The literature of quantum gravity is bogged down in Bohr's incomplete picture of the meaning of the quantum that posits no "there" there - no objective reality. Bohm's picture, in collaboration with Einstein at Princeton in 1951 restores objective reality. Lenny Susskind has introduced the notion of the "landscape" into string-brane cosmology. I already in 1996 introduced it at Tucson II as a way of picturing Bohm's pilot wave theory of 1951.
Example 1 single quantum particle is the ball on the "Q" Bohm-Quantum Potential Landscape.
That is the effective conservative potential in
F = md^2r/dt^2 = -gradU
U = V + Q
V is the classical potential energy
Q = Bohm non-classical potential energy
Q = - [(hbar)^2/2m]|psi|^-1Grad|psi|
psi = |psi|e^iS
is the pilot wave
Pilot wave = Wheeler's BIT
Path of particle on U-landscape is Wheeler's IT
IT FROM BIT
Ignore for now entanglement of multi-particle systems where Q is non-factorizable in configuration space.
Ordinary quantum theory, including delayed choice experiments with slow neutrons is simple and visualizable classically. The quantum potential Q has all the nonlocal quantum weirdness in it.
Ordinary quantum theory with "no cloning" signal locality (nonlocal entanglement is not a stand-alone C^3) is the test particle approximation. That is, the ball gets its marching orders from the landscape on which it rolls, but it does not change the shape of the landscape in a self-organizing globally self-consistent "intelligent" adaptive fashion. "Test particle" means rigid fixed algorithm - not like an adaptive neural net - not like an intelligent conscious universe.
Everything Linde did on Sunday at AAAS 2007 for eternal chaotic inflation FORMALLY fits the above simple model where
psi = GIANT vacuum ODLRO condensate Pilot Wave of the Pocket Universe "Higgs field" and V = 0.
(relation of cosmic inflation to SU(2) chiral weak force is there)
psi has 6D hyperspace Calabi-Yau "hair," i.e. moduli, fluxes, branes, orbifolds defining the domain of the cosmic landscape.
Assumed homogeneous FRW metric "ball" a(t) = scale factor in first approximation, with the ball as the proto-universe rather than the particle in Bohm's simple case.
The "ball" is a 3-Geometry scale factor at the next level of abstraction. Particle r is replaced by FRW scale factor a(t) in the usual cosmological simplification.
On Feb 19, 2007, at 6:42 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked,
dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix
According to Peter Woit in "Not Even Wrong" Ed Witten is the Tim Leary of physics destroying a whole generation of particle theorists on an insane quest that boggles the rational mind. On the other hand, hearing the Susskind-Linde Stanford Duet is very seductive music to the ears and it is understandable how so many poor little lambs have been led astray.
It's still too early to say for sure. Susskind's imagery of 6D Calabi-Yau spaces as "DNA molecules" whose moduli, fluxes, branes and orbifolds pinpoint where we are on the cosmic landscape of the megaverse is seductive as was Linde's impassioned soliloquy repeating Brandon Carter's argument that the many Anthropic coincidences only make sense if there is an actually populated landscape of causally disconnected pocket universes outside each other's de Sitter dark energy past and future horizons. Of course, a slight change in the rules of quantum theory to allow entanglement "signal nonlocality" violating the no-cloning theorem makes the pocket universes directly observable in principle though severely impacting Lenny Susskind's notions of information loss through horizons. So Lenny is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
On Feb 18, 2007, at 8:20 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Lenny called his talk "Rats leaving the sinking ship." "ship" = reductionism. However Lenny called "emergence" = "reductionism" in reverse POV. I am not sure if I agree with that. I am not sure if ODLRO "More is different" can be viewed that way. I say that with emergent ODLRO bottom -> up emergence (related to effective low energy field theories in flows of renormalization group?) is not simply the flip side of reductionism since it is non-perturbative).
Lenny wrote my basic equation that I use over and over again in Super Cosmos to make some model calculations e.g. charge clusters
F = ma = GMm/r^2 + mc^2/\zpfr
For a simple Lorentz-Poincare electron
ma = @e^2/r^2 + (hbar/2)^2/2mr^3 + mc^2/\zpfr = 0 equilibrium
Solves the finite classical electron problem with /\zpf < 0 dark matter core.
i.e. @e^2r* + (hbar/2)^2/2m + mc^2/\zpfr*^4 = 0 stable equilibrium
@e^2 + 4mc^2/\zpfr*^3 > 0
@ + 4(mc^2/e^2)/\zpfr*^3 > 0
@ is shell shape factor.
Extending to charge cluster is trivial.
Linde - "multiverse is a feast with all dishes served"
Gravity energy + matter energy = 0
Guv + /\zpfguv + kTuv = 0
Quantum fluctuations inflate when /\zpf stays constant from viscosity like in damped oscillator - slow roll.
Jiggle of the Higgs scalar ODLRO field at bottom of landscape well heats up the big bang creating on-mass-shell matter.
Coincidence problem means Weak Anthropic or else intelligent design.
On Feb 18, 2007, at 6:25 PM, Jack Sarfatti wrote:
Just got back from Hilton. Surprisingly Sean Carroll was there asked a question but I forget what it was. Lenny looks great - very Regal Shakespearean, but with the voice of Sid Caesar in The Show of Shows. He even had a slide of Woody Allen. Linde is also a good Russian comedian. Linde gave an impassioned impromptu answer at end to a question showing is real motivation for the landscape multiverse before in early 80's really identical to my own - more on that in another message. I have almost finished Peter Woit's book "Not Even Wrong." Peter writes well and is very convincing so it was propitious that I went to hear Lenny and Linde speak on how inflation and string theory reinforce each other in a way not totally disconnected from up-coming experiments like PLANCK NASA Probe. Lenny says that even a positive space curvature of 10^-3 would be trouble for multiverse-inflation. Lenny admits to the basic issues raised by Woit, but the situation is more complex. More on this to come. The situation is not as bad as Woit paints it, but not as good as Lenny wishes. When I spoke to Lenny personally he agreed that signal nonlocality using entanglement (a violation of orthodox QM - see papers by A. Valentini) would make the landscape directly observable, but it would spoil other parts of his theory connected with no-cloning. Lenny said he is not ready to move into that area of speculation - so I guess it's up to me (also Cramer's retrocausality experiment will be crucial). Someone mentioned Lee Smolin and Lenny said "who"? He pretended not to know of Smolin's work - a joke. ;-)
PS Krauss showed how dark energy proves Worst Possible World, i.e. life not sustainable. Some talk about string theory as religion.
"If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?"
- Albert Einstein