Peter Woit: String theory is dead

_{Denyse O'Leary

February 27, 2023

Cosmology}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Following Eric Weinstein’s interview on how String Theory culture has stifled innovation in theoretical physics, longstanding critic of String Theory, Peter Woit, takes aim at the theory itself. He argues that String Theory has become a degenerative research project, becoming increasingly complicated and, at the same time, removed from empirical reality. Even the remaining string theorists of the past have given up on the ontology of strings, as well as the original vision of the theory. – Peter Woit (February 23, 2023)

But can something like string theory really die? Didn’t it ever only exist in order to keep smart people from grappling with reality?

Comments

Of further note:
How Gödel’s Proof Works (Godel numbering) – Natalie Wolchover -July 14, 2020 His incompleteness theorems destroyed the search for a mathematical theory of everything. Nearly a century later, we’re still coming to grips with the consequences. Excerpt: In the 89 years since Gödel’s discovery, mathematicians have stumbled upon just the kinds of unanswerable questions his theorems foretold. For example, Gödel himself helped establish that the continuum hypothesis, which concerns the sizes of infinity, is undecidable, as is the halting problem, which asks whether a computer program fed with a random input will run forever or eventually halt. Undecidable questions have even arisen in physics, suggesting that Gödelian incompleteness afflicts not just math, but — in some ill-understood way — reality. ,,, (Godel numbering is also discussed) https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-godels-incompleteness-theorems-work-20200714/ "Clearly then no scientific cosmology, which of necessity must be highly mathematical, can have its proof of consistency within itself as far as mathematics go. In absence of such consistency, all mathematical models, all theories of elementary particles, including the theory of quarks and gluons...fall inherently short of being that theory which shows in virtue of its a priori truth that the world can only be what it is and nothing else. This is true even if the theory happened to account for perfect accuracy for all phenomena of the physical world known at a particular time." - Stanley Jaki - Cosmos and Creator - 1980, pg. 49 The nature and significance of Gödel’s incompleteness theorems - Princeton - 2006 Excerpt: ,,Stephen Hawking (2002) and Freeman Dyson (2004), among others, have come to the conclusion that Gödel’s theorem implies that there can’t be a (mathematical) Theory of Everything.,, http://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/papers/Godel-IAS.pdf Godel’s theorems & the limits of reason Dr Asad Zaman - April 12, 2015 German logician Kurt Godel finally achieved spectacular and entirely unexpected results in this area. His first result was the Incompleteness Theorem. This showed that no matter how we formulate the axiomatic-deductive machinery, there will always exist true statements about numbers which this machinery cannot prove. This means that the ‘whole’ truth about numbers will forever remain outside the grasp of logical reasoning. The second was the Undecidability Theorem, which proves that logic cannot be used to decide the truth or falsity of certain statements. One famous example is Euclid’s Parallel Postulate. Whether it is true or false is a matter of choice, not logic. If we choose to deny this postulate, we create a non-Euclidean geometry which has its own valid and useful insights, quite different from the Euclidean world we studied in school. The Enlightenment hopes that man could reach truth purely by observations and logic, cannot be fulfilled even in the limited domain of mathematics. Godel proved what poets have always known, that transcendental truths are beyond the reach of reason: https://tribune.com.pk/story/868779/godels-theorems-the-limits-of-reason/ "Either mathematics is too big for the human mind, or the human mind is more than a machine." - Kurt Gödel As quoted in Topoi : The Categorial Analysis of Logic (1979) by Robert Goldblatt, p. 13 Gödel’s philosophical challenge (to Turing) – Wilfried Sieg – lecture video 38 second mark: “The human mind infinitely surpasses any finite machine.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=je9ksvZ9Av4 Einstein once remarked to Oskar Morgenstern, one of the cofounders of game theory, that he went to the Institute chiefly to walk home with Gödel. The God of the Mathematicians – Goldman – 2010 The religious beliefs that guided Kurt Gödel’s revolutionary ideas Excerpt: As Gödel told Hao Wang, “Einstein’s religion [was] more abstract, like Spinoza and Indian philosophy. Spinoza’s god is less than a person; mine is more than a person; because God can play the role of a person.” http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/07/the-god-of-the-mathematicians
Also of note, at the 10:00 minute mark of the following video, the fact that mathematicians could not 'prove' that 1+1=2 is discussed
BBC-Dangerous Knowledge – Part 3 of 5 https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xdoj7y 4 of 5 https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xdoj8c
bornagain77_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
05:00 PM
5
05
00
PM
PDT}

