Eric Weinstein may have found the answer to physics’ biggest problems<\/a> The article tells of a new mathematical theory developed by physicist Eric Weinstein<\/a>\u00a0over the last couple of decades. \u00a0This new theory, dubbed Geometric Unity <\/strong>by its creator, and motivated by a desire to unify gravity and quantum mechanics, is\u00a0based on a larger group of symmetries that encompasses the standard model of particle physics<\/a> and proposes to answer a number of intriguing questions raised by the current theory. \u00a0As well as giving a more general explanation of facts we currently know – so that some old mysteries (such as why there are three generations of particle families in the standard model, and what is going on with the cosmological constant) seem rather more natural in the new framework –\u00a0it makes a number of unexpected predictions<\/em>\u00a0such as the existence of a number of new particles, and a new, more natural way to understand dark matter and dark energy.<\/p>\n This means that Weinstein’s theory comes with its own way to be tested for validity. \u00a0By putting its head on the chopping block in this way, it will happily be relegated to a fanciful idea that didn’t end up working if its predictions do not turn out to be true. \u00a0But if the predictions lead to genuine new discoveries, we will be in possession of a brand new way of viewing the universe. \u00a0As du Sautoy puts it:<\/p>\n This is such a major project spanning huge stretches of mathematics and physics that it will take some time to realise the full implications of the ideas. \u00a0And just as Einstein’s general theory of relativity took some years to stabilise there are likely to be modifications to the theory before it is complete. \u00a0But for me what is so appealing about Weinstein’s ideas is the naturalness of the story, the way things aren’t arbitrarily inserted to make the theory fit the data but instead emerge as a necessary part of the mathematics.<\/p>\n Weinstein begins the paper in which he explains his proposal with a quote from Einstein: “What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world.” \u00a0Weinstein’s theory answers this in spades. \u00a0Very little in the universe is arbitrary. \u00a0The mathematics explains why it should work the way it does. \u00a0If this isn’t a description of how our universe works then frankly I’d prefer to move to the universe where it does!<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Einstein gave us a new description of reality. \u00a0He didn’t prove Newton wrong,<\/em>\u00a0just that Newtonian mechanics was an approximation<\/em>. \u00a0If true, Weinstein’s theory will do the same to Einstein. \u00a0The next improvement to Einstein, whether this theory due to Weinstein or something else, \u00a0is likely to be “nothing more” than the next approximation, too. \u00a0But a better understanding of the universe is a better understanding of the universe, and I’m excited!\u00a0It’s early days yet, but this is worth keeping your eyes on.<\/p>\n Marcus du Sautoy\u00a0is the\u00a0Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science\u00a0(Richard Dawkins‘ old job) and Professor of\u00a0Mathematics\u00a0at the\u00a0University of…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":16,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[70,69],"tags":[128,130,129,224,223],"class_list":["post-1396","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-physics","category-science","tag-eric-weinstein","tag-geometric-unity","tag-marcus-du-sautoy","tag-physics","tag-science"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/reasonablyfaithless\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1396","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/reasonablyfaithless\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/reasonablyfaithless\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/reasonablyfaithless\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/16"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/reasonablyfaithless\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1396"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/reasonablyfaithless\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1396\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/reasonablyfaithless\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1396"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/reasonablyfaithless\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1396"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skepticink.com\/reasonablyfaithless\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1396"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\n<\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.physicsoftheuniverse.com\/images\/relativity_curved_space.jpg\")
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"