Wilczek's Supersymmetry

The Ultimate Abstraction of Abstractions

Having been somewhat misled by Frank Wilczek's Origins Lecture at ASU a couple of months ago - entitled "The Materiality of the Vacuum", into thinking that I had found a like-minded critic of Quantum Physics, as I too stress the reality of some kind of Universal Substrate, I soon found that I couldn't have been more wrong!

For, in his Lecture at The Royal Institution in London, Wilczek's actual stance could not have been made more clear - he sees Pure Mathematical Form alone, as being the sole determinator of Reality. And, in this Lecture, he reveals, very clearly indeed, what he occupies himself with to the exclusion of all else.

Indeed, in spite of his admissions elsewhere that Natural Law may once have been very different, he doesn't hide his total subscription to the Principle of Plurality (which, most certainly, contradicts that belief), and, nevertheless, makes it the absolute centre of his work! And, he puts it all in a way that any mathematician would immediately recognise and agree with.

He calls it Symmetry, but defines it in a very special way that legitimises, not only the established Standard Experimental Method in Science, involving its rigorous "farming-and-control" of conditions, so that only a single component cause is purposely sought and displayed as clearly as possible - thus enabling its easy extraction, AND, consequently, the also-unavoidable processes of transformation and simplification, as well as those involved in idealisation, which he excuses on the ground that they do NOT transform the underlying eternal Natural Law.

Now, such a position can only be true, if and only if, the World is pluralistic, for only then will any extracted Laws be totally eternal and fixed.

But, if, on the contrary, the World is actually holistic, then "Everything affects everything else", and all the inflicted transformations upon a situation DO indeed change things significantly!

So, what is Wilczek really working upon if it isn't Reality-as-is? It can only be the parallel, reflected World of Pure Forms alone, which we call Ideality - the formal, purely-descriptive realm of Mathematics.

Indeed, in his very clear exposition, at the Royal Institution, he even uses the very processes which I criticise, namely Simplification and Idealisation as his approach's primary virtues. For, within his chosen realm, Ideality, they are indeed true: but, of course, it isn't Reality, for it contains not only absolutely NO concrete entities - it is Pattern alone, but also a vast extension of formally legitimate patterns and dimensions - impossible in concrete Reality.

What is involved here is the re-institution of the seeking of so-called Absolute Essences, which alone determine Everything. It is out-and-out Idealism.

But, it isn't always immediately evident what he is doing, for he describes it somewhat differently. He emphasises Beauty and Symmetry as Reality's deepest "forming" principles. "If it is beautiful, it must be true!"

And, his legitimisation of what he reveals is based upon the concept of "Transformation without Intrinsic Change", and this is crucial!

For, in mathematical transformations within Ideality, there are indeed such things, and Wilczek promotes them to the very highest levels of profundity: they become (for him) the causal engines of Reality. His simplified, abstracted and idealised forms are what makes Reality what it is... He has abandoned Materialist Science for a totally idealistic stance.

It is no wonder that the kit he depends upon for process-able data is the gigantic Large Hadron Collider, regularly powered-ever-higher to colossal energies, as the only source of potentially new events to take his theories further into the highest possible level of Idealisation - namely Super Symmetry!

I was mislead by his concept of the Materiality of the Vacuum, in which he scarcely mentioned his idea of the composition of his Substrate, for that, mentioned only very briefly elsewhere, turned out to be the Gluons for which he received his Nobel Prize in 2004.

His audience at the Royal Institution, were dead silent (apart from laughing at his jokes) for the whole lecture! It wasn't just abstract: it was multiple abstractions of prior abstractions - he had lost the majority of his audience in Ideality in the Infinity of its formal relations.

Big Blip: Seeking Answers in the Knacker’s Yard

The Rejuvenated LHC?

In yet another celebration of the Large Hadron Collider, on the occasion of its resuscitation after a two-year refit, New Scientist (3022) recently proffered an article by Elizabeth Landau entitles The Big Blip.

It is a muse about what may be discovered by the updated device, and the possible questions posed on the consensus standard model of the collection of “fundamental particles" in the Sub Atomic realm, the by the confidently expected “new evidence”.

A major concern seems to be about matter and antimatter – indeed concerning a purely theoretical concept of their differences and origins. In what has become the usual theoretical route, these were defined to match known evidence, but without any idea as to why they came to be.

And, using this prodigious machine, an experiment has been devised to reveal more evidence, and enable its encapsulation into yet more formalist relations - NOT, I must emphasize, as any sort of physical explanation, but merely as a set of formalisms which can be massaged (via the usual methods) to fit the revealed evidence.

It is important to consider such events and their purposes, knowing that explanation in general had long ago been abandoned as mere self-kid. (In 1927 at Solvay the significant turn was made). And, thereafter, the only accepted, reliable encapsulation of what was found, were a zoo of fundamental particles, and various formalisms about them embodied in mathematical equations.

And, with such a “revolution”, the means for further study unavoidably narrowed into a series of ever more powerful Accelerators (Colliders), of which the LHC is the latest and most powerful version. In addition, the methodology was also similarly restricted solely to smashing up such entities to see what they might be made of.

Indeed, such a History has produced a unique realm of concepts and rules, which are worked out by very competent mathematicians on blackboards – effectively working exclusively in abstractions. It has produced a compelling realm, which is necessarily compilation in its own realm, and is situated a very long way from the believed basis of the preceding Classical Physics.

The main imperative has been to reveal the Origins of Reality itself solely in terms of these ultimate, descrete and abstract entities – to supposedly lay bare the true determining basis for absolutely everything.

