The problem with the theory of everything | Janna Levin

The hunt for the theory of everything continues — but we won’t find it without understanding quantum gravity first.

There’s a pursuit of simplicity and unification in theoretical physics, aiming for a single mathematical law to unify quantum mechanics and gravity: a theory of everything. But while other forces have been successfully unified, gravity resists integration — casting doubt on the likelihood of ever unlocking the theory of all theories.

As physicist Janna Levin explains, black holes, with their strong space-time curvature, provide insights into this challenge. Levin draws parallels to mathematicians' incompleteness theorems, noting the inherent limitations in such an overarching theory.

Acknowledging the complexity of the endeavor, Levin emphasizes the need to embrace and explore gravity's enigmatic nature fully. In doing so, the pursuit of unification might still yield profound insights, even if a comprehensive theory of everything remains elusive.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About Janna Levin:
Janna Levin is a professor of physics and astronomy at Barnard College of Columbia University. She is also director of sciences at Pioneer Works, a center for arts and sciences in Brooklyn, and has contributed to an understanding of black holes, the cosmology of extra dimensions, and gravitational waves in the shape of spacetime. Her previous books include How the Universe Got Its Spots and a novel, A Madman Dreams of Turing Machines, which won the PEN/Bingham Prize. She was recently named a Guggenheim fellow.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read more from The Well:
Few of us desire true equality. It’s time to own up to it
The case for “dusking”: In a world of light and noise, embracing the dark can be healing
Respect alchemy. The crazy, criminal pursuit gave us modern science

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About The Well
Do we inhabit a multiverse? Do we have free will? What is love? Is evolution directional? There are no simple answers to life’s biggest questions, and that’s why they’re the questions occupying the world’s brightest minds.

Together, let's learn from them.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Join The Well on your favorite platforms:

[deepaks.m.]

I like when scientists talk like a scientist. Slow and steady with a bit of uncertainty.

[saldabri]

I WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree that we need step back and take another look at gravity. From my perspective, dark matter, for instance, is a placeholder for our lack of understanding of gravity. I think there is more to consider, than just mass.

[coffierichard]

I’ve heard her voice so many times on Startalk nice to finally see you Janna!

[ockievanniekerk]

Thank you. At last a voice that tells us to consider the possibility that we won't be able to know everything.

[Someone-A]

Everything is one, one is everything. This unity can not be created or destroyed but it can only change form.

[Bretter]

There is a huge difference between complex and complicated and their combination is responsible for the P versus NP problem. Gravitation is the simplest way to make things complex.

[KajSeVai]

I think AGI might one day figure out how to combine the two.

[SpotterVideo]

Conservation of Spatial Curvature (Both Matter and Energy described as "Quanta" of Spatial Curvature. A string is revealed to be a twisted cord when viewed up close.)

Is there an alternative interpretation of "Asymptotic Freedom"? What if Quarks are actually made up of twisted tubes which become physically entangled with two other twisted tubes to produce a proton? Instead of the Strong Force being mediated by the constant exchange of gluons, it would be mediated by the physical entanglement of these twisted tubes. When only two twisted tubules are entangled, a meson is produced which is unstable and rapidly unwinds (decays) into something else. A proton would be analogous to three twisted rubber bands becoming entangled and the "Quarks" would be the places where the tubes are tangled together. The behavior would be the same as rubber balls (representing the Quarks) connected with twisted rubber bands being separated from each other or placed closer together producing the exact same phenomenon as "Asymptotic Freedom" in protons and neutrons. The force would become greater as the balls are separated, but the force would become less if the balls were placed closer together. Therefore, the gluon is a synthetic particle (zero mass, zero charge) invented to explain the Strong Force. An artificial Christmas tree can hold the ornaments in place, but it is not a real tree.

String Theory was not a waste of time, because Geometry is the key to Math and Physics. However, can we describe Standard Model interactions using only one extra spatial dimension? What did some of the old clockmakers use to store the energy to power the clock? Was it a string or was it a spring?

What if we describe subatomic particles as spatial curvature, instead of trying to describe General Relativity as being mediated by particles? Fixing the Standard Model with more particles is like trying to mend a torn fishing net with small rubber balls, instead of a piece of twisted twine.

Quantum Entangled Twisted Tubules:
“We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct.” Neils Bohr
(lecture on a theory of elementary particles given by Wolfgang Pauli in New York, c. 1957–8, in Scientific American vol. 199, no. 3, 1958)

The following is meant to be a generalized framework for an extension of Kaluza-Klein Theory. Does it agree with some aspects of the “Twistor Theory” of Roger Penrose, and the work of Eric Weinstein on “Geometric Unity”, and the work of Dr. Lisa Randall on the possibility of one extra spatial dimension? During the early history of mankind, the twisting of fibers was used to produce thread, and this thread was used to produce fabrics. The twist of the thread is locked up within these fabrics. Is matter made up of twisted 3D-4D structures which store spatial curvature that we describe as “particles"? Are the twist cycles the "quanta" of Quantum Mechanics?

