Radical New Theory Could Kill the Multiverse Hypothesis

Though galaxies look larger than atoms and elephants appear to outweigh ants, some physicists have begun to suspect that size differences are illusory. Perhaps the fundamental description of the universe does not include the concepts of “mass” and “length,” implying that at its core, nature lacks a sense of scale.

This little-explored idea, known as scale symmetry, constitutes a radical departure from long-standing assumptions about how elementary particles acquire their properties. But it has recently emerged as a common theme of numerous talks and papers by respected particle physicists. With their field stuck at a nasty impasse, the researchers have returned to the master equations that describe the known particles and their interactions, and are asking: What happens when you erase the terms in the equations having to do with mass and length?

More…

The most obvious response to the subject line is “which type of multiverse?” there are a dozen or so different possible type of multiverse that I’m aware of. So I suppose I need to read the original article.

The next most obvious response is that we all know how masses are created by symmetry breaking – that’s just the Higgs mechanism. But lengths?!

> “The scale symmetry approach traces back to 1995, when William Bardeen, a theoretical physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory”

OMG, it’s the Curies all over again.

John Bardeen is famous for three things, for the invention of the transistor, for understanding superconductivity, and for creating and then solving the solar neutrino problem. William A Bardeen is his son, and seems to have taken over the family business ie. Physics. All I can say is that anything generated by a Bardeen is well worth listening to.

mollwollfumble said:

> “The scale symmetry approach traces back to 1995, when William Bardeen, a theoretical physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory”

OMG, it’s the Curies all over again.

John Bardeen is famous for three things, for the invention of the transistor, for understanding superconductivity, and for creating and then solving the solar neutrino problem. William A Bardeen is his son, and seems to have taken over the family business ie. Physics. All I can say is that anything generated by a Bardeen is well worth listening to.

My father was a bricklayer. Does not mean that I can lay a brick.

BTW, the senior Bardden won the Nobel twice for physics. Not bad for an EE :)

• My father was a bricklayer. Does not mean that I can lay a brick.

Similar for me and the trade of my father…

It would be interesting indeed if the multiverse is ever falsified. In a sense it would be a confirmation that the human imagination is greater than the universe itself – a compelling reason to guide human evolution in the direction of our own imaginings, rather than the harsh world that gave us birth. Amongst all the other reasons.

Interesting point

mollwollfumble said:

The most obvious response to the subject line is “which type of multiverse?” there are a dozen or so different possible type of multiverse that I’m aware of. So I suppose I need to read the original article.

Quite. It is obviously impossible to “kill” at least some types of multiverse hypotheses, since we can not know anything about the other universes, even in principle.

interesting that is…..from original linked page

“…..The researchers have identified a mass scale where the Higgs boson stops interacting with other particles, causing their masses to drop to zero. It is at this scale-free point that a phase change-like crossover occurs. And just as water behaves differently than ice, different sets of self-contained laws operate above and below this critical point….”

transition said:

interesting that is…..from original linked page

“…..The researchers have identified a mass scale where the Higgs boson stops interacting with other particles, causing their masses to drop to zero. It is at this scale-free point that a phase change-like crossover occurs. And just as water behaves differently than ice, different sets of self-contained laws operate above and below this critical point….”

Good analogy if true.