Since atheists/anti IDers here on UD are, predictably, trying to distance Godel's incompleteness from having any implications for God as being the author for any mathematics that might describe this universe, I will simply note this,
Taking God Out of the Equation - Biblical Worldview - by Ron Tagliapietra - January 1, 2012 Excerpt: Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) proved that no logical systems (if they include the counting numbers) can have all three of the following properties. 1. Validity ... all conclusions are reached by valid reasoning. 2. Consistency ... no conclusions contradict any other conclusions. 3. Completeness ... all statements made in the system are either true or false. The details filled a book, but the basic concept was simple and elegant. He (Godel) summed it up this way: “Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle—something you have to assume but cannot prove.” For this reason, his proof is also called the Incompleteness Theorem. Kurt Gödel had dropped a bomb on the foundations of mathematics. Math could not play the role of God as infinite and autonomous. It was shocking, though, that logic could prove that mathematics could not be its own ultimate foundation. Christians should not have been surprised. The first two conditions are true about math: it is valid and consistent. But only God fulfills the third condition. Only He is complete and therefore self-dependent (autonomous). God alone is “all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28), “the beginning and the end” (Revelation 22:13). God is the ultimate authority (Hebrews 6:13), and in Christ are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2:3). http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v7/n1/equation# Ron Tagliapietra has taught mathematics at five colleges. He is the author of the math textbooks from BJU Press, as well as Math for God’s Glory. A Biblical View Of Mathematics Vern Poythress - Doctorate in theology, PhD in Mathematics (Harvard) 15. Implications of Gödel’s proof B. Metaphysical problems of anti-theistic mathematics: unity and plurality Excerpt: Because of the above difficulties, anti-theistic philosophy of mathematics is condemned to oscillate, much as we have done in our argument, between the poles of a priori knowledge and a posteriori knowledge. Why? It will not acknowledge the true God, wise Creator of both the human mind with its mathematical intuition and the external world with its mathematical properties. In sections 22-23 we shall see how the Biblical view furnishes us with a real solution to the problem of “knowing” that 2 + 2 = 4 and knowing that S is true. http://www.frame-poythress.org/a-biblical-view-of-mathematics/
Without God providing the solid foundation for their epistemology, apparently anti-Christians can't even 'know for sure' that 2=2=4 :) And to further defend my claim that Godel, (who was a Christian Theist by the way), poured cold water on the belief that there will be a purely mathematical theory of everything, I will simply reiterated the fact that Godel’s incompleteness has now also been extended into quantum physics. In the following article entitled ‘Quantum physics problem proved unsolvable’, which studied the derivation of macroscopic properties from a complete microscopic description, the researchers remark that even a perfect and complete description of the microscopic properties of a material is not enough to predict its macroscopic behaviour.,,, The researchers further commented that their findings challenge the reductionists’ point of view, as the insurmountable difficulty lies precisely in the derivation of macroscopic properties from a microscopic description.”
Quantum physics problem proved unsolvable: Gödel and Turing enter quantum physics – December 9, 2015 Excerpt: A mathematical problem underlying fundamental questions in particle and quantum physics is provably unsolvable,,, It is the first major problem in physics for which such a fundamental limitation could be proven. The findings are important because they show that even a perfect and complete description of the microscopic properties of a material is not enough to predict its macroscopic behaviour.,,, “We knew about the possibility of problems that are undecidable in principle since the works of Turing and Gödel in the 1930s,” added Co-author Professor Michael Wolf from Technical University of Munich. “So far, however, this only concerned the very abstract corners of theoretical computer science and mathematical logic. No one had seriously contemplated this as a possibility right in the heart of theoretical physics before. But our results change this picture. From a more philosophical perspective, they also challenge the reductionists’ point of view, as the insurmountable difficulty lies precisely in the derivation of macroscopic properties from a microscopic description.” http://phys.org/news/2015-12-quantum-physics-problem-unsolvable-godel.html
In short, it is now proven, via the extension of Godel’s incompleteness into quantum physics, that there never will be a purely mathematical theory of everything that accounts for the macroscopic descriptions of General Relativity from the microscopic descriptions of Quantum Mechanics. As well, in further defending the Christian's claim that God must be behind any mathematics that describe this universe, I will simply note that both Eugene Wigner, (who’s insights into quantum mechanics continue to drive breakthroughs in quantum mechanics; per A. Zeilinger), and Albert Einstein, who needs no introduction, are both on record as to regarding it as a miracle that math should even be applicable to the universe. Moreover, Wigner questioned Darwinism in the process of calling it a miracle, and Einstein even went so far as to chastise ‘professional atheists’ in his process of calling it a miracle.
The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences – Eugene Wigner – 1960 Excerpt: ,,certainly it is hard to believe that our reasoning power was brought, by Darwin’s process of natural selection, to the perfection which it seems to possess.,,, It is difficult to avoid the impression that a miracle confronts us here, quite comparable in its striking nature to the miracle that the human mind can string a thousand arguments together without getting itself into contradictions, or to the two miracles of the existence of laws of nature and of the human mind’s capacity to divine them.,,, The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve. We should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future research and that it will extend, for better or for worse, to our pleasure, even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide branches of learning. https://www.maths.ed.ac.uk/~v1ranick/papers/wigner.pdf On the Rational Order of the World: a Letter to Maurice Solovine – Albert Einstein – March 30, 1952 Excerpt: “You find it strange that I consider the comprehensibility of the world (to the extent that we are authorized to speak of such a comprehensibility) as a miracle or as an eternal mystery. Well, a priori, one should expect a chaotic world, which cannot be grasped by the mind in any way .. the kind of order created by Newton’s theory of gravitation, for example, is wholly different. Even if a man proposes the axioms of the theory, the success of such a project presupposes a high degree of ordering of the objective world, and this could not be expected a priori. That is the ‘miracle’ which is constantly reinforced as our knowledge expands. There lies the weakness of positivists and professional atheists who are elated because they feel that they have not only successfully rid the world of gods but “bared the miracles.” -Albert Einstein http://inters.org/Einstein-Letter-Solovine
And the last time I checked, miracles are considered the sole province of God,
mir·a·cle a surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore considered to be the work of a divine agency.
And since, I assume, JVL will, once again, point out that Einstein did not believe in a personal God, I will simply note that although Einstein himself may not have personally believed in life after death, (nor in a personal God),,, but Special Relativity itself contradicts Einstein and offers stunning confirmation that Near Death Testimonies are accurate ‘physical’ descriptions of what happens after death, i.e. going to a ‘higher timeless/eternal dimension’, i.e. heavenly dimension, that exists above this temporal realm. https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/at-mind-matters-news-are-extra-dimensions-of-the-universe-real-or-imaginary/#comment-772620 Verse and quotes:
John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” ‘the Word’ in John 1:1 is translated from ‘Logos’ in Greek. Logos is also the root word from which we derive our modern word logic http://etymonline.com/?term=logic What is the Logos? Logos is a Greek word literally translated as “word, speech, or utterance.” However, in Greek philosophy, Logos refers to divine reason or the power that puts sense into the world making order instead of chaos.,,, In the Gospel of John, John writes “In the beginning was the Word (Logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1). John appealed to his readers by saying in essence, “You’ve been thinking, talking, and writing about the Word (divine reason) for centuries and now I will tell you who He is.” https://www.compellingtruth.org/what-is-the-Logos.html
bornagain77_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
03:21 PM
3
03
21
PM
PDT}

