Here are some of the highlights of the game (I recommend for any avid fan to watch the entire match):
Barça, Barça, Barça !
“There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.” – Albert Einstein
“The best years of your life are the ones in which you decide your problems are your own. You do not blame them on your mother, the ecology, or the president. You realize that you control your own destiny.” – Albert Ellis
“The trouble with not having a goal is that you can spend your life running up and down the field and never score.” – Bill Copeland
“If what you’re doing is not your passion, you have nothing to lose.”
“The person who says something is impossible should not interrupt the person who is doing it.”
“It is never too late to be what you might have been.” – George Eliot
“All our dreams can come true – if we have the courage to pursue them.” – Walt Disney
“What the mind can conceive, it can achieve.” – Napoleon Hill
“It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare; it is because we do not dare that things are difficult.” – Seneca
“Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.” - Eleanor Roosevelt
“If opportunity doesn’t knock, build a door.” - Milton Berle
“The sky has never been the limit. We are our own limits. It’s then about breaking our personal limits and outgrowing ourselves to live our best lives.”
“Don’t say you don’t have enough time. You have exactly the same number of hours per day that were given to Helen Keller, Pasteur, Michaelangelo, Mother Teresea, Leonardo da Vinci, Thomas Jefferson, and Albert Einstein.” – Life’s Little Instruction Book, compiled by H. Jackson Brown, Jr.
“First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.” – Mahatma Gandhi
“When you can’t change the direction of the wind — adjust your sails.” ~ H. Jackson Brown
“Everything you want should be yours: the type of work you want; the relationships you need; the social, mental, and aesthetic stimulation that will make you happy and fulfilled; the money you require for the lifestyle that is appropriate to you; and any requirement that you may (or may not) have for achievement or service to others. If you don’t aim for it all, you’ll never get it all. To aim for it requires that you know what you want” ~ Richard Koch
“Confidence comes not from always being right but not fearing to be wrong”
“Your time is limited, don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma, which is living the result of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of other’s opinion drowned your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition, they somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.” – Steve Jobs
Erik Verlinde’s proposal of the emergence of the gravitational force as an entropic force is extended to abelian and non-abelian gauge fields and to matter fields. This suggests a picture with no fundamental forces or forms of matter whatsoever.And the appreciation:
I wish to thank Erik Verlinde for very helpful correspondence from which it is clear that he independently has also arrived at the conclusion that not only gravity, but all gauge fields should be emergent.Geoffrey Chew's failed "bootstrap program" of the sixties - much the same reminiscing theoretical idea:
It is as if assuming certain forces and forms of matter to be fundamental is tantamount (in the sense of an effective theory) to assuming that there are no fundamental forces or forms of matter whatsoever, and everything is emergent. This latter picture in which nothing is fundamental is reminiscent of Chew’s bootstrap approach, the original breeding ground of string theory. Could it be that after all its mathematically and physically exquisite developments, string theory has returned to its birthplace?It is still puzzling to me as to why this is a good thing. During David Gross' (a former student of Chew's) Nobel prize lecture, he explains:
I can remember the precise moment at which I was disillusioned with the bootstrap program. This was at the 1966 Rochester meeting, held at Berkeley. Francis Low, in the session following his talk, remarked that the bootstrap was less of a theory than a tautology…
With only three elements to consider, our algorithm will not take very long to complete. But, if we are trying to determine why our computer won't turn on, we are presented with more elements to consider: Is it plugged in? Is it frozen? Does it need to be rebooted? Does the operating software need to be re-installed? Is it broken? And so on.1. The lamp is not plugged in.
2. The light bulb is burnt out.
3. The lamp is broken.
Leonardo Da Vinci, the great Italian renaissance man who changed our views of both art and science in such a way that modern civilizations still adore and admire his work. His accomplishments are unprecedented, a worldly known brilliant polymath whose unquenchable curiosity was equaled only by his powers of invention. There is no doubt that he is perhaps the greatest person in history, the only man to have attempted to know everything there is to know. His influences encompassed the world of arts, science & technology, and even invented new mechanisms that have revolutionized mankind. Astonishing feats of engineering were established 500 years ago, perhaps surpassing that of our modern era. He is a portrait of a genius of extraordinary diversity.