It is, of course, a lost cause! And, the reason is that it has become no longer a study of Reality, but something very different indeed. It is a study of abstract concepts, elicited from certain phenomena, but most definitely NOT a comprehensive and meaningful extraction, but, on the contrary, a selection according to a set of formal criteria, leaving absolutely everything that doesn’t so conform behind. Consequently it necessarily becomes a study of an entirely Formal World with the narrowest of connections with Concrete Reality.

Indeed, if you are to subscribe to this approach, you will no longer be investigating Reality-as-is, but, instead, only addressing a selection of simplified and idealised extractions, which are usually ONLY obtainable from intensively-farmed Domains within Reality. So, clearly, what is then studied in current Sub Atomic Physics is a version of that very same Formal World – the realm of Pure Form alone, which is termed Ideality, and served by its methodology, which we call Mathematics!

Yet, in spite of truly gigantic amounts of funds, resources and competent mathematicians, all invested into experiments such as those on the LHC, it certainly cannot be said that the original source, Reality itself, has been clearly defined.

On the contrary, the only way that the theorists involved have coped is by the adoption of the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Theory, due initially to Bohr and Heisenberg, which embraces a supposed Reality with Wave/Particle Duality at its very heart, and Formal Description, which is deemed to be more profound and even determining than any attempted Physical Explanation.

Indeed, a “New World” is said to exist down there, which cannot be dealt within any other way, and most particularly not in the “old ways” applied universally before the quantum! And, this essentially different realm must henceforth be dealt with solely according to the bases, assumptions and methods of Copenhagen.

Of course, it is also true that many of the premises and principles of Classical Physics were, indeed, wholly inadequate in these deeper investigations of the nature of Reality. Yet, instead of solving the evident shortcomings of that established approach, the denizens of Copenhagen turned the other way, and “on principle” looked solely to Forms as the true essential drivers of absolutely everything.

But, clearly such things are ONLY abstractions from Reality, mostly carefully arranged-for, to enable reliable predictions in given contexts, and which are totally unable to explain properties and causes.

Indeed, without a moment’s doubt, equations are now seen as the actual “causes” of phenomena, rather than being merely formal descriptions of them. Clearly, Copenhagen and its whole consequent realm is entirely an idealist retreat!

In the next few weeks, two new Special Issues of the SHAPE Journal will be published, which explain Quantization in a very different, physical and materialist way. 

Part I of The Atom and the Substrate is now available.

Order Out of Chaos Introduction

This forthcoming series of papers (Issue 10) under the general title of Order Out of Chaos? were commenced in 2008, and bear the stamp of when they were written. They do not represent the developed, current position of the author, but nevertheless, it was decided that they must be included in the journal as a necessary preparation for the continuous stream of rapidly developing contributions that have been produced ever since. Also, it is very clear to me that this is perhaps the most important area in modern science, and will not be delivered by a single theorist, and I'm keen to see other contributions in this area.

Firstly, the erroneous claims of the mathematicians of Chaos that their new area will ultimately contain the explanations for crucial Emergences such as that of the Origin of Life on Earth, must be debunked. Formal Mathematics cannot explain anything: it merely describes, never explains, and hence can never address such an important question. Secondly, these studies must actually investigate what really happens within such events as Emergences - NOT as mathematical forms only, but as Real Science. Since when did we credit our tools with creating the masterpieces by themselves!

The question, which has motivated this author for over 15 years, is considered to be by far the most important one in Science, which is now regularly coming up against the consequences of its own basic assumptions, tenets and even "beliefs". The chaos that is today's sub-Atomic Physics, is finally heading for its ultimate demise at its own hand. The "final proofs" of its current theories expected from the experiments on the Large Hadron Collider, will not be forthcoming. Indeed, by far the most likely outcome from this mammoth experiment will be an evident failure in this regard, causing a general flight from maintaining any trust in these odd believers in Parallel Universes, Physical Singularities, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, time flowing backwards, and even colliding Branes producing our Universe out of precisely Nothing. They will finally, and justifiably, be laughed out of Court.

It was decided, therefore, to include these older papers as an introduction to the studies into Emergence by this author. For though this is an important area, it is very little supported within current research, outside of the denizens of the Santa Fe Institute, who think that Mathematical Chaos will alone provide all the answers necessary. There appear to be very few who agree with this author. Nevertheless, the line of research that will appear ONLY in the Shape Journal, has recently arrived at a new Theory of Emergences, which for the first time goes into the various phases of such an event. At the same time, such vital research cannot be a one-man show, and even hostile criticism will help refine these new ideas. Of course, even better would be the contributions of other like-minded experts, who are not merely mathematical physicists, but true explanatory scientists, who also realise that the study of Emergences is the crucial area in the absolutely imperative re-establishment of Real Science as the only sound path towards Truth.

Don't miss Issue 10 of the Shape Journal to read the first instalment of this paper.

Eureka! It's Populist Science

"...On reading the current issue [Eureka Magazine, The Times, Nov 5 2009] from cover to cover, I was surprised to find that really nothing new was presented there at all. It reminded me of New Scientist, but whereas that journal is aimed at “scientists” (supposedly), this one is certainly aimed at the “interested layman” in mind instead. And one of the characteristics of such disseminations is that they are totally subservient to the “experts”.

No longer do we have hostile antagonisms by arts-types and other non-believers, but in the new attitude of embracing Science in all its current glory, all the participants merely swell the ranks of the consensus merchants, who “wonder” at the might and power of Big Science as propagated by its producers. This removes that absolutely vital criticism which Science has always needed to continue to progress, and which is now, more than ever absolutely essential, as its ageing philosophy and consequent methodology becomes increasingly inadequate to cope with the major unanswered questions that are daily arriving at the top of every agenda..."

Read the rest of this article

Issue 3 of Shape

Read the latest issue here