I had been totally immersed in further development of my supersymmetric mirror models early this year. The COVID-19 pandemic did not draw my attention until about a month ago when it hit the US really hard. Then all of a sudden it really changed me, not only my life but also my way of thinking. I could not focus well on my favorite mirror-matter projects. I should have finished my invisible-decay paper weeks earlier. Instead it has made me pondering more on what a dream world or society should or could be like. With an open universe of physical objects in mind, what an open world of creatures and an open society of human beings could we imagine?
Author: Wanpeng Tan
I share my ideas and thoughts mainly about mirror matter theory and open science on this blog. Under the new theory, we live in the universe with a mirror (hidden) sector of particles. A perfectly imperfect (minimally broken) mirror symmetry is the key to unlock the beauty and elegance of our universe. Click on the menu links for a popular introduction, a technical summary, and list of my papers on the new mirror matter theory.
My new paper on black holes
I am a little bit late to celebrate Einstein’s birthday. But here is my new paper that extends Einstein’s 4-d General Relativity to a 2-d spacetime model with new understanding and studies the black hole as a genuine 2-d object. Unfortunately, arXiv did not help again this time and put my submission on hold one more time. Most likely, they are going to reject it again like my last paper in a few weeks.
The new model predicts a neutron/quark star mass limit of less than 2.5 solar mass that is compatible with observation. For more massive stars, the ever softer equation of state in 4-d spacetime will eventually cause a core collapse to a temperature above 1016 GeV. The 4-d spacetime then undergoes phase transition to 2-d spacetime with much reduced degrees of freedom to re-stabilize the star as a true 2-d black hole.
From quantum indeterminism to open science, open society, and open world
I just submitted a paper for the essay contest held at FQXi. I focused on topics from quantum indeterminism to no theory of everything, to a dynamic Universe with hierarchical underlying laws, all the way to the justification of our pursuance of open science, open society, and open world.
Gödel’s undecidability results (incomplete theorems) demonstrate that no consistent math system is complete, i.e., one can always construct statements that can not be proved or disproved within the same system. Hilbert’s dream of unification of all mathematics may be busted. Similarly, quantum indeterminism indicates that physics and the Universe may be indeterministic, incomplete, and open in nature, and therefore demand no single unification theory of everything. All my recent works on mirror matter theory and supersymmetric mirror models seem to support such an open world ideology.
Continue reading “From quantum indeterminism to open science, open society, and open world”
How risky or controversial is my work on mirror matter theory?
To demonstrate the risky or controversial aspects of my work on mirror matter theory, I’d like to share more comments extracted from various review reports from the expert physicists when refereeing my work. See here for early comments on my work. Clearly, the controversies are getting escalated on my new work on a dynamical view of the Universe as even relatively open-mined arXiv decided to deny my submission (see here). The list of the following review comments is sort of in the order from positive to negative.
-
Example 1:
This subject is a hot topic, and the results are very interesting in light of future experimental measurements for the light quark sector.
Continue reading “How risky or controversial is my work on mirror matter theory?”
No theory of everything
Here is my new paper that provides a dynamic view on theory of everything. Normally arXiv should have it posted online on Feb. 4 but instead has put it on hold for nearly two weeks. So I have to submit it as an OSF preprint and to the archive of “crackpottery”[viXra:2002.0262] since arXiv is probably considering the paper a crackpot. It can also be downloaded from this page with all my papers on mirror matter theory (A persistent link of my mirror papers is also on the side menu). Below is the popular summary of this paper:
No single unification theory of everything. The universe is dynamic and so are the underlying physical models and spacetime. As our 4-d spacetime evolves dimension by dimension in the early universe, consistent yet different models emerge one by one with different sets of particles and interactions. A new set of first principles are proposed for building such models with new understanding of supersymmetry, mirror symmetry, and the dynamic mechanism – spontaneous symmetry breaking. Under this framework, the arrow of time is naturally explained and the Standard Model of physics is elegantly extended to time zero of the universe.
Are we losing the last piece of pure land – arXiv.org?
Not long ago, I posted one article on how to improve arXiv.org and make it the best science publication system. One of my concerns about arXiv I pointed out was about the issue of over-regulation. Now I feel the issue is more serious than I thought.
I submitted my last paper to arXiv a week ago for the little celebration of the anniversary of my first mirror matter paper. But the administrators decided to put it on hold for an announcement. I don’t know what I did in the paper to trigger such a cautionary action. But it is just a pure scientific paper and probably one of the most important of my works. Apparently they have no interest in solving the issue soon. I have no choice but have also submitted it to a traditional journal. At this moment, I am not sure who will publish it first if they do in the end.
Continue reading “Are we losing the last piece of pure land – arXiv.org?”
First anniversary of my mirror matter theory
Exactly one year ago, I posted my first paper about mirror matter theory on arXiv.org. I wanted a little celebration and therefore submitted my latest work to arXiv yesterday. It is probably the most complete and astonishing of all – building a dynamic theory or staged models to describe the universe from the very beginning when the arrow of time started all the way to the Standard Model physics we know best about today.
The paper was supposed to show up on arXiv yesterday. Unfortunately, arXiv administrators decided to put it on hold and obviously ruined my anniversary celebration a little bit. It was a surprise to me as this is my first on-hold experience with arXiv. I don’t know what in my paper is so alarming to arXiv administrators or moderators. Maybe they regard it a crackpot? Or maybe this is just another example of over-regulation on the arXiv side. I just hope it won’t become another long ordeal like the ones I have been enduring with the journals.
New physics of mirror matter manifests in a topological way
Modern physicists are used to a perturbative way to solve or understand problems in modern physics. In particular, since the invention of the powerful Feynman diagram technique by Richard Feynman, particle physicists are so fond of this perturbation tool and can seldom talk about physics without showing some Feynman diagrams.
However, there indeed exist some fundamental physical processes that can not be described by Feynman diagrams. These processes are typically called nonperturbative or topological transitions that have been studied since the discovery of “instanton” about half a century ago.
Unfortunately, perturbation theory is planted in the minds of a lot of particle physicists so firmly that they could not think in other possible topological ways. This has to be part of the reasons why some editors and reviewers have been so easy to dismiss my works. It may also be causing other physicists jumping on and off the bandwagon of my theory.
Continue reading “New physics of mirror matter manifests in a topological way”
Most influential works and physicists on my mirror-matter theory
The first Christmas or Christian New Year has just arrived and the solar New Year Day of 2020 is coming since I posted my first paper on mirror matter theory on the Chinese New Year day (spring festival) of 2019. I’d like to take this moment to acknowledge some scientists and their works that have been the most influential during my studies on mirror matter theory. It is definitely from a personal perspective and far from a complete list. I apologize if some important works are omitted.
Scientists:
Tsung-Dao Lee (李政道) and Chen-Ning Yang (杨振宁) shared the 1957 Nobel Prize on their parity violation work [T. D. Lee and C. N. Yang, Phys. Rev. 104, 254 (1956)], which also opened the door to the studies of mirror symmetry.
Edward W. Kolb is a great cosmologist and his early work on mirror matter has fully turned my attention to mirror matter theory. The beautiful picture about mirror-matter in the early Universe is strikingly presented in his Nature paper [E. W. Kolb, D. Seckel, and M. S. Turner, Nature 314, 415 (1985)]; I leaned a lot from his classic textbook “the early universe” with M.S. Turner.
Continue reading “Most influential works and physicists on my mirror-matter theory”
A unified publication system with arXiv-based overlay journals
How can we have all scientists publish their works on equal grounds? How can we make sure that the good ideas and results get published fairly instead of falling through the cracks? How can we prevent the major journals publish fake/bad results because of limited or insufficient reviews?
How can we prevent an elite circle publish their works easily while bullying others or new comers outside the circle? How can we prevent one biased referee/editor killing the publication of one brilliant paper? How can we use every critical eye in the scientific community to vet a manuscript before it gets published?
Here my goal is to imagine an ideal publication system for science, at least basic science. We can start with physics. But it may apply to other disciplines as well.
Continue reading “A unified publication system with arXiv-based overlay journals”