Leonardo was and is best known as an artist, the creator of such masterpieces as the Mona Lisa and The Last Supper, the most well known paintings of all time. His astonishing works of beauty still captivate and inspire people worldwide. His paintings became famous, and only rivaled by Michelangelo’s creation of Adam. When drawing his masterpiece, the Mona Lisa, his dedication and perseverance in achieving perfection caused him 10 years of his life, only to have painted the lips. In 1466, at the age of fourteen, Leonardo was apprenticed to the artist Andrea di Cione, known as Verrocchio. Other famous painters apprenticed there include Domenico Ghirlandaio, Perugino, Botticelli, and Lorenzo di Credi. Leonardo’s earliest known dated work while there is a drawing in pen and ink of the Arno Valley, drawn on August 5th, 1473. He was commissioned to paint the Virgin of the Rocks for the confraternity of the Immaculate Conception, and The Last Supper for the Monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie. In January 1478, he received his first independent commission, to paint an altarpiece for the Chapel of St Bernard in the Palazzo Vecchio and The adoration of the Magi in March 1481 for the monks of San Donato a Scopeto. On Octover 18, 1503, he spent two years designing and painting a great mural of the Battle of Anghiari, with Michelangelo designing its companion piece, the Battle of Cascina. In both theory and practice, Leonardo’s artistic influence in the 16th and 17th century Europe, notably France, Spain, Flanders, and Germany was immense, as to have dedicated numerous museums and organizations in his honour. To this day only 15 of his paintings have survived, which have inspired and captivated millions world-wide.
Leonardo’s scientific contributions are brilliant and revolutionary for his time. His new views of the universe and nature are very accurate according to modern science, which is without a doubt a staggering feat for a man who had little to go by. His vision of the world is essentially logic rather than mystery. His personal notebook, which was discovered all over Europe in pieces, reveals correct interpretations of the human anatomy, explanations of physical concepts such as inertia, and sketches for various engineering marvels, such as conceptualizations of a helicopter, a tank, concentrated solar power, a calculator, the double hull and outlined a rudimentary theory of plate tectonics. Additionally, there are compositions for paintings, studies of details and drapery, studies of faces and emotions, of animals, babies, dissections, plant studies, rock formation, and even whirl pools. As a child, Leonardo received informal education in Latin, geometry and mathematics but did not show any particular signs of aptitude. Leonardo’s approach to science was an observational one: he tried to understand a phenomenon by describing and depicting it in utmost detail, and did not emphasize experiments or theoretical explanation. In the 1490’s, while studying mathematics under Luca Pacioli, he prepared a series of drawings of regular solids in skeletal form to be engraved as plates for Pacioli’s book De Divina Proportione, published in 1509. A recent and exhaustive analysis of Leonardo as a scientist by Frtjof Capra argues that Leonardo was a fundamentally different kind of scientist from Galileo, Newton, and other scientists who followed him, whom were more of specialized rather than diverse.
During his lifetime, Leonardo was highly valued as an engineer & a gifted inventor. He created mechanisms never thought of that had influenced people of average status to soldiers in the military. One of his famous inventions, still in use today, is an everyday tool – the scissor. He greatly advanced the state of knowledge in the fields of anatomy, civil engineering, optics, and hydrodynamics. After knowing Ludovico il Moro, Duke of Milan, he went on to produce many different projects for him, including the preparation of floats and pageants for special occasions, designs for a dome for Milan Cathedral, and a model for a huge equestrian monument. When Ludovico was overthrown, Leonardo fled Milan for Venice, where he was employed as a military architect and engineer, devising methods to defend the city from naval attack. He devised a system of moveable barricades to protect the city from attack. While in that position, Leonardo went on to create several maps, which were extremely rare at the time and it would have seemed like a new concept, even though only a few handful of people had seen and known how to use a map. When he returned to the Vatican in Rome, he made a mechanical lion which could walk forward, then open its chest to reveal a cluster of lilies, and also designed wings and shoes for walking on water. Da Vinci also invented musical instruments, such as a keyboard instrument with strings, which made sound via a wheel, horsehair strap, and a bow – a lot like a modern violin. His list of inventions rivals that of Thomas Edison, and continued to do so when building hydraulic pumps, reversible crank mechanisms, finned mortal shells, and even the steam cannon. Big leaps in thought were established during this ‘Da Vinci’ era.
Born in Vinci, Florence on April 15 1452, Leonardo di ser Piero Da Vinci, a man born with remarkable talents that some say transcends from God, displayed infinite grace in everything he did and cultivated his genius so brilliantly that all problems he studied were solved with ease. As Giorgio Vasari once stated, “all his actions seem inspired and indeed everything he does clearly comes from God rather than from human skill.” As a painter, sculptor, architect, musician, mathematician, engineer, inventor, anatomist, geologist, cartographer, botanist, and writer, his works and accomplishments speak for themselves, and through extensive research there is no doubt that he is perhaps the greatest man to have ever lived that has influenced people of such broad perspectives. His death on May 2nd, 1519 only marked the beginning of a new era that has forever changed mankind. In 2003, American author Dan Brown based a fiction novel entitled “The Da Vinci Code”, that sold 80 million copies as of 2009, and went on to be produced into a blockbuster movie.
