter 7 is very short, consisting of this one sentence: ‘There is no direct experimental evidence for string theory.’

Having got that out of the way, Conlon now explains how the complex and sophisticated toolkit of string theory has led to insights across physics. He discusses the use of string theory in facilitating calculations in quantum field theories in their strong coupling regime via the AdS/CFT correspondence; the modelling of heavy ion collisions; applications in mathematics (relating to ‘monstrous moonshine’); predictions of dark matter candidates such as axions; predictions of dark radiation resulting from the theory’s extra spatial dimensions; and of course the opportunity to model black hole microstates, entropy and spacetime topology changes in what is presumed to be string theory’s core competence, quantum gravity.

The author now moves on to mini-portraits of the main kinds of scientists he see in the community around him. We hear about the revolutionaries who wish to kick over the applecart (not so easy). We hear about the worker ants whose slogan is ‘Vorsprung durch Technik’ – those researchers who kick the can of science up the road with their calculations so that experimentation can progress - little chance of glory but employment prospects are good. Under ‘Stockholm or Bust’ we meet the model builders, those hoping to call nature right and get to Sweden – and those who game the system. There are the super-theorists, like Witten, members of the ‘Most Sublime Brahminate of Princeton’, and those who appreciate that ‘il faut cultiver notre jardin’ - who look for unfashionable areas which to their eyes show great promise and are able to deliver.

Conlon’s final two chapters address (in a fair and evenhanded manner) the well-known criticisms of string theory and provide rebuttals. He then explains why string theory remains so dominant in the field and hazards some guesses as to its future.

Understanding the state-of-the-art in fundamental physics is of course hard, the subject is inaccessible for most physicists let alone the broader community. Conlon writes (p. 198):
“Undergraduate physics is an unparalleled intellectual experience: it is a smorgasbord of the deepest and most powerful thoughts that have ever been thunk. You learn physics at a rate of a Nobel Prize a week, and the resulting frisson of the mind is at a level that is never experienced again. Four years takes you from Newtonian gravity through the laws of heat and energy, past Maxwell's synthesis of electromagnetism and into the laws of special and general relativity, from the basics of quantum mechanics to the Standard Model and quantum field theory. It is wonderful and magnificent.”
Sadly, beyond these well-explored paths there is the slog of the new, where progress slows to a crawl. In this book Professor Conlon has provided – as he promises in his preface - an astonishingly clear tour of modern physics. It is hard to think of a better, clearer or wittier review, and one which will be particularly useful to science undergraduates curious as to where their field is heading. School students who have done some reading around the subject (e.g. who have read books by Brian Greene) might also find this work of great value. It’s highly recommended.

Wednesday, October 28, 2015

On colonising the observable universe quite quickly!


Stuart Armstrong and Anders Sandberg

Future of Humanity Institute, Philosophy Department, Oxford University, Suite 8, Littlegate House 16/17 St. Ebbe’s Street, Oxford, OX1 1PT UK.

---
Abstract

"The Fermi paradox is the discrepancy between the strong likelihood of alien intelligent life emerging (under a wide variety of assumptions), and the absence of any visible evidence for such emergence. In this paper, we extend the Fermi paradox to not only life in this galaxy, but to other galaxies as well.

"We do this by demonstrating that traveling between galaxies – indeed even launching a colonisation project for the entire reachable universe – is a relatively simple task for a star-spanning civilization, requiring modest amounts of energy and resources.

"We start by demonstrating that humanity itself could likely accomplish such a colonisation project in the foreseeable future, should we want to, and then demonstrate that there are millions of galaxies that could have reached us by now, using similar methods. This results in a considerable sharpening of the Fermi paradox."
The authors have in mind the launching of replicators both to other stars in our own galaxy and to other galaxies. They note that once the interstellar/intergalactic probe is up to relativistic speed it basically turns off and cruises. In cosmological time it's rather irrelevant as to whether the cruise time is hundreds, thousands or millions of years (the universe operate on a timescale of billions of years).
"However, the main difference between interstellar and intergalactic travel is merely a longer time until the destination is reached. If the contents of the colonizing probe are inert over long timescales (as they would need to be for many forms of interstellar travel) it is likely that they can be made inert over the longer flights to other galaxies." (Page 3)
We could send lots of probes without too much effort assuming a technology a few hundred years in the future.
"... we will first delineate a potential replicator probe design, and tackle how such probes could decelerate upon arrival. We will see what speeds these probes could move at, and how many duplicates need to be sent out to avoid collisions with intergalactic dust particles.

"Then we will consider the launch system – due to the great inefficiency of the rocket equation, it would be much more effective to use fixed launch systems than to count on the probes to power themselves. We will analyse these launch systems, and delve into some details as to how they could be powered (four different scenarios will be considered, from speculative antimatter drives to reasonable fission engines).

"It will turn out that only about six hours of the sun’s energy is needed to commence the colonisation of the entire universe! And this is the kind of energy that a future human civilisation could quite easily aspire to, as we shall demonstrate." (page 4).
They propose we disassemble Mercury (they describe how to do it with mass drivers, and on page 16 calculate it will take 31 years and 85 days!) and use the material to create a Dyson Swarm of solar mirrors powering propulsion devices (lasers, particle beams, coilguns ...).

The probes will be accelerated by these power-plants to relativistic speeds at which point they will coast to their targets. Thousands, millions or billions of years later they will arrive, slow down and find asteroids or planets to start terraforming. The seeds they carry will germinate .. and our descendants will walk under the light of other stars .. in other galaxies.

They're careful to stay within the envelope of feasible, or exploratory engineering,



so why didn't aliens on some of the other relatively nearby galaxies get to us first? They show that there's plenty of candidate colonisers (of the order of a million galaxies) and plenty of time for it to have happened (page 25).

The Fermi Paradox just got sharper.

All in all, a very stimulating big-concept read. Here's a links to Anders Sandberg's blog.