The universe could teach itself to evolve into a better, more stable cosmos – that’s the far-fetched idea of a team of scientists who say they are reinventing the universe, just as Darwin renewed our view of the natural world. tries to explain why the laws of physics are as we see them by using a mathematical framework to describe various proposed theories in physics, such as: B. Quantum field theories and quantum gravity. The result is a system that resembles a machine learning program.
Laws and quantities with fixed values to define the universe. From the mass of an electron to gravity, there are many specific constants in the universe which, due to their precise and seemingly patternless values, appear arbitrary to the laws of physics, but why do they prove to be what they are, why do they take shape who they are, “said author William Cunningham, physicist and software director at quantum computing startup Agnostiq.” There is no reason. Obviously, Why One [Law] is Preferred Over Another
A Self-Didactic System
To answer this question, the group wondered if the way we see the universe today is just one way the universe was? Perhaps the laws we see today are just one repetition of many. Maybe the universe is evolving.
To an evolving universe, the researchers proposed an idea called a self-taught universe, a universe that is self-learning. Similar to a machine learning algorithm where feedback at one level influences the next, with the aim of achieving a more stable state of energy.
The group developed a possible framework for learning the universe universe based on matrix mathematics: a method in lines and columns to do organized math: neural networks and other principles of machine learning.
In short, they were investigating whether the universe could be a learning computer. change the conversation to get a deeper understanding of the subject, “said author Lee Smolin, a physicist at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, in Water Loo, Canada.
Much like how a moth can evolve to have better camouflage, a self-taught universe could evolve into a higher state, which in this case could mean a more stable energetic state. The physical constants that we measure today are only valid now and may have had different values in the past.
The team discovered that certain theories of quantum gravity and the quantum field, known as gauge theories, are a class of theories that aim to build a bridge between Einstein’s special theory of relativity and quantum mechanics describing subatomic particles that could be mapped or included in the Language of matrix mathematics can be translated, creating a model of a machine learning system. The connection showed that in any iteration or cycle of the machine learning system, the result could be the physical laws of the universe.
The work described in their article published in the arXiv Prepress database represents the first “small steps” of the idea, according to the group. However, with more work, the team could create a full model of the universe that opens new doors to understanding could open our cosmos.
“An interesting perspective is that you could use one of these models and maybe extract something new,” said Cunningham. This could be the discovery of the physics of a new type of black hole or a new law describing a physical system that has yet to be explained, such as dark energy.
However, not all researchers are so enthusiastic about the new idea. Tim Maudlin, a philosophy professor at New York University who was not involved in the new work, claims that there is no evidence for the concept and much against it, such as that certain laws of physics that have been measured are the same . these days. You were just after the Big Bang. As the laws of the universe evolve, Maudlin believes that there must be a larger, immutable set of laws governing this change, negating the idea of a self-taught system.
“Maudlin said.” They can be written in a mathematically very limited way without many adjustable parameters. Peter W. Evans, a philosopher at the University of Queensland in Australia who was not involved in the new study, initially attracted to the new work, but Evans agrees to take time to look at unorthodox approaches to radical questions like “Why is this Universe as it is? ” “Such approaches, while not in themselves fruitful, could lead to unexpected ideas that could open new doors to learn more about the universe,” he said. His work is preliminary and shouldn’t be. a definitive theory, but a way of rethinking things. While the article ultimately fails to draw any conclusions about what kind of model could be used to describe our universe
“I think we ended up with a lot of open questions and we certainly couldn’t prove anything,” Cunningham said.“But what we really wanted is to start an argument.
Original article on Science Atom.