S(1,n) = 1
S(2,n) = 2n-2xS(1,n)
S(3,n) = 3n-3xS(2,n)-3xS(1,n)
S(4,n) = 4n-4xS(3,n)-6xS(2,n)-4xS(1,n)
S(5,n) = 5n-5xS(4,n)-10xS(3,n)-10xS(2,n)-5xS(1,n)
S(6,n) = 6n-6xS(5,n)-15xS(4,n)-20xS(3,n)-15xS(2,n)-6xS(1,n)
S(7,n) = 7n-7xS(6,n)-21xS(5,n)-35xS(4,n)-35xS(3,n)-21xS(2,n)-7xS(1,n)
T(7,n) = S(7,n)
T(6,n) = T(7,n)+7xS(6,n)
T(5,n) = T(6,n)+21xS(5,n)
T(4,n) = T(5,n)+35xS(4,n)
T(3,n) = T(4,n)+35xS(3,n)
T(2,n) = T(3,n)+21xS(2,n)
T(1,n) = T(2,n)+7xS(1,n)
I have been recently reading Neil Turok & Paul Steinhardt's new book "The Endless Universe - Beyond the Big Bang" which I bought at the Quantum to Cosmos festival held at Waterloo a few months ago. This book provides a fascinating glimpse into the process of cosmological and theoretical physics research. Both authors recount their personal history, their introduction to cosmology, and how they became involved in research related to the Big Bang theory. Overall, a great read for those anxious of physics related advancements since the 2000s. Here is a snippet of one of my favourite chapters.
Let’s talk physics history. An ever-so exciting tale of young physicists that changed the mindset of physics for decades to come since the late 1960s.
“Make everything as simple as possible but not simpler.” – Albert Einstein.
Nowhere was the optimism of particle physicists in the early 1980s more evident than at the annual Workshop on Grand Unification, known by the acronym WOGU (pronounced “whoa-goo”). Each spring the leading physicists, their postdoctoral fellows, and their students would gather at a different site to discuss the latest experimental breakthroughs and theoretical advances. Every year, the exciting presentations at WOGU seemed to engender new confidence that quantum field theory and grand unification were on track … until the fourth WOGU, when a soft spoken young theorist politely suggested that a sharp turn in the current thinking might be needed.
The meeting took place in April 1983 at the University of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia, about fifty miles from Princeton, New Jersey, the home of Edward Witten. Only thirty-two years old at the time, he was already recognized as a theoretical physicist of great vision. For years, he had been a much admired pioneer in exploring the theoretical underpinnings of grand unification.
When Witten was invited by one of WOGU’s organizers to give a presentation, surprisingly, Witten was reluctant to accept. He explained that he was working on something new and was not sure the topic would be appropriate for a meeting on grand unified theories. That only made the prospect more intriguing, and so with persistence, Witten finally agreed to speak.
When the time came for Witten to talk, the last of the meeting, the auditorium was packed to standing room only. In his characteristic calm and gentle voice, Witten began by noting ways in which the current attempts at grand unification were failing. The most dramatic prediction, the instability of protons, had been tested, but no decays had been seen. The predictions of the masses of matter particles had also turned out wrong. Physicists could adjust the models to evade these problems, but only at the cost of adding ugly complications that made the whole framework implausible.
Witten then suggested that it might be time to consider a totally new approach. He proposed three guiding principles. First, the new approach should include gravity from the outset. Particle physicists were used to ignoring gravity because the gravitational attraction between elementary particles is normally negligible. However, when particles were smashed together at high energies, their collective mass rises in accordance with Einstein’s famous equations E = mc2, and the effects of gravity become stronger and stronger. At the very high energies where the strong and electroweak forces seem to merge into a single unified force, gravity is nearly as strong. For this reason, Witten argues, gravity has to be included in any theory of unification.
Dealing with gravity would be no easy task. Einstein had developed his theory of gravity in the early part of the twentieth century, at the same time that quantum theory was emerging. Despite all attempts, the two strands of physics had never been successfully joined. Einstein’s theory works tremendously well on large scales for describing gravity on the Earth, the solar system, and in the universe. But just like electromagnetism and light, gravity must be formulated in a way that is consistent with the laws of quantum physics in order to make sense on microscopic scales. For the other three forces, the quantum field approach had been spectacularly successful. But for gravity, every attempt to quantize Einstein’s theory had failed, leading to infinities, negative probabilities, or, at best, an infinite number of indeterminate parameters. A totally new approach was needed, one that would give a sensible answer.
