Distress полностью

"He might have had better luck with Mystical Renaissance. He's a self-described Buddhist, so they almost forgive him for working on TOEs. So long as he didn't remind them that he once wrote that The Tao of Physics was to Zen what a Creation Science biology text was to Christianity."

Mosala reached up and started massaging the back of her neck, as if talk of the journey was rekindling its symptoms. "I would have brought Pinda, if the flight had been shorter. She would have loved it here. Left me to my boring lectures, and dragged her father off to explore the reefs."

"How old is she?"

"Three and a bit." She glanced at her watch and complained wistfully, "It's still only four in the morning, back home. Not much chance of a call from her, for two or three hours."

It was another opportunity to raise the emigration rumors—but I held off, yet again.

We resumed the interview. The beam from the skylight had shifted to the east, leaving Mosala almost silhouetted against the window and a dazzling blue sky. When I invoked Witness again, it reached up into my retinas and made some adjustments, enabling me to register the fine details other face in spite of the back-lighting.

I moved on to the question of Helen Wu's analysis.

Mosala explained, "My TOE predicts the outcome of various experiments, given a detailed description of the apparatus involved: details which 'betray' clues about all the less-fundamental physics which—some people insist—a TOE is meant to pull out of thin air, all by itself. But unraveling those clues certainly isn't trivial. You or I can't just glance at an idle particle accelerator and predict, instantly, the outcome of any experiment which might be performed with the machine."

"But a supercomputer, programmed with your TOE, can. So is that good, bad, or indifferent… are you guilty of circular logic, or not?"

Mosala seemed unsure of the verdict, herself. "Helen and I have been talking it over, trying to thrash out exactly what it means. I have to confess that I started out resenting what she was doing—and then ignoring most of her later work. Now, though… I'm beginning to find it very exciting."

"Why?"

She hesitated. It was clear that her ideas on this were too new, too unformed; she really didn't want to say anything more. But I waited patiently, without prompting her, and she finally relented.

"Ask yourself this: If Buzzo or Nishide can come up with a TOE in which the whole universe is more or less implicit in a detailed description of the Big Bang—details deduced, right here and now, from observations of helium abundance, galactic clustering, the cosmic background radiation, and so on—no one accuses them of circular logic. Feeding in the results of any number of 'telescope experiments' is fine, apparently. So why is it any more 'circular' to have a TOE in which the universe is implicit in the details of ten contemporary particle physics experiments'

I said, "Okay. But isn't Helen Wu saying that your equations have virtually no physical content at all? I mean, no amount of pure mathematics could ever produce Newton's law of gravity—because there's no purely mathematical reason why the inverse square law couldn't be replaced by something different. The whole basis for it lies in the way the universe happens to work. Isn't Wu trying to show that your TOE doesn't rely on anything out there in the world—that it collapses into a lot of statements about numbers, which simply have to be true?"

Mosala replied, frustrated, "Yes! But even if she's right… when those 'statements which have to be true' are coupled with real, tangible experiments—which are very much 'out there in the world'—the theory ceases to be pure mathematics… in the same way that the pure symmetry of pre-space ceases to be symmetrical.

"Newton came up with the inverse square law by analyzing existing astronomical observations. By treating the solar system in the way I treat a particle accelerator: saying, 'This much we know for a fact.' Later, the law was used to make predictions and those predictions turned out to be correct. Okay… but where exactly does the physical content reside, in that whole process? With the inverse-square law itself… or with the observed motions of the planets, from which that equation was deduced in the first place? Because if you stop treating Newton's law as something given, standing outside the whole show as an eternal truth, and look at… the link, the bridge… between all the different planets orbiting different stars, coexisting in the same universe, having to be consistent with each other… what you're doing starts to become much more like pure mathematics."