Seversky: I guess you don't understand how ideas like string theory and evolution are connected. Let me try and help you see. An entire generation of physicists devoted their energies and their learning to a theory that seemed to be a "Theory of Everything," able to combine GR with the SM, only to have their careers end up on the ash heap of history. But not before they marginalize and drive out anyone who disagrees with their assessment. And then, when faced with a complete repudiation of their theory in the LHC studies, they continue to insist that their ideas must be right. In all of this, they mirror what happens in the field of Darwinian evolutionary theory. Only, of course, it's worse with the evolutionists. But, from a probabilistic viewpoint, there is also this connection: IIRC, string theory ends up unable to find a particular 'background' to build its theory on. It turns out that there are something like 10^500 possible 'backgrounds.' In the face of the overwhelming odds of never being able to explain their theory, they happily go on with pencil and paper with the hope that "somehow" they'll find it. Hope this helped.PaV_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
11:13 AM
11
11
13
AM
PDT}

JVL: Have you read Penrose's "The Emperor's New Mind"? Your quote says of Godel's Incompleteness Theorems:
" The theorems are widely, but not universally, interpreted as showing that Hilbert’s program to find a complete and consistent set of axioms for all mathematics is impossible."
Some people think that we really didn't go to the moon either. Getting "universal" agreement is a hard thing to accomplish. Penrose makes very clear the manner in which Hilbert's hopes were dashed. It's rational. It's logical. It's convincing. So, I encourage you to read it, if you haven't. If you have, I wonder if you could share with us the "reasons" why you disagree with Penrose's arguments--that is, if you intend to "wield it."PaV_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
10:54 AM
10
10
54
AM
PDT}

Relatd: "the theory is thought to describe an enormous landscape of possible universes" . . . Is thought, by some. Does that not depend on which 'interpretation' of quantum mechanics is adopted? Also, it says 'possible' universes NOT multi-verse. How much of the Wikipedia article about string theory discusses the multi-verse?JVL_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
10:19 AM
10
10
19
AM
PDT}

@8 Agreed. Godel's results are fascinating for having shown that arithmetic cannot have the features of first-order logic (which is consistent and complete). But it has no implications at all for whether there could be a "theory of everything".PyrrhoManiac1_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
10:15 AM
10
10
15
AM
PDT}

Seversky at 2, You know what? There is a reality beyond this one. As a guy who worships fallible man as the ultimate all there is, you only see power and politics. These things are temporary. Eternity isn't.relatd_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
10:14 AM
10
10
14
AM
PDT}

JVL at 7, "Another issue is that the theory is thought to describe an enormous landscape of possible universes, which has complicated efforts to develop theories of particle physics based on string theory." Wikipediarelatd_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
10:11 AM
10
10
11
AM
PDT}

My sense of string theory is that it was never an attempt to deal with the fine-tuning problem. It was an attempt to reconcile general relativity and quantum mechanics without the paradoxes of "gravitons".PyrrhoManiac1_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
09:47 AM
9
09
47
AM
PDT}

Bornagain77: Especially since Gödel in 1931, via his incompleteness theorem, poured cold water on the belief that there will be a purely mathematical theory of everything. No, that is not what Godel's work says. Sigh. From Wikipedia:
Gödel's incompleteness theorems are two theorems of mathematical logic that are concerned with the limits of provability in formal axiomatic theories. These results, published by Kurt Gödel in 1931, are important both in mathematical logic and in the philosophy of mathematics. The theorems are widely, but not universally, interpreted as showing that Hilbert's program to find a complete and consistent set of axioms for all mathematics is impossible. The first incompleteness theorem states that no consistent system of axioms whose theorems can be listed by an effective procedure (i.e., an algorithm) is capable of proving all truths about the arithmetic of natural numbers. For any such consistent formal system, there will always be statements about natural numbers that are true, but that are unprovable within the system. The second incompleteness theorem, an extension of the first, shows that the system cannot demonstrate its own consistency.
Most people do not understand Godel's work and should not attempt to wield it.JVL_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
09:35 AM
9
09
35
AM
PDT}

Tammy: String Theory involves a multiverse It does? Where did you get that from?JVL_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
09:30 AM
9
09
30
AM
PDT}