Everyone in the audience knew about these difficulties in building a quantum theory of gravity. So all in attendance were naturally anxious to learn what Witten had in mind. Witten emphasized that he did not deserve credit for the idea he was going to suggest. Hard work had been done by a small, intrepid group of theorists working largely unnoticed and unappreciated. But Witten was now advocating, as his second principle, considering their daring proposal: a conceptual framework known as string theory.
Many in the auditorium had heard of string theory before, but most knew little about its history because it had had little impact on mainstream particle physics or cosmology up to that point. String theory had been developed in a rather roundabout way.
In 1968, Gabriele Veneziano at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) had proposed a formula for describing the scattering of nuclear particles interacting via the strong nuclear force. In 1970, Yoichiro Nambu at the University of Chicago, Holger Nielsen at the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen, and Leonard Susskind, then at Belfer Graduate College in Israel and now at Stanford University, showed that Veneziano’s formula could be interpreted as a model of vibrating one-dimensional strings. Unfortunately, it was soon discovered that the model had various pathologies, such as a tachyon, a physically impossible particle that moves faster than light. But this problem was cured as people realized that string theory was much more than a theory of nuclear particles. First, Joel Scherk at the Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris and John Schwarz at the California Institute of Technology showed that string theory included a particle behaving like a graviton, the troublesome quantum of Einstein’s theory of gravity. Then, by incorporating matter particles using a powerful new quantum symmetry called super-symmetry, Scherk with David Olive and other physicists managed to construct a completely consistent model with no tachyon.
In this way, the theory originally designed to describe the strong nuclear force was suddenly transformed into a unified theory with the potential to describe all the forces and particles in nature, including quantized gravity. But these developments went largely unnoticed. The 1970s were the heyday of quantum field theory, and string theory was seen as a speculative backwater. A few lonely theorists continued to struggle to develop the theory and iron out its remaining mathematical difficulties. This was a daunting and slow process, since few people were willing to risk working on the subject.
Witten’s talk went on to describe the advantages of reinterpreting elementary particles as tiny spinning bits of string. Just as Einstein pictures three-dimensional space as an elastic substance that can be stretched and distorted, you can think of string as a geometrical curve with no width that can bend and turn in all possible ways, like an infinitely thin strand of rubber. The string is perfectly elastic, so it can shrink to a point or be stretched out to an arbitrary length. If you stretch a piece of string out in a straight line, the free ends pull together with a fixed force called the string tension.
Some of the properties of string are actually very similar to those of cosmic strings. But whereas cosmic strings are really twisted-up configurations of fields with a minuscule but finite width, fundamental strings are ideal one-dimensional mathematical curves.
The string picture is beautiful in that one basic entity – string – can potentially account for the myriad of elementary particles observed in nature. Bits of string vibrate and spin, in certain specific quantized motions. Each new quantized state has a set of physical attributes: mass, charge, and spin. The little pieces of string describing photons, electrons, or gravitons are far too tiny to be seen, much less than a trillionth the diameter of a proton. To us, they appear like pointlike particles. But if string theory is correct, the masses, charges, ad spins of these little bits of string should precisely match the physical properties of all of the particles ever discovered.
Witten was especially attracted to this picture because it included gravitons as a hidden bonus, as Scherk and Schwarz had first shown. Bits of string with two free ends could account for all known types of matter particles. But the mathematics of string also allows for closed loops, like tiny elastic bands. When vibrating and spinning in just the right way, these loops have the same properties as gravitons, the quanta of the gravitational field. Even better, while calculations assuming pointlike particles and gravitons give nonsensical, infinite answers, calculations for stringy particles and loopy gravitons produce sensible, finite results. Although not designed for the purpose, string theory appears to automatically incorporate a theory of quantum gravity without infinities.
The reason string theory works where the particle description of quantum field theory fails can be explained by simple geometry. If two pointlike particles collide, their energy is concentrated at a point. Such pileups of energy cause a large gravitational field, curving space and drawing even more energy into the region. A runaway process ensues in which space curls up irretrievably into a tinier and tinier knot: a singularity. This catastrophe leads to mathematical infinities signaling a breakdown of the theory. On the other hand, if particles are tiny vibrating strings, their energy is spread out. If a collision causes a momentary pileup of energy, the string rapidly wriggles away and spreads out the energy, preventing the gravitational distortion from concentrating in one spot. Calculations of what happens when two bits of string collide, join, and break apart again give sensible, finite results. There are no singularities, and no infinities.
