John Carlos BaezDec 6

I've decided to spend some time on a quest that's likely to fail. I'm trying to start with the Standard Model of particle physics, ponder its patterns, and figure out *why* it's that way.

That's *not* what most particle physicists have been doing for the last 40 years. In many ways the Standard Model looks complicated and arbitrary, so they often try to embed it in some larger, more symmetrical theory. That hasn't worked too well, so it's worth trying something else - even though it's likely to fail.

This is my report on some patterns that pop out if you stare at the Standard Model long enough. These are mostly not my own discoveries, but I'm trying to package them a bit more neatly.

This is the first of two parts!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zrp5HVK-tE

Note: this talk is not for beginners. If you're just getting started, try my course on the Standard Model:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yjxqMoX-y8

Can We Understand the Standard Model?

YouTube
Show threadOscar Cunningham
@johncarlosbaez Sometimes I like to wonder about how much of the standard model we'd have been able to figure out if humanity were only allowed to do chemistry experiments. This is an analogy to trying to go beyond the standard model without doing further high-energy experiments.
Dec 7 at 10:02amWeb
Show threadJohn Carlos BaezDec 7
@OscarCunningham - yes. My hope is that imposing the 3 constraints that theory be mathematically beautiful, make good conceptual sense and fit the data we have narrows the search enough to make it manageable. In fact string theorists seem to have decided these 3 constraints are so stringent that there are *no* solutions. Thus, many are studying a mathematically beautiful theory that predicts a "multiverse" of possible universes, one of which might fit the data we have (though nobody has yet found one without throwing about 100 extra terms into the equations in an ad hoc way).