Page 1 of 1

Revolution in Quantum Field Theory?

Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2013 6:57 am
by 1over137
Guys, I discovered thrilling news https://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta ... m-physics/

Get to you later with what that all means and what all it will effect.

Let me for now quote from the link:
The revelation that particle interactions, the most basic events in nature, may be consequences of geometry significantly advances a decades-long effort to reformulate quantum field theory, the body of laws describing elementary particles and their interactions. Interactions that were previously calculated with mathematical formulas thousands of terms long can now be described by computing the volume of the corresponding jewel-like “amplituhedron,” which yields an equivalent one-term expression.

“The degree of efficiency is mind-boggling,” said Jacob Bourjaily, a theoretical physicist at Harvard University and one of the researchers who developed the new idea. “You can easily do, on paper, computations that were infeasible even with a computer before.”

The new geometric version of quantum field theory could also facilitate the search for a theory of quantum gravity that would seamlessly connect the large- and small-scale pictures of the universe. Attempts thus far to incorporate gravity into the laws of physics at the quantum scale have run up against nonsensical infinities and deep paradoxes. The amplituhedron, or a similar geometric object, could help by removing two deeply rooted principles of physics: locality and unitarity.

Re: Revolution in Quantum Field Theory?

Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2013 9:01 am
by RickD
Hana,

To understand what that says to me, read a couple of paragraphs of nothing except idioms of the English language. That's how much sense that makes to me. :lol:

I hope you can put that in layman's terms for us "less intelligent" types. :D

Re: Revolution in Quantum Field Theory?

Posted: Thu Dec 19, 2013 9:34 am
by Byblos
This is what caught my eye and what I think will generate the most buzz (for the wrong reasons of course):
“In a sense, we would see that change arises from the structure of the object,” he said. “But it’s not from the object changing. The object is basically timeless.