Strings 2012 public lectures

After the end of SFT VI, I had one extra day in Munich, and I attended two public lectures associated with the Strings 2012 conference. The main conference was at the same time as SFT VI, and also there was a 35o Euro fee to attend, so I didn’t go to any of it. (I don’t understand why physics conferences often charge substantial admission fees, while mathematics conference usually charge little or nothing. Is it because of different funding models? Or just to keep the crackpots out?) Anyway I was lucky to be in the right place at the right time to attend the public lectures.

The room was packed with nearly 1000 people and uncomfortably hot.

The first lecture was by Prof. Heuer, director of CERN, on “Die Weltmaschine LHC am CERN: Einblicke in das frühe Universum”. I didn’t understand it very well because both German and physics are foreign languages for me, and the sound quality was poor (I could understand most of Witten’s talk only because almost everything was written on the slides), but here is what I got out of it: (1) CERN is awesome (I guess I already knew that). (2) What they just discovered might be the Higgs boson, or it might be just one of several scalar fields. They are hoping to discover more scalar fields which could be consituents of dark matter. (3) “The air is thin” for supersymmetry, but they might be seeing something beyond the Standard Model “in the charm regime”.

It seems like a dangerous public relations strategy to raise expectations too high (e.g. to raise expectations for finding constituents of dark matter), since no one knows what, if anything, the LHC is going to find beyond the Standard Model. Anyway they will soon shut it down for two years to double its energy, and everyone is hoping they will find something new after that.

The second lecture was by Witten on “String theory and the Universe”. It was mostly a review of standard things which I have heard before. The most interesting part was the question period afterwards. The first questioner launched into a very aggressive rant about how Witten was abusing his scientific responsibility by leading thousands of people to waste their intelligence on a theory for which there is no experimental evidence.  The chairman basically needed to shut him up (and should have done so earlier). Anyway Witten answered: (1) Some things take time, look at how long it was from when the Higgs particle was predicted to when it was discovered, (2) [I think what he said is that] since quantum mechanics and relativity are incompatible we need to work on reconciling them, (3) [I couldn’t hear what he said.] (Of course, mathematics has benefitted enormously from Witten’s discoveries, even if not all the fundamental problems of theoretical physics have been solved yet.) Someone else asked (in a much more reasonable tone) about alternative approaches to quantum gravity. Witten said that some approaches which had been considered as competitors, such as twistor theory, had been absorbed into string theory. He said something else about loop quantum gravity which I couldn’t make out.

Anyway I was kind of shocked to see such an agressive attack from the general public. I’m glad I don’t have questioners attacking me because my work does not have enough real-world applications or whatever.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Strings 2012 public lectures

  1. Pingback: Strings 2012 | Not Even Wrong

  2. Prof. Dr. F. Winterberg says:

    I met Professor Witten at the Avatars of string theory meeting in Santa Barbara, I think it was in 2000, where I told him supersymmetry can exist without string theory but not the other way around. He replied that you can say something like that about any theory. But now it appears that SUSY is dead. Without SUSY the Higgs mass should be the Planck mass, but not 125 GeV. I rather suspect that the vacuum is a kind of plasma made up from positive and negative Planck masses with the fermions receiving their mass from the positive gravitational interaction energy of a positive mass quasiparticle gravitationally interacting with a negative mass quasiparticle of this plasma. Why then can the Higgs particle not be a spin 2 graviton, solving the hierarchy problem?

    • Witten said there still might be “split supersymmetry” in which we wouldn’t see certain superpartners. But I am just repeating words I have heard without any understanding of them; if you want to discuss physics details it might be better to do so on Peter Woit’s blog.

      Another thing which fascinates me as a layperson is the process of evauating and interpreting the mass of data from the LHC. In the first talk, Heuer compared looking for the Higgs with “looking for a needle in a haystack where the haystack is made out of needles”. In this situation, how does one go about looking for something new and unexpected? Anyway, exciting stuff…

  3. Peter Woit says:

    Hi Michael,

    Good question! There are some generic things you might expect a new very massive particle to do which you can look for, but it’s all too conceivable that something unexpected is happening at the LHC, but the right kind of analysis needed to see it is not being done. Perhaps the best argument for lots of dubious speculative theorizing about things like extra dimensions and SUSY at the LHC is that it provides a range of specific things for the experimentalists to look for. When looking for these, they could find something else turning up.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s