The Goldilocks Enigma by PCW Davies

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter marcus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    enigma
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on PCW Davies' paper "The Problem of What Exists" and his upcoming book "The Goldilocks Enigma." The paper explores the concept of fine-tuning in physical parameters, questioning why certain constants are neither too large nor too small but "just right." Davies critically examines common assumptions in physics, suggesting that some constants may not be fundamental but rather relational, arising from mathematical artifacts. The paper has garnered attention in the scientific community, indicating its potential impact on ongoing discussions in cosmology.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of fine-tuning in cosmology
  • Familiarity with the Standard Model of particle physics
  • Knowledge of mathematical artifacts in physical theories
  • Awareness of current discussions in cosmological constants
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of fine-tuning in cosmological models
  • Study the Standard Model of particle physics in detail
  • Examine mathematical artifacts in theoretical physics
  • Explore relational theories of fundamental constants
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, physicists, and students interested in cosmology, particularly those examining the implications of fine-tuning and the nature of fundamental constants in the universe.

marcus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
24,752
Reaction score
795
PCW Davies has a fun paper out called
THE PROBLEM OF WHAT EXISTS
http://arxiv.org/astro-ph/0602420

the paper cites a new book in the works by Davies

Davies, P.C.W. (2006) The Goldilocks Enigma (Allen Lane, London), in the press.

if you want something to illustrate the "goldilocks" idea, think of any kind of "fine-tuning", for instance of the cosmological constant.
why are some physical parameters neither to large or too small, but "just right"?

Goldilocks Enigma is a catchy, also a good, title----and judging from the short WHAT EXISTS paper, Davies thinks clearly and comprehensively. I guess I should also say independently---he examines common assumptions critically and forms his own ideas. So the book could become widely read and have some impact on current discussions.

=================

The What Exists paper has already gotten a bit of attention. I flagged it around 5:30 PM pacific yesterday (half hour after it posted on arxiv) and today Christine noted it on her blog. Also today she wrote about it at Peter's blog and he acknowledged. Haven't seen any other comment but there could well be more coming.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I suspect some of the constants we currently regard as fundamental are not truly fundamental, and some of the apparent fine tuning is merely a mathematical artifact arising from different ways of expressing the same underlying principles. It is, however, difficult to resist the suspicion that all the truly fundamental constants are relational and self tuning is a natural consequence.
 
Chronos said:
I suspect some of the constants we currently regard as fundamental are not truly fundamental, and some of the apparent fine tuning is merely a mathematical artifact arising from different ways of expressing the same underlying principles. It is, however, difficult to resist the suspicion that all the truly fundamental constants are relational and self tuning is a natural consequence.

Well, that's some of what Davies says in his "What Is" paper. He offers the idea that the undetermined parameters in the Standard Model are not expressions of deeper physics but just "frozen accidents", results of some twiddle or other when the particles were condensing after the big bang.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
14K
  • · Replies 523 ·
18
Replies
523
Views
308K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K