And in the following video, the late Isabel Piczek, who made a 3-D sculpture from the Shroud of Turin states that, “The muscles of the body are absolutely not crushed against the stone of the tomb. They are perfect. It means the body is hovering between the two sides of the shroud. What does that mean? It means there is absolutely no gravity.”
“When you look at the image of the shroud, the two bodies next to each other, you feel that it is a flat image. But if you create, for instance, a three dimensional object, as I did, the real body, then you realize that there is a strange dividing element. An interface from which the image is projected up and the image is projected down. The muscles of the body are absolutely not crushed against the stone of the tomb. They are perfect. It means the body is hovering between the two sides of the shroud. What does that mean? It means there is absolutely no gravity. Other strange you discover is that the image is absolutely undistorted. Now if you imagine the clothe was wrinkled, tied, wrapped around the body, and all of the sudden you see a perfect image, which is impossible unless the shroud was made absolutely taut, rigidly taut.” Isabel Piczek – (world renowned sculptor and artist)– 2:20 mark Turin shroud – – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIpdIz5Rp3I
As well, Kevin Moran, an optical engineer who has studied the Shroud of Turin, describes the Shroud Image in this way, “The unique front-and-back only image can be best described as gravitationally collimated. The radiation that made the image acted perfectly parallel to gravity. There is no side image. The radiation is parallel to gravity,,,”
Optically Terminated Image Pixels Observed on Frei 1978 Samples – Kevin E. Moran – 1999 Discussion Pia’s negative photograph, from 1898, showed what looked to be a body that was glowing, but slightly submerged in a bath of cloudy water. This condition is more properly described as an image that is visible, at a distance, but by locally attenuated radiation. The unique front-and-back only image can be best described as gravitationally collimated. The radiation that made the image acted perfectly parallel to gravity. There is no side image. The radiation is parallel to gravity and, if moving at light speed, only lasted about 100 picoseconds. It is particulate in nature, colliding only with some of the fibers. It is not a continuum or spherical-front radiation that made the image, as visible or UV light. It is not the X-ray radiation that obeys the one over R squared law that we are so accustomed to in medicine. It is more unique,,, Theoretical model It is suggested that the image was formed when a high-energy particle struck the fiber and released radiation within the fiber at a speed greater that the local speed of light. Since the fiber acts as a light pipe, this energy moved out through the fiber until it encountered an optical discontinuity, then it slowed to the local speed of light and dispersed. Discussion The fact that the pixels don’t fluoresce suggests that the conversion to their now brittle dehydrated state occurred instantly and completely so no partial products remain to be activated by the ultraviolet light. This suggests a quantum event where a finite amount of energy transferred abruptly. The fact that there are images front and back suggests the radiating particles were released along the gravity vector. The radiation pressure may also help explain why the blood was “lifted cleanly” from the body as it transformed to a resurrected state.” https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/moran.pdf
Moreover, besides gravity being dealt with on the Shroud of Turin, the Shroud of Turin also gives us evidence that Quantum Mechanics itself was also dealt with. In the following paper, it was found that it was not possible to describe the image formation on the Shroud in classical terms but they found it necessary to describe the formation of the image on the Shroud in discrete quantum terms.
The absorbed energy in the Shroud body image formation appears as contributed by discrete (quantum) values – Giovanni Fazio, Giuseppe Mandaglio – 2008 Excerpt: This result means that the optical density distribution,, can not be attributed at the absorbed energy described in the framework of the classical physics model. It is, in fact, necessary to hypothesize a absorption by discrete values of the energy where the ‘quantum’ is equal to the one necessary to yellow one fibril. http://cab.unime.it/mus/541/1/c1a0802004.pdf
Moreover, the following rather astonishing study on the Shroud, found that it would take 34 Trillion Watts of what is termed VUV (directional) radiation to form the image on the shroud.
Astonishing discovery at Christ’s tomb supports Turin Shroud – NOV 26TH 2016 Excerpt: The first attempts made to reproduce the face on the Shroud by radiation, used a CO2 laser which produced an image on a linen fabric that is similar at a macroscopic level. However, microscopic analysis showed a coloring that is too deep and many charred linen threads, features that are incompatible with the Shroud image. Instead, the results of ENEA “show that a short and intense burst of VUV directional radiation can color a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin, including shades of color, the surface color of the fibrils of the outer linen fabric, and the absence of fluorescence”. ‘However, Enea scientists warn, “it should be noted that the total power of VUV radiations required to instantly color the surface of linen that corresponds to a human of average height, body surface area equal to = 2000 MW/cm2 17000 cm2 = 34 thousand billion watts makes it impractical today to reproduce the entire Shroud image using a single laser excimer, since this power cannot be produced by any VUV light source built to date (the most powerful available on the market come only to several billion watts)”. Comment The ENEA study of the Holy Shroud of Turin concluded that it would take 34 Thousand Billion (trillion) Watts of VUV radiation to make the image on the shroud. This output of electromagnetic energy remains beyond human technology. http://www.predatormastersforums.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3014106 Lazzaro’s (approx.) 30th slide in his powerpoint presentation states, Excerpt: 34 thousand billion watt is an impressive number but,, * Back to basics: let us consider the fraction A/B. If B is very small then A/B results in a very large number.,,, * 17 joules energy/0.00000001 seconds results in 1.7 billion watt. It is called “peak power” which different of the commonly used “average power”. * The above peak power was delivered to 1 cm^2 flax. Being the average man skin surface = 2 m^2 = 20,000 cm^2, we have 34 thousand billion watt necessary to complete the body image on the Shroud. https://www.academia.edu/38029774/Linen_Coloration_by_Pulsed_Radiation._A_Review
Moreover, that it is even physically possible for the human body to emit such ‘quantum light’ is revealed by the following,
Photocount distribution of photons emitted from three sites of a human body – 2006 Excerpt: Signals from three representative sites of low, intermediate and high intensities are selected for further analysis. Fluctuations in these signals are measured by the probabilities of detecting different numbers of photons in a bin. The probabilities have non-classical features and are well described by the signal in a quantum squeezed state of photons. Measurements with bins of three sizes yield same values of three parameters of the squeezed state. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16520060 Humans Glow in Visible Light – July 2009 – with photographs Excerpt: Past research has shown that the body emits visible light, 1,000 times less intense than the levels to which our naked eyes are sensitive. In fact, virtually all living creatures emit very weak light, https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna32090918
Thus in conclusion, when we rightly allow the Agent causality of God ‘back’ into physics, (as the Christian founders of modern science originally envisioned, Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, James Clerk Maxwell, and Max Planck, to name a few of the Christian founders,,,, and as quantum mechanics itself now empirically demands with the closing of the free will loophole by Anton Zeilinger and company), then rightly allowing the Agent causality of God ‘back’ into physics provides us with a very plausible resolution for the much sought after ‘theory of everything’ in that Christ’s resurrection from the dead bridges the infinite mathematical divide that exists between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics and provides us with a very plausible, and even an empirically backed, reconciliation, via the Shroud of Turin, between Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity into the much sought after ‘Theory of Everything”
Colossians 1:15-20 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
Supplemental note:
Sept 2022: Entropic divide between special relativity and general relativity https://uncommondescent.com/black-holes/at-live-science-are-black-holes-wormholes/#comment-765326
bornagain77_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
08:05 AM
8
08
05
AM
PDT}