When we draw a sine wave on a blackboard, we are representing spatial curvature. Does a photon transfer spatial curvature from one location to another? Wrap a piece of wire around a pencil and it can produce a 3D coil of wire, much like a spring. When viewed from the side it can look like a two-dimensional sine wave. You could coil the wire with either a right-hand twist, or with a left-hand twist. Could Planck's Constant be proportional to the twist cycles. A photon with a higher frequency has more energy. ( E=hf, More spatial curvature as the frequency increases = more Energy ). What if Quark/Gluons are actually made up of these twisted tubes which become entangled with other tubes to produce quarks where the tubes are entangled? (In the same way twisted electrical extension cords can become entangled.) Therefore, the gluons are a part of the quarks. Quarks cannot exist without gluons, and vice-versa. Mesons are made up of two entangled tubes (Quarks/Gluons), while protons and neutrons would be made up of three entangled tubes. (Quarks/Gluons) The "Color Charge" would be related to the XYZ coordinates (orientation) of entanglement. "Asymptotic Freedom", and "flux tubes" are logically based on this concept. The Dirac “belt trick” also reveals the concept of twist in the ½ spin of subatomic particles. If each twist cycle is proportional to h, we have identified the source of Quantum Mechanics as a consequence twist cycle geometry.

Modern physicists say the Strong Force is mediated by a constant exchange of Gluons. The diagrams produced by some modern physicists actually represent the Strong Force like a spring connecting the two quarks. Asymptotic Freedom acts like real springs. Their drawing is actually more correct than their theory and matches perfectly to what I am saying in this model. You cannot separate the Gluons from the Quarks because they are a part of the same thing. The Quarks are the places where the Gluons are entangled with each other.

Neutrinos would be made up of a twisted torus (like a twisted donut) within this model. The twist in the torus can either be Right-Hand or Left-Hand. Some twisted donuts can be larger than others, which can produce three different types of neutrinos. If a twisted tube winds up on one end and unwinds on the other end as it moves through space, this would help explain the “spin” of normal particles, and perhaps also the “Higgs Field”. However, if the end of the twisted tube joins to the other end of the twisted tube forming a twisted torus (neutrino), would this help explain “Parity Symmetry” violation in Beta Decay? Could the conversion of twist cycles to writhe cycles through the process of supercoiling help explain “neutrino oscillations”? Spatial curvature (mass) would be conserved, but the structure could change.

Gravity is a result of a very small curvature imbalance within atoms. (This is why the force of gravity is so small.) Instead of attempting to explain matter as "particles", this concept attempts to explain matter more in the manner of our current understanding of the space-time curvature of gravity. If an electron has qualities of both a particle and a wave, it cannot be either one. It must be something else. Therefore, a "particle" is actually a structure which stores spatial curvature. Can an electron-positron pair (which are made up of opposite directions of twist) annihilate each other by unwinding into each other producing Gamma Ray photons?

Does an electron travel through space like a threaded nut traveling down a threaded rod, with each twist cycle proportional to Planck’s Constant? Does it wind up on one end, while unwinding on the other end? Is this related to the Higgs field? Does this help explain the strange ½ spin of many subatomic particles? Does the 720 degree rotation of a 1/2 spin particle require at least one extra dimension?

Alpha decay occurs when the two protons and two neutrons (which are bound together by entangled tubes), become un-entangled from the rest of the nucleons

. Beta decay occurs when the tube of a down quark/gluon in a neutron becomes overtwisted and breaks producing a twisted torus (neutrino) and an up quark, and the ejected electron. The production of the torus may help explain the “Symmetry Violation” in Beta Decay, because one end of the broken tube section is connected to the other end of the tube produced, like a snake eating its tail. The phenomenon of Supercoiling involving twist and writhe cycles may reveal how overtwisted quarks can produce these new particles. The conversion of twists into writhes, and vice-versa, is an interesting process, which is also found in DNA molecules. Could the production of multiple writhe cycles help explain the three generations of quarks and neutrinos? If the twist cycles increase, the writhe cycles would also have a tendency to increase.

Gamma photons are produced when a tube unwinds producing electromagnetic waves. ( Mass=1/Length )

The “Electric Charge” of electrons or positrons would be the result of one twist cycle being displayed at the 3D-4D surface interface of the particle. The physical entanglement of twisted tubes in quarks within protons and neutrons and mesons displays an overall external surface charge of an integer number. Because the neutrinos do not have open tube ends, (They are a twisted torus.) they have no overall electric charge.

Within this model a black hole could represent a quantum of gravity, because it is one cycle of spatial gravitational curvature. Therefore, instead of a graviton being a subatomic particle it could be considered to be a black hole. The overall gravitational attraction would be caused by a very tiny curvature imbalance within atoms.

In this model Alpha equals the compactification ratio within the twistor cone, which is approximately 1/137.

1= Hypertubule diameter at 4D interface

137= Cone’s larger end diameter at 3D interface where the photons are absorbed or emitted.

The 4D twisted Hypertubule gets longer or shorter as twisting or untwisting occurs. (720 degrees per twist cycle.)

How many neutrinos are left over from the Big Bang? They have a small mass, but they could be very large in number. Could this help explain Dark Matter?

Why did Paul Dirac use the twist in a belt to help explain particle spin? Is Dirac’s belt trick related to this model? Is the “Quantum” unit based on twist cycles?

I started out imagining a subatomic Einstein-Rosen Bridge whose internal surface is twisted with either a Right-Hand twist, or a Left-Hand twist producing a twisted 3D/4D membrane. This topological Soliton model grew out of that simple idea. I was also trying to imagine a way to stuff the curvature of a 3 D sine wave into subatomic particles.

[Danny_Handford]

So far, it appears that the universe started as something tiny and started to expand to what we can observe and detect today. It also appears that anything we can observe or detect is made from extremely tiny particles which interact and combine with each other based on some fundamental predetermined rules.

We have identified quit a few of these extremely tiny particles and have identified quit a few of the rules these particles follow to interact and combine. Perhaps most of the particles and most of the rules but there probably are more. We also discovered that anything that we can observe or detect is made from the same basic stuff and we named this stuff energy. We know this because we have figured out how to calculate a value or quantity of energy for anything that we can observe or detect. We say the fabric of the universe is space time but we can also say that the fabric of the universe is energy time because we now know that space is not empty and is also some type of energy.

It also appears that after the universe started to expand, no more energy was added or removed as it continues to expand. We do not know what the rules were that determined the amount of energy in the universe nor what caused the energy in the universe to start expanding.

The rules for how energy expands, transforms, interacts and combines cause energy to cycle from concentrated to diluted states. Although the cycles can be repeated almost an infinite number of times, there will be a time when they stop because as the cycles keep repeating, the total amount of energy in the universe keeps becoming more and more diluted. We call this rule entropy.

At some point in time, all the energy will become so diluted that it will not be able to cycle back into more concentrated states and we think this is when the universe ends.

We still do not know the rules before the universe started to expand and we still do not know the rules after the universe will end and there are probably still many rules that we do not know as the energy in the universe continues to expand and cycle back and forth from concentrated to diluted states.

[zcydssh]

Interesting for a scientist to question something as fundamental as our theory of gravity. I suspect some of her peers will be uneasy about this.

[invox]

The same way the Higs Boson interacts with the Higs Field to give objects its mass. Gravity might be the result of a "particular" that interact with space that allows "attracion" between objects... Thus studying Dark Matter might be the way to go.

[leonhardtkristensen]

What about taking small steps. One question: What is energy?
Do we know what energy is? I don't think so yet energy is every thing - isn't it? E=mc^2

[stephenanastasi]

Good stuff, but the music is altogether too loud, especially toward the end. I found it distracting.

[michaelodriscoll]

Zero, Nothing = Infinity.

That transformation arises spontaneously, Effortlessly.
By Observing " what is", it is revealed instantaneous.
Matuh trying to explain how such arises, never will math explain " what is".
Namaste 🙏

[starexplorers]

4:22 The way we unified electromagnetism is the reason why we don't have a Theory of Everything.

[FractalOni]

It seems to me that for unification it is necessary to change the mindset and accept several postulates like:
0. Fields and space are the same fluid-like substance, capable of bending and carrying waves. From quarks, electrons and photons to gravitational waves;
1. The nature of gravity is to some extent similar to the nature of magnetism - both are a consequence of the curvature of a substance.
2. The observation of quantumness does not mean that fields and energy are quantum in nature. The observation of quantumness is merely a consequence of the fact that our measuring instruments are made of atoms and are not capable of interacting with the full continuous spectrum of energies.

[marishkagrayson]

Gravity is the memory of the oneness of the universe! 😅

[demotics]

How fascinating it is, for a super simple (supposedly) theory, from which all emerge, all forces and matter, will be discovered and understood by us. It's like the equation will discover itself.

[Someone-A]

It's very simple:

One is all, all is one.

[mchammer]

Gravity is just one of the many forces that dwells outside of our ability to observe it.