Forum Home | Log in | Signup | My Page | Rules | FAQ | Boards | Members | Search
« GRITZ Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: What is Twistor Theory? | Roger Penrose AND What came before Big Bang? Why he changed his mind.

By: De_Composed in GRITZ | Recommend this post (0)
Sat, 07 Jun 25 11:37 PM | 22 view(s)
Boardmark this board | Grits Breakfast of Champeens! 		Msg. 09329 of 09339
(This msg. is a reply to 09328 by Fiz)
Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

fizzy:

Re: “2:30 He explains that gravitons can spin left...but not right handed.”Very interesting post, fizzy. I thought it was odd that Penrose talked about gravity within the pre-universe, with the Standard Model describing a preliminary state which had to have been very, very, VERY hot with particles constantly popping into existence as mirrored pairs (even as some do today, they think) and promptly annihilating one another.

The Standard Model conjectures that we owe the particles that remain to the rapid expansion/cooling that came after the Big Bang. Particles formed in conditions of tremendous heat and pressure (and vary greatly in how much heat and pressure they need). As the new universe quickly expanded and cooled, there were points where various particles were permanently frozen into existence, never to be created again but also unable to annihilate if their partner had not formed when the freezing took place. In the case of gravitons, this happened when the universe had an average energy level of about 10^32° Kelvin. Gluons, which are thought to mediate the strong force, were frozen into existence at 10^28°. Photons, which mediate the electromagnetic force, were frozen into existence at 10^15°. W and Z bosons gave us the weak force at 10^12° Kelvin.

And this occurred in the first 1/10,000th of a second following the Big Bang. It was a happenin' place!

Before 10^-43rd of a second, there were no residual gravitons. It was still too hot. So why does Penrose talk about the effect of gravity on the pre-Big Bang universe? No gravitons = no gravity, right? I'm sure he's got an explanation.







 - - - - -
View Replies (2) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: What is Twistor Theory? | Roger Penrose AND What came before Big Bang? Why he changed his mind.
By: Fiz in GRITZ
Sat, 07 Jun 25 9:49 PM 		Msg. 09328 of 09339

1:30 he describes how photons can "spin" either left or right (which shows up on polarized glass which allows only one spin or the other to go through). 2:30 He explains that gravitons can spin left...but not right handed.

I actually posted these video links largely for you, thinking you might want to look at them, as you previously posted your interest in Schrödinger's Cat, etc.

I think -- just maybe -- we are at the edge of a major reworking of Quantum Mechanics, in particular, as Penrose's recent comments, together with Weinstein's comments, with a kick from Curt Jaimungal's recent podcast interviews with a number of physicists who are questioning fundamental things about Quantum Mechanics(including both Penrose and Weinstein, but also others), seems to be reaching critical mass.

Although I can't follow Penrose's math (hopefully some day) I can follow him pretty well when he is interviewed. And I thought some people on this board might want to start digging through his more recent interviews.

Lots of thought provoking stuff. I have my fingers crossed the "Schrödinger's Cat" confusion is about to be resolved. Penrose says, in one if his more recent interviews, that Quantum Mechanics is "just wrong" at a very fundamental level and, specifically, that it would be absurd for "intelligent observation" to collapse the wave function ... so it must be that PHYSICS collapses the wave function..which results in "intelligent observation". (FWIW, those are my words, so maybe you will have a different take on what he is saying...which I hope you will bring to my attention).

Physics, and Quantum Mechanics in particular, as I think you know, has been pretty fundamentally stuck for a number of decades now.

I'm hopeful, at the moment, that we might finally be at a point, akin to the point after the Michelson-Morely experiments, when the old paradigm finally gives way to a much more profound new paradigm.

Roger Penrose is my favorite living physicist; and actually my favorite since Einstein (who died just a couple months before I was born). And it is inspiring to see him, well into his nineties, with one Nobel Prize in his pocket already, potentially now making his BIGGEST breakthrough on something he has been pursuing for most of his adult life!

And I sure as heck would like to see an alternative to "string theory" arise and revitalize questions about origin vs end of the universe, consciousness, etc.


« GRITZ Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next