On top of that 'infinite mathematical divide' that is now found between quantum mechanics and general relativity, Godel’s incompleteness has now also been extended into quantum physics. In the following article entitled ‘Quantum physics problem proved unsolvable’, which studied the derivation of macroscopic properties from a complete microscopic description, the researchers remark that even a perfect and complete description of the microscopic properties of a material is not enough to predict its macroscopic behaviour.,,, The researchers further commented that their findings challenge the reductionists’ point of view, as the insurmountable difficulty lies precisely in the derivation of macroscopic properties from a microscopic description.”
Quantum physics problem proved unsolvable: Gödel and Turing enter quantum physics – December 9, 2015 Excerpt: A mathematical problem underlying fundamental questions in particle and quantum physics is provably unsolvable,,, It is the first major problem in physics for which such a fundamental limitation could be proven. The findings are important because they show that even a perfect and complete description of the microscopic properties of a material is not enough to predict its macroscopic behaviour.,,, “We knew about the possibility of problems that are undecidable in principle since the works of Turing and Gödel in the 1930s,” added Co-author Professor Michael Wolf from Technical University of Munich. “So far, however, this only concerned the very abstract corners of theoretical computer science and mathematical logic. No one had seriously contemplated this as a possibility right in the heart of theoretical physics before. But our results change this picture. From a more philosophical perspective, they also challenge the reductionists’ point of view, as the insurmountable difficulty lies precisely in the derivation of macroscopic properties from a microscopic description.” http://phys.org/news/2015-12-quantum-physics-problem-unsolvable-godel.html
In short, it is now proven, via Godel’s extension into quantum physics, that there never will be a purely mathematical theory of everything that accounts for the macroscopic descriptions of General Relativity from the microscopic descriptions of Quantum Mechanics. Yet, (at least for the Christian), all hope is not lost in finding the correct ‘theory of everything’. Dr. William Dembski in this following comment, although he was not directly addressing the ‘infinite mathematical divide’ that exists between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, offers this insight into what the ‘unification’ of infinite God with finite man might look like mathematically:, Specifically he states, “The Cross is a path of humility in which the infinite God becomes finite and then contracts to zero, only to resurrect and thereby unite a finite humanity within a newfound infinity.”
The End Of Christianity – Finding a Good God in an Evil World – Pg.31 William Dembski PhDs. Mathematics and Theology Excerpt: “In mathematics there are two ways to go to infinity. One is to grow large without measure. The other is to form a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero. The Cross is a path of humility in which the infinite God becomes finite and then contracts to zero, only to resurrect and thereby unite a finite humanity within a newfound infinity.” http://www.designinference.com/documents/2009.05.end_of_xty.pdf
Of note: I hold it to be fairly obvious that ‘growing large without measure’ can only ever be a potential infinity. Whereas a fraction in which the denominator goes to zero would be an actual infinity and/or a “completed totality”
Potential Infinity vs. Actual Infinity – June 7, 2012 by Ryan Excerpt: In a potential infinity, one can keep adding or subdividing without end, but one never actually reaches infinity. In a sense, a potential infinity is an endless process that at any point along the way is finite. By contrast, in an actual infinity, the infinite is viewed as a completed totality. http://www.numbersleuth.org/trends/potential-vs-actual-infinity/
And I also note that this ‘completed totality’ of an actual infinite fits extremely well into St. Augustine’s view that the Mind of God exceeds the ‘potential infinity’ of numbers.
“Every number is defined by its own character so that no number is equal to any other. They are unequal to one another and are different, and the individual numbers are finite, but as a class they are infinite. Does that mean that God does not know all numbers, because of their infinity? Does God’s knowledge extend as far as a certain sum, and end there? No one could be insane enough to say that. Now those philosophers who revere the authority of Plato will not despise numbers and say that they are irreverent to God’s knowledge, For Plato emphasizes that God constructed the world by use of numbers, while we have the authority of Scripture, where God is thus addressed, “You have set all things in order all things by number, measure, and weight.” And the prophet says of God, “He produces the world according to number’. And the Savior says in the Gospel, “Your hairs are all numbered”. Never let us doubt then that every number is known to him “whose understanding cannot be numbered”. Although the infinite series of numbers cannot be numbered, this infinity of numbers is not outside the comprehension of him “whose understanding cannot be numbered”.” – St. Augustine – “City of God” – 12th Book, 19th Chapter – Infinity: Aristotle, St. Augustine, Cantor, Gödel – video – 31:29 minute mark https://youtu.be/SMt2VtjMfrU?t=1889
Moreover, when we rightly allow the Agent Causality of God ‘back’ into physics, as the Christian founder of modern physics, Sir Isaac Newton, himself originally envisioned,
‘Without all doubt this world…could arise from nothing but the perfectly free will of God… From this fountain (what) we call the laws of nature have flowed, in which there appear many traces indeed of the most wise contrivance, but not the least shadow of necessity. These therefore we must not seek from uncertain conjectures, but learn them from observations and experiments.”,,, – Sir Isaac Newton – (Cited from Religion and the Rise of Modern Science by Hooykaas page 49). https://thirdspace.org.au/comment/237
,,, and when we rightly allow the Agent Causality of God back into physics, as quantum mechanics itself now empirically demands with the closing of the free will loophole by Anton Zeilinger and company,
Cosmic Bell Test Using Random Measurement Settings from High-Redshift Quasars – Anton Zeilinger – 14 June 2018 Excerpt: This experiment pushes back to at least 7.8 Gyr ago the most recent time by which any local-realist influences could have exploited the “freedom-of-choice” loophole to engineer the observed Bell violation, excluding any such mechanism from 96% of the space-time volume of the past light cone of our experiment, extending from the big bang to today. https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.080403
,, then that (very) reasonable concession to rightly allow God ‘back’ into physics, as the Christian founders of modern science originally envisioned, provides us with a very plausible resolution for the much sought after ‘theory of everything’ in that Christ’s resurrection from the dead provides a very plausible, and empirically backed reconciliation, via the Shroud of Turin, between quantum mechanics and general relativity into the much sought after ‘Theory of Everything”. Specifically, when scrutinizing some of the many fascinating details of the Shroud of Turin, we ‘surprisingly’ find that both General Relativity, i.e. gravity, and Quantum Mechanics were both dealt with in Christ’s resurrection from the dead. In regards to gravity, and as can be seen in the following ‘backside’ image, and holographic image video, from the Shroud of Turin, there is no flattening on the backside of the body as would be expected if the image on the Shroud had formed if a dead body had merely been laying flat on a slab of rock.
Shroud image – backside https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/jPxzJOtRHgLSddLOYbOQ_kpvXUV6aOt0mG-8DZeeEXj7uFSr63hqsGbgknwNBEFFFtrayZsYH8ONdXznreuD1TnOxYOeM72QFFuydody6Bpb1FJ2yNoMLabv_Kub7LA Shroud Hologram – backside image https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYBcIX1YLCg
bornagain77_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
08:04 AM
8
08
04
AM
PDT}

Although Peter Woit thinks "the idea of string theory unification is simply a failure", Woit still holds out hope that, via "the geometry of twistors", there will ultimately be found a single, purely mathematical, 'theory of everything'. A purely mathematical theory which unifies general relativity with quantum field theory in the Standard Model of particle physics. But why do Peter Woit, and practically all other theoretical physicists/mathematicians today, even believe that there will is a purely mathematical theory of everything? Especially since Gödel in 1931, via his incompleteness theorem, poured cold water on the belief that there will be a purely mathematical theory of everything. As Stephen Hawking himself grudgingly admitted in his book 'The Grand Design', (where he himself was looking for a purely mathematical theory of everything), "Gödel's incompleteness theorem (1931), proves that there are limits to what can be ascertained by mathematics. Kurt Gödel halted the achievement of a unifying all-encompassing theory of everything in his theorem that: “Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle—something you have to assume but cannot prove”
"Gödel's incompleteness theorem (1931), proves that there are limits to what can be ascertained by mathematics. Kurt Gödel halted the achievement of a unifying all-encompassing theory of everything in his theorem that: “Anything you can draw a circle around cannot explain itself without referring to something outside the circle—something you have to assume but cannot prove”." - Stephen Hawking & Leonard Miodinow, The Grand Design (2010)
And as David P. Goldman succinctly put the situation, "we cannot construct an ontology that makes God dispensable.,,, Mathematics never will create the sort of closed system that sorts reality into neat boxes."
The God of the Mathematicians - David P. Goldman - August 2010 Excerpt: we cannot construct an ontology that makes God dispensable. Secularists can dismiss this as a mere exercise within predefined rules of the game of mathematical logic, but that is sour grapes, for it was the secular side that hoped to substitute logic for God in the first place. Gödel's critique of the continuum hypothesis has the same implication as his incompleteness theorems: Mathematics never will create the sort of closed system that sorts reality into neat boxes. http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/08/the-god-of-the-mathematicians
In fact, Chaitin's work extending Godel's incompleteness theorem has made this 'reconciliation problem' between quantum mechanics and gravity infinitely worse for secularists. Specifically, "what Gödel discovered was just the tip of the iceberg: an infinite number of true mathematical theorems exist that cannot be proved from any finite system of axioms."
The Limits Of Reason – Gregory Chaitin – 2006 Excerpt: Unlike Gödel’s approach, mine is based on measuring information and showing that some mathematical facts cannot be compressed into a theory because they are too complicated. This new approach suggests that what Gödel discovered was just the tip of the iceberg: an infinite number of true mathematical theorems exist that cannot be proved from any finite system of axioms. https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~robins/The_Limits_of_Reason_Chaitin_2006.pdf
The late Steven Weinberg, who was an atheist, recognized the problem that this presents to secularists.
"I don't think one should underestimate the fix we are in. That in the end we will not be able to explain the world. That we will have some set of laws of nature (that) we will not be able to derive them on the grounds simply of mathematical consistency. Because we can already think of mathematically consistent laws that don't describe the world as we know it. And we will always be left with a question 'why are the laws nature what they are rather than some other laws?'. And I don't see any way out of that. The fact that the constants of nature are suitable for life, which is clearly true, we observe,,," (Weinberg then comments on the multiverse conjecture of atheists) "No one has constructed a theory in which that is true. I mean,, the (multiverse) theory would be speculative, but we don't even have a theory in which that speculation is mathematically realized. But it is a possibility." Steven Weinberg – as stated to Richard Dawkins at the 8:15 minute mark of the following video Leonard Susskind – Richard Dawkins and Steven Weinberg – 1 in 10^120 Cosmological Constant points to intelligent design – video https://youtu.be/z4E_bT4ecgk?t=495
And although atheists, as Steven Weinberg himself honestly admitted, are in a pretty bad 'fix', Christians have a ready solution. As Dr. Bruce Gordon stated, "This transcendent reality cannot merely be a Platonic realm of mathematical descriptions, for such things are causally inert abstract entities that do not affect the material world,,, Rather, the transcendent reality on which our universe depends must be something that can exhibit agency – a mind that can choose among the infinite variety of mathematical descriptions and bring into existence a reality that corresponds to a consistent subset of them. This is what “breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe.”
Bruce Gordon: Hawking’s irrational arguments – October 2010 Excerpt: ,,,The physical universe is causally, (and mathematically), incomplete and therefore neither self-originating nor self-sustaining. The world of space, time, matter and energy is dependent on a reality that transcends space, time, matter and energy. This transcendent reality cannot merely be a Platonic realm of mathematical descriptions, for such things are causally inert abstract entities that do not affect the material world,,, Rather, the transcendent reality on which our universe depends must be something that can exhibit agency – a mind that can choose among the infinite variety of mathematical descriptions and bring into existence a reality that corresponds to a consistent subset of them. This is what “breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe.” Anything else invokes random miracles as an explanatory principle and spells the end of scientific rationality.,,, Universes do not “spontaneously create” on the basis of abstract mathematical descriptions, nor does the fantasy of a limitless multiverse trump the explanatory power of transcendent intelligent design. What Mr. Hawking’s contrary assertions show is that mathematical savants can sometimes be metaphysical simpletons. Caveat emptor. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/1/hawking-irrational-arguments/
In fact, the belief that any mathematics than might describe this universe are to be considered 'God's thoughts' is not just some new belief that Christians are trying to impose onto science simply because of the failure of string theory, but the belief that any mathematics than might describe this universe are 'God's thoughts', (and via Neoplatonic philosophy and Augustinian theology), played a large, integral. part in the founding of modern science in Medieval Christian Europe,
Keep It Simple - By Edward Feser - April 2020 Excerpt: Mathematics appears to describe a realm of entities with quasi-divine attributes. The series of natural numbers is infinite. That one and one equal two and two and two equal four could not have been otherwise. Such mathematical truths never begin being true or cease being true; they hold eternally and immutably. The lines, planes, and figures studied by the geometer have a kind of perfection that the objects of our experience lack. Mathematical objects seem immaterial and known by pure reason rather than through the senses. Given the centrality of mathematics to scientific explanation, it seems in some way to be a cause of the natural world and its order. How can the mathematical realm be so apparently godlike? The traditional answer, originating in Neoplatonic philosophy and Augustinian theology, is that our knowledge of the mathematical realm is precisely knowledge, albeit inchoate, of the divine mind. Mathematical truths exhibit infinity, necessity, eternity, immutability, perfection, and immateriality because they are God’s thoughts, and they have such explanatory power in scientific theorizing because they are part of the blueprint implemented by God in creating the world. For some thinkers in this tradition, mathematics thus provides the starting point for an argument for the existence of God qua supreme intellect. https://www.firstthings.com/article/2020/04/keep-it-simple ‘O God, I am thinking your thoughts after you!’ - Johann Kepler - 1619 - stated shortly after he discovered the third law of planetary motion.
Moreover, the main problem in trying to mathematically unify quantum mechanics with general relativity is the fact that there is an apparent ‘infinite mathematical divide’ that exists between the two theories. Professor Jeremy Bernstein states the situation as such, “there remains an irremediable difficulty. Every order reveals new types of infinities, and no finite number of renormalizations renders all the terms in the series finite. The theory is not renormalizable.”
Quantum Leaps – Jeremy Bernstein – October 19, 2018 Excerpt: Divergent series notwithstanding, quantum electrodynamics yielded results of remarkable accuracy. Consider the magnetic moment of the electron. This calculation, which has been calculated up to the fifth order in ?, agrees with experiment to ten parts in a billion. If one continued the calculation to higher and higher orders, at some point the series would begin to break down. There is no sign of that as yet. Why not carry out a similar program for gravitation? One can readily write down the Feynman graphs that represent the terms in the expansion. Yet there remains an irremediable difficulty. Every order reveals new types of infinities, and no finite number of renormalizations renders all the terms in the series finite. The theory is not renormalizable. https://inference-review.com/article/quantum-leaps Jeremy Bernstein is professor emeritus of physics at the Stevens Institute of Technology.
And as theoretical physicist Sera Cremonini stated, “You would need to add infinitely many counterterms in a never-ending process. Renormalization would fail.,,,”
Why Gravity Is Not Like the Other Forces We asked four physicists why gravity stands out among the forces of nature. We got four different answers. Excerpt: the quantum version of Einstein’s general relativity is “nonrenormalizable.”,,, In quantum theories, infinite terms appear when you try to calculate how very energetic particles scatter off each other and interact. In theories that are renormalizable — which include the theories describing all the forces of nature other than gravity — we can remove these infinities in a rigorous way by appropriately adding other quantities that effectively cancel them, so-called counterterms. This renormalization process leads to physically sensible answers that agree with experiments to a very high degree of accuracy. The problem with a quantum version of general relativity is that the calculations that would describe interactions of very energetic gravitons — the quantized units of gravity — would have infinitely many infinite terms. You would need to add infinitely many counterterms in a never-ending process. Renormalization would fail.,,, - Sera Cremonini – theoretical physicist – Lehigh University https://www.quantamagazine.org/why-gravity-is-not-like-the-other-forces-20200615/
And as Michio Kaku stated in the following video, when you try to combine General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics, “you get an infinite sequence of infinities, (which is) infinitely worse than the divergences of Einstein’s original theory (i.e. General Relativity).”
“Here is the problem (with black holes), right there, when ‘r’ (radius) is equal to zero, The point at which physics itself breaks down. So 1 over ‘r’ equals 1 over 0 equals infinity. To a mathematician infinity is simply a number without limit. To a physicist it is a monstrosity. It means first of all that gravity is infinite at the center of a black hole. That time stops. And what does that mean? Space makes no sense. It means the collapse of everything we know about the physical universe. In the real world there is no such thing as infinity. Therefore there is a fundamental flaw in the formulation of Einstein’s theory.” (And Michio Kaku then notes, when you try to combine General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics) “In fact, you get an infinite sequence of infinities, (which is) infinitely worse than the divergences of Einstein’s original theory (i.e. General Relativity).” Quantum Mechanics & Relativity – Michio Kaku – The Collapse Of Physics As We Know It ? – video Science vs God Its The Collapse Of Physics As We Know it – video https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2jbd7x
bornagain77_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
08:03 AM
8
08
03
AM
PDT}

As a Creationist, I got a suggestion for anyone who is "genuinely puzzled as to how that project was “keeping smart people from grappling with reality”", or finds it "weird that an esoteric theory in physics should be of such concern to a blog concerned with the ID/evolution controversy" Here it is: Read up on Dr Brian Greene, PhD, Theoretical Physics Guru, and TV Science Personality. Briefly, Dr Greene, now 60, is a poor fool from Columbia University in New York City who wasted his gifts and his career chasing the nonsense of String Theory. String Theory involves a multiverse, and that explains why our Atheist adademia and media elite made Dr Greene a media celebrity. The multiverse offered a last hope for finding a Non-Creationist explanation of fine tuning. Hope that clears up your genuine puzzle, and gives a common sense explanation for what you thought was wierd . P.S. Us Creationists, we got a question Now that String Theory has tanked, our poor Atheist friends must be kind of desperate for a new Non-Creationist way to explain away fine tuning. Its got to be like String Theory. In other words its got to be upscale, and have lots of Math formulas and Sciencey sounding hocus pocus. What do you guys figure they'll try next?TAMMIE LEE HAYNES_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
07:17 AM
7
07
17
AM
PDT}

What is weird is that an esoteric theory in physics should be of such concern to a blog concerned with the ID/evolution controversy. It makes more sense if you understand that ID's beef is not just with evolution but with any science which has the potential to undermine - at least in their eyes - their religious presuppositions. Framing science as an elite interest group desperate to preserve their money and political power by any means is a standard Alinskyite tactic.Seversky_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
06:43 AM
6
06
43
AM
PDT}

This rhetorical question is really weird to me:
Didn’t it ever only exist in order to keep smart people from grappling with reality?
The basic idea behind string theory was to use some obscure ideas from higher-dimensional topology to unify general relativity and quantum mechanics. I'm genuinely puzzled as to how that project was "keeping smart people from grappling with reality".PyrrhoManiac1_{February 28, 2023
February
02
Feb
28
28
2023
05:41 AM
5
05
41
AM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply