{"id":14232,"date":"2024-11-11T19:10:36","date_gmt":"2024-11-12T00:10:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=14232"},"modified":"2024-11-12T07:58:20","modified_gmt":"2024-11-12T12:58:20","slug":"why-sabine-hossenfelder-is-just-wrong","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=14232","title":{"rendered":"Why Sabine Hossenfelder is Just Wrong"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Sabine Hossenfelder&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=m62ntuQS7xc\">latest video<\/a> argues<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>There&#8217;s no reason for nature to be pretty (5:00)<\/li>\n<li> Working on a theory of everything is a mistake because we don&#8217;t understand quantum mechanics (8:00).\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>These are just wrong: nature is both pretty and described by deep mathematics.  Furthermore, quantum mechanics can be readily understood in this way.<\/p>\n<p>Actually, the title and first paragraph above are basically just clickbait. Inspired by the class I&#8217;m teaching, I wanted to write something to advertise a certain point of view about quantum mechanics, but I figured no one would read it.  Picking a fight with her and her 1.5 million subscribers seems like a promising way to deal with that problem. After a while, I&#8217;ll change the title to something more appropriate like &#8220;Representations of Lie algebras and Quantization&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>To begin with, it&#8217;s not often emphasized how classical mechanics (in its Hamiltonian form) is a story about an infinite dimensional Lie algebra.  The functions on a phase space $\\mathbf R^{2n}$ form a Lie algebra, with Lie bracket the Poisson bracket $\\{\\cdot,\\cdot \\}$, which is clearly antisymmetric and satisfies the Jacobi identity.  Dirac realized that quantization is just going from the Lie algebra to a unitary representation of it, something that can be done uniquely (Stone-von Neumann) on the nose for the Lie subalgebra of polynomial functions of degree less than or equal to two, but only up to ordering ambiguities for higher degree.<\/p>\n<p>This is both beautiful and easy to understand.  As Sabine would say &#8220;Read my book&#8221; (see chapters 13, 14, and 17 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/%7Ewoit\/QM\/qmbook.pdf\">here<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p>This is canonical quantization, but there&#8217;s a beautiful general relation between Lie algebras, phase spaces and quantization.  For any Lie algebra $\\mathfrak g$, take as your phase space the dual of the Lie algebra $\\mathfrak g^*$.  Functions on this have  a Poisson structure, which comes tautologically from defining it on linear functions as just the Lie bracket of the Lie algebra itself (a linear function on $\\mathfrak g^*$ is an element of $\\mathfrak g$).  This is &#8220;classical&#8221;, quantization is given by taking the universal enveloping algebra $U(\\mathfrak g)$.  So, this much more general story is also beautiful and easy to understand. Lie algebras are generalizations of classical phase spaces, with a corresponding non-commutative algebra as their quantization.<\/p>\n<p>The problem with this is that these have a Poisson structure, but one wants something satisfying a non-degeneracy condition, a symplectic structure.  Also, the universal enveloping algebra only becomes an algebra of operators on a complex vector space (the state space) when you choose a representation.  The answer to both problems is the orbit method.  You pick elements of $\\mathfrak g^*$ and look at their orbits (&#8220;co-adjoint orbits&#8221;) under the action of a group $G$ with Lie algebra $\\mathfrak g$.  On these orbits you have a symplectic structure, so each orbit is a sensible generalized phase space.  By the orbit philosophy, these orbits are supposed to each correspond to an irreducible representation under &#8220;quantization&#8221;.  Exactly how this works gets very interesting, and, OK, is not at all a simple story.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Sabine Hossenfelder&#8217;s latest video argues There&#8217;s no reason for nature to be pretty (5:00) Working on a theory of everything is a mistake because we don&#8217;t understand quantum mechanics (8:00). These are just wrong: nature is both pretty and described &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/?p=14232\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14232","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-quantum-mechanics"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14232","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=14232"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14232\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14241,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14232\/revisions\/14241"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=14232"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=14232"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.math.columbia.edu\/~woit\/wordpress\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=14232"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}