The cosmological one is maybe easier to realize: it considers, the current Universe generation is formed by interior of giant dense collapsar, which is behaving like black hole from outer perspective. This collapse was followed by phase transition, which proceeded like crystallization from over-saturated solution by avalanche-like mechanism. During this, the approximately spherical zones of condensing false vacuum have intersect mutually, and from these places the another vacuum condensation has started (a sort of nucleation effect). We can observe the residuum of these zones as a dark matter streaks. The dodecahedron structure of these zones should corresponds the E8 group geometry, as being observed from inside (i.e. from past perspective due the Universe "expansion").

The second interpretation of E8 is relevant for Planck scale, i.e. for outer perspective (the future). The dense interior of black hole is forming the physical vacuum, which is filled by spongy system of density fluctuations, similar to nested foam. Such structure has even a behavior of soap foam, because it gets more dense after introducing of energy by the same way, like soap foam shaken inside of closed vessel. Such behavior leads to the quantum behavior of vacuum and particle-wave duality. Every energy wave, exchanged between pair of particles (i.e. density fluctuations of foam) is behaving like less or more dense blob of foam, i.e. like gauge boson particle. Every boson can exchange its energy with another particles, including other gauge bosons, thus forming the another generation of intercalated particles.

Therefore the E8 Lie group solves the trivial question: "

*Which structure should have the tightest lattice of particles, exchanged/formed by another particles*?*".*And such question has perfect meaning even from classical physics point of view! Such question has a perfect meaning in theory, describing the most dense structure of inertial particles, which we can ever imagine, i.e. the interior of black hole. AWT inteprets a rotation of Lie group in general reference frame, which leads to another particle generation as a Penrose-Terrell effect, formalized in Wick rotation approach.
## 6 comments:

Recap: E8 group geometry solves trivial question: "Which structure should have the tightest lattice of particles, formed by energy exchange between another particles, recursivelly?". And such question has a perfect meaning even from classical physics point of view! Such question has a perfect meaning in theory, describing the most dense structure of inertial particles formed by energy exchange between another particles, which we can ever imagine, i.e. the interior of black hole.

Regarding to recent Carrol's and Distler's critique of Garret's E8 theory, I don't understand, two things:

1) If usage of E8 group by Garret is so wrong, why string theory is using it too?

2) Why not to use some larger group, for example Monster group? It’s evident, real world is not just 24 dimensional (1, 2)..

This is a response to the critic post by L.M. against GraviGUT theories, thanks to Zephir for letting me to use his blog to write a comment without to be censored.Dear L.M.

You're forcing me to be a troll in your blog, because you are writing many nonsenses on physics and other stuffs. I have to make noise and attack your blog in order to keep the truth. I can realise the lies that you are writing one and again, even without to be a physicist and without to understand the mathematical techniques used by the specialists.

1) You wrote:

"

... Of course, such an enhancement of a group would also violate the Coleman-Mandula theorem ..."It's simply false:

1.1) Do you know what the C-M theorem exactly asserts? (9605147v1)

If

(the theory allows interactions between particles)a) The S matrix is not trivial

b) There is a finite number of particle types with a given mass

c) G is a symmetry group of the S matrix

then

G is locally isomorphic to the direct product of the Poincare group and an internal symmetry group

1.2) Have you ever been read a paper (1004.4866) where the three authors clarify the reasons for what the GraviGUT theories don't violate the C-M theorem, L.M.?

"

... Before symmetry breaking,"there is no metric and thus no S-matrix – a loophole allowing the unification of gravity and gauge fields2) You also wrote

"

... The symmetry breaking will be explicit in all cases, assuming a proper physical definition of "explicit" and "spontaneous ..."In the paper of three autors is clearly said:

"

... In this work we propose a fully g-invariant"gauge theory that breaks spontaneouslyto h and yields gravity coupled to Yang-Mills theory ...So, WTF?

:-D - Please don't delete this comment!, Thanks.

Actually, I got lost after sentence "you are writing many nonsenses on physics and other stuffs"...

Sometimes, I can't resist the comments made by Lubos, whose sole purpose are attacking some physics theories and their authors. I get angry a lot and then, without thinking, I write some offensives comments at the fast comments section of his blog TRF, which are immediately deleted by him. I have to confess that many of these comments only add noise. Unfortunately, I can't resist the lies that Lubos has written about the whole class dubbed the GraviGUT theories. E8 theory belongs to this class and as you know is the right TOE. Well, there are another theories that are close to the truth, like the SO(3,11) theory by Nesti and Percacci, but only can exist one correct TOE ;-).

So, I've wrote a response to such unfair and sly post by Lubos critiquing these theories.

The Voyager probes would need to use codewords whose sequences were distinct enough to be recognizable even with a few corrupted bits. But using less distinct codewords would provide more possibilities within the 24-bit limit, enabling faster data transmission. These competing needs translated into a geometry problem in which the bits corresponded to spatial coordinates, with each codeword the center point of a sphere in 24-dimensional space. If the spheres overlapped, the associated codewords would no longer be uniquely recognizable. To optimize the amount of data that could be transmitted and then corrected, the question became: How densely could spheres be packed in 24-dimensional space?

Post a Comment