Witten’s third guiding principle dealt with the major hitch theorists had previously discovered about string theory. The equations describing the quantized vibrations of strings give sensible answers only if the number of spatial dimensions is nine. Nine!? To most physicists, this seemed absurd. Why study a theory that predicts six extra dimensions of space that have never been seen?
Witten addressed the problem of extra dimensions head-on: Learn to live with them, he said. Just accept the six extra dimensions of string theory; they are an essential aspect of the geometry of the universe. He reminded the audience that back in the 1920s the Swedish physicist Oskar Klein, building on the work of the German physicist Theodor Kaluza, had dreamed up a way of linking Maxwell’s electromagnetic theory with Einstein’s theory of gravity, in a model of the universe where one extra dimension of space was hidden from view.
To see how this works, consider the surface of a long soda straw. From a long distance away, it appears to be one-dimensional because you cannot detect its thickness. But up close, you can see the surface of the straw. To prove to yourself that the surface is two dimensional, slit the straw along its length and flatten it out. You will get a rectangle, a shape that is obviously two dimensional because it has both length and width.
Klein supposed that in addition to the three familiar dimensions of height, width, and length, there is a fourth dimension of space that is curled up in a circle so tiny that it cannot normally be seen. Kaluza and Klein’s remarkable discovery was that Einstein’s theory of gravity in four space dimensions, with one of the dimensions curled up as described, contained both Einstein’s theory of gravity in the remaining three extended dimensions and Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetism. Electric and magnetic fields arise, in this picture, from a “twisting” of the small extra dimension as you move along one of the large everyday dimensions.
According to Witten, theorists simply had to adapt Klein’s idea to the six extra spatial dimensions in string theory. There is no problem having strings wiggle in nine spatial dimensions, so long as six of the spatial dimensions are too small to be seen.
The extra dimensions would exist at every point in three-dimensional space. As an analogy, I’m going to use a rather famous one - consider a pile carpet made of woolen loops. To us, looking from above, it appears as a two-dimensional surface. But to an ant it seems like a huge forest of loops. At any point, the ant can choose to run along the direction of the floor, that is, along one of the two extended dimensions, or around one of the woolen loops that describe the curled-up dimension. In the same way, the extra dimensions in Kaluza and Klein’s approach are invisible, because their tiny size is too small to be seen. But in principle, with a very powerful microscope using very short wave-length radiation, one would be able, like the ants on the pile carpet, to see the convoluted structure of the extra dimensions on tiny length scales.
Witten framed his lecture carefully and peppered it with qualifications, but his message was clear. In a mere forty minutes, he made a compelling case that theories of grand unification were incomplete and that gravity, strings, and extra dimensions ought to be considered. Research on the fundamental laws of physics could be headed toward a revolution, he quietly suggested. You could have heard a pin drop in the auditorium as many physicists described. The audience was stunned, unsure how seriously to take Witten’s remarks.
Through the remainder of 1983, there were few signs that anything was going to change. During the Aspen summer workshop that year, for example, the talk was almost all about grand unification and field theory. But, sure enough, Witten’s lecture was the harbinger of a revolution that would soon sweep the world. The “first string revolution,” as it has been called, was ignited a year later at the 1984 Aspen workshop when Michael Green, then at Queen Mary College, London (now at Cambridge), and John Schwarz overcame a key mathematical roadblock in the construction of realistic string theories.
Until that point, there were many versions of string theory with different ways of folding the extra dimensions, but they all seemed to be fatally flawed. Witten had recently shown that many versions of string theory are unacceptable because they violate the conservation of energy through a quantum effect known as an anomaly. Green and Schwarz’s breakthrough was the identification of a special version of string theory that had realistic matter particles and no anomalies. Now, for the first time, one could point to a quantum theory that incorporated gravity and other forces and gave finite, sensible answers.
Working at Princeton, David Gross, one of the leading pioneers of unified quantum field theories (now director of the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics in Santa Barbara), along with Jeffrey Harvey and Emil Martinec (both now at the University of Chicago) and Ryan Rohm (now at Boston University) produced a compelling example known as heterotic string theory. The word heterotic, meaning hybrid, was added because it combined different versions of string theory to obtain one that has more of the ingredients needed to make a realistic theory of elementary particle physics. (A later, further improved form, heterotic M theory, was the stimulus for the Cyclic model of the universe.) These successes, and others that followed in rapid succession, captivated the international community of theoretical physicists. Almost overnight, it seemed, the focus of research shifted from particles to strings. And the merger of fundamental physics and cosmology that had seemed imminent in 1983 was put on hold.
On an unrelated note, i'm going to be posting less often as exam season is approaching. Oh the suspense ... Hooray for new banner & layout!