Distress полностью

The ultimate test of a TOE was to answer questions like: "What is the probability of a ten-gigaelectronvolt neutrino fired at a stationary proton scattering off a down quark and emerging at a certain angle?"… or even just: "What is the mass of an electron?" Essentially, Mosala prefixed all such questions with the condition: "Given that we know that space-time is roughly four-dimensional, and total space is roughly ten-dimensional, and the apparatus used to perform the experiment consists, approximately, of the following…"

Her supporters said she was merely setting everything in context. No experiment happened in isolation; quantum mechanics had been hammering that point home for the last hundred and twenty years. Asking a Theory of Everything to predict the chance of observing some microscopic event—without adding the proviso that "there is a universe, and it contains, among other things, equipment for detecting the event in question"—would be as nonsensical as asking: "If you pick a marble out of a bag, what are the odds that it will be green?"

Her critics said she used circular reasoning, assuming from the very beginning all the results she was trying to prove. The details she fed into her computations included so much about the known physics of the experimental apparatus that—indirectly, but inevitably—they gave the whole game away.

I was hardly qualified to come down on either side… but it seemed to me that Mosala's opponents were being hypocritical, because they were pulling the same trick under a different guise: the alternatives they offered all invoked a cosmological fix. They declared that "before" the Big Bang and the creation of time (or "adjoining" the event, to avoid the oxymoron), there had been nothing but a perfectly symmetrical "pre-space," in which all topologies carried equal weight… and the "average result" of most familiar physical quantities would have been infinite. Pre-space was sometimes called "infinitely hot"; it could be thought of as the kind of perfectly balanced chaos which space-time would become if so much energy was poured into it that literally everything became equally possible. Everything and its opposite; the net result was that nothing happened at all.

But some local fluctuation had disturbed the balance in such a way as to give rise to the Big Bang. From that tiny accident, our universe had burst into existence. Once that had happened, the original "infinitely hot," infinitely even-handed mixture of topologies had been forced to become ever more biased, because "temperature" and "energy" now had a meaning—and in an expanding, cooling universe, most of the "hot" old symmetries would have been as unstable as molten metal thrown into a lake. And when they'd cooled, the shapes into which they'd frozen had just happened to favor topologies close to a certain ten-dimensional total space—one which gave rise to particles like quarks and electrons, and forces like gravity and electromagnetism.

By this logic, the only correct way to sum over all the topologies was to incorporate the fact that our universe had—by chance—emerged from pre-space in a certain way. Details of the broken symmetry had to be fed into the equations "by hand"—because there was no reason why they couldn't have been utterly different. And if the physics resulting from this accident seemed improbably conducive to the formation of stars, planets, and life… then this universe was just one of a vast number which had frozen out of pre-space, each with a different set of particles and forces. If every possible set had been tried, it was hardly surprising that at least one of them had turned out to be favorable to life.

It was the old anthropic principle, the fudge which had saved a thousand cosmologies. And I had no real argument with it even if all the other universes were destined to be forever hypothetical.

But Violet Mosala's methods seemed neither more nor less circular. Her opponents had to "fine tune" a few parameters in their equations, to take account of the particular universe "our" Big Bang had created. Mosala and her supporters merely described real experiments in the real world so thoroughly that they "showed the equations" the very same thing.

It seemed to me that both groups of physicists were confessing, however reluctantly, that they couldn't quite explain how the universe was built… without mentioning the fact that they were there inside it, looking for the explanation.