THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE

The String Theory Landscape, by Raphael Bousso and Joseph Polchinski

Given the success of replacing the gravitational force with the dynamics of space and time, why not seek a geometric explanation for the other forces of nature and even for the spectrum of elementary particles? Indeed, this quest occupied Einstein for much of his life. He was particularly attracted to work by German Theodor Kaluza and Swede Oskar Klein, which proposed that whereas gravity reflects the shape of the four familiar spacetime dimensions, electromagnetism arises from the geometry of an additional fifth dimension that is too small to see directly (at least so far). Einstein's search for a unified theory is often remembered as a failure. In fact, it was premature: physicists first had to understand the nuclear forces and the crucial role of quantum field theory in describing physics--an understanding that was only achieved in the 1970s.

.



Previous, a discussion took place there in Peter's Blog on Susskind and Smolin. I would like to know if Peter supports Smolin's position?

I had mention to Lubos about the fact that strings/M theory had changed the concept of the quantum mechanical discription of the spacetime fabric. Part of this question, was based on how Smolin and LQGists would be limited in there perceptions, if acceptance of GR, does not go through any revision? Compton scattering amplitudes would have pointed to Glast determinations and support of Smolin in his valuation. But what was deeper in my mind, was the question of what graviton intersection might have implied, if such a unity would have been established, based on KK theory and unification of electromagnetism and gravity?

In Kaku's preface of Hyperspace, page ix, we find a innocent enough statement that helps us orientate a view that previous to all understanding, is counched in the work of Kaluza.

In para