Text Size


Tag » David Gross

On Mar 4, 2014, at 11:30 AM, JACK SARFATTI <jacksarfatti@gmail.com> wrote:

"(dS4) is holographically dual to a three-dimensional conformal field theory
(CFT3) living on the spacelike boundary of dS4 at future timelike infinity. The CFT3 is the Euclidean Sp(N) vector model with anticommuting scalars”

CFT3/Sp(N) must be the software running on the dS4 future horizon hardware

"The AdS/CFT correspondence provides a non-perturbative holographic definition of anti-de Sitter (AdS) quantum gravity in terms of a CFT living on the timelike conformal boundary of AdS."

“living” quite literally from non-unitary signal nonlocality violating Shimony’s “passion at a distance."

"Our own universe is unlikely to have an anti-de Sitter boundary, but may well have a de Sitter (dS) boundary in the far future. This dS boundary shares a number of mathematical properties with the AdS boundary. Hence it is natural to try to define dS quantum gravity in terms of a CFT living on the future conformal boundary of dS [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. One key difference is that in AdS/CFT, the radial direction emerges holographically from the CFT,
while in dS/CFT time itself must be holographically emergent. It is challenging to reconcile this with our usual quantum notions of unitary time evolution.”

I have come to drive the priests of unitarity out of the Temple. 

Subquantum Information and Computation
Antony Valentini
(Submitted on 11 Mar 2002 (v1), last revised 12 Apr 2002 (this version, v2))
It is argued that immense physical resources - for nonlocal communication, espionage, and exponentially-fast computation - are hidden from us by quantum noise, and that this noise is not fundamental but merely a property of an equilibrium state in which the universe happens to be at the present time. It is suggested that 'non-quantum' or nonequilibrium matter might exist today in the form of relic particles from the early universe. We describe how such matter could be detected and put to practical use. Nonequilibrium matter could be used to send instantaneous signals, to violate the uncertainty principle, to distinguish non-orthogonal quantum states without disturbing them, to eavesdrop on quantum key distribution, and to outpace quantum computation (solving NP-complete problems in polynomial time).

"A second key difference is that we have had no useful microscopically complete examples of the dS/CFT correspondence. This has stymied progress in the subject and at times rendered the discussions somewhat formal.1 It is the purpose of this paper to begin to fill this gap."

to be continued.

On Mar 4, 2014, at 10:58 AM, JACK SARFATTI <jacksarfatti@icloud.com> wrote:

No, but I claim I have done exactly that! Of course like the Cardinals in the Curia of Rodrigo Borgia there will be schisms on this. 
See Michael Towler's Lecture 8 of his online Bohm course @ Cambridge

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 4, 2014, at 9:58 AM, Deepak Chopra <wrote:

Can any theory be called Grand Unified in the absence of mind / matter unification ? 

2013 Costa Del Mar Road
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Dream Weaver
The Chopra Center for Wellbeing
The Chopra Foundation
Chopra Connect

On Mar 4, 2014, at 9:41 AM, "Jack Sarfatti" <jacksarfatti@gmail.com> wrote:

Note that it's nonunitary hence signal nonlocality hence conscious in my model
So my intuition or precognition shall we say may prove right
The future boundary the brane  of Hawking's mind of I j good's "god(d)" is a conscious computer 
So Seth the Lloyd 

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 3, 2014, at 8:52 PM, JACK SARFATTI <jacksarfatti@icloud.com> wrote:

Excellent just what I was looking for thanks

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 3, 2014, at 8:32 PM, Saul-Paul and Mary-Minn Sirag <sirag@mindspring.com> wrote:

For ds/CFT check out Strominger et al:


But as David Gross points out in his talk, AdS/CFT has been used to correctly model the quark-gluan plasma created at Brookhaven. 

On Mar 3, 2014, at 8:25 PM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

Yes I have said that many times
It's obvious for cosmology
But I think they model black holes in higher dimensions with it as well?
We need a dS/CFT

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 3, 2014, at 8:21 PM, Saul-Paul and Mary-Minn Sirag <sirag@mindspring.com> wrote:

There's an easier way to falsify AdS.
Simply point out that AdS requires a negative cosmological constant, while the observational evidence is for a small positive cosmic constant---thus the dark energy picture. 

However the superstring theory as a quantum gravity theory deals mainly with physics at the Planck scale, where things can be quite different. 

On Mar 3, 2014, at 7:25 PM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

Of course I know who gross is I have even eaten at table with him at ucsb
But if bizon is right in his claim that's the end of it
Can't have it both ways

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 3, 2014, at 7:20 PM, Saul-Paul and Mary-Minn Sirag <sirag@mindspring.com> wrote:

David Gross doesn't mention Bizon's claim of AdS instabiility at all.
Probably Gross considers it as irrelevant to the AdS/CFT duality.

You should watch the David Gross YouTube talk, anyway.

Certainly Gross would be familiar with Bizon's claims, since he has presented it at KITP-UCSB in Feb. 2012.
Note that David Gross is the director of KITP-UCSB.
Also Bizon's paper on this has been on the web since 2011.


Bizon tests the stability of Einstein's GR equations in 4-d AdS
He claims in the last paragraph that 5-d AdS is also unstable, but doesn't demonstrate this.

5 AdS is unphysical - Jack

However, the AdS/CFT theorem is based on IIB superstring theory whose 10 dimensions are asymtotically the 10-d space AdS_5 x S^5.
The CFT theory is an SU(N) theory (with N being large) on the 4-d boundary of AdS_5.

As David Gross describes in his YouTube talk, the 4-d boundary at infinity of AdS_5 is 4-d Minkowski space. 

So the quantum gravity theory entailed in this picture is radically different from applying Einstein's equations to AdS_4 or AdS_5. 

All for now;)
On Mar 3, 2014, at 5:01 PM, JACK SARFATTI wrote:

so what? 

"On the mathematical and numerical side, Prof. Piotr Bizon presented his striking result that the anti-de Sitter space-time, is unstable in full, non-linear general relativity although it was known to be perturbatively stable. This is surprising both because it has been known for some time that de Sitter space-time and Minkowski space-time are non-linearly stable and because the anti-de Sitter space-time is assumed to represent the ‘ground state’ in the
ADS/CFT correspondence.” GR20/Amaldi10 Conference held at Warsaw, Poland
Abhay Ashtekar, IGC, Penn State ashtekar@gravity.ps.edu

Are you saying that Bizon’s result is wrong? I mean did Gross say Bizon was wrong?

Note that our universe is deSitter in the future and that is allegedly stable.

dark energy density ~ hc/Lp^2A

A = area-entropy of our far future de Sitter event horizon computer of ~ 10^124 qubits

so Seth the Lloyd! 

On Mar 3, 2014, at 4:43 PM, Saul-Paul and Mary-Minn Sirag <sirag@mindspring.com> wrote:

But see the strong endorsement of AdS/CFT by David Gross at the Dyson Festschrift a month after the GR 20 conference'


At the end Gross makes the point the Spacetime seems to be Emergent.

That is a separate point not connected. I have been saying it’s emergent for years, but there are many different ideas of emergence. I don’t think that AdS/CFT being wrong would deny such emergence?

All for now;-)
On Mar 3, 2014, at 12:54 PM, JACK SARFATTI wrote: