I've been looking at another Penrose's theory/model called twistor theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twistor_theory) that seems very interesting. From what I've read it seems to me that literally everything can be represented by twistors (or, rather, variations of twist theory).(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The only things that I found that could not be properly described by them were neural networks (but the book itself where I read that said that some modification of it could do it) and renormalization group calculations as it is indicated here (https://physics.stackexchange.com/q...cattering-amplitudes-be-applied-to-reno/56111) but the comments and the answers say that while being not the best option (it makes mathematics difficult when trying to apply twistors there) it is not impossible.

I also read that in its original form, twistors could not be applied to other spaces than 4D and other metric signatures than (2,2), but that modifications of the theory have made it able to be applicable to every dimensions/signatures (https://mafiadoc.com/clifford-geome...linear-algebra-_5a33759f1723ddfb91c2e096.html)

Also, they have been related to other space time networks theories (like Wolphram's) and to the holographic principle (to my knowledge, a holographic principle based universe could represent everything we have in our own universe, so all mathematical/logical things could be represented in holography)

Here's the link (https://phys.org/news/2018-03-math-bridges-holography-twistor-theory.html)

I also find this entry (https://motls.blogspot.com/2017/02/a-story-about-roger-penrose.html) in Lubos Motl's blog that says "It's not quite clear whether twistors are totally sufficient to describe quantum gravitational phenomena in D=4" and in the spanish wikipedia entry of twistor theory it says "For a time it was hoped that the theory of twistors constituted by itself a direct path to quantum gravity, but this, at present, is considered unlikely".

All the things that twistor theory cannot be applied to or cannot describe seem to have problems with Penrose's original twistor theory or at least with twistors themselves (or "alone"). But would it be the same for a modified twistor theory (by adding something else to the theory for example)?

But this may be only my perception. So, my question is: Can literally all logical/mathematical things be represented by twistors and (variations of) twistor theory?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# A Can twistor theory be used to describe everything?

Can you offer guidance or do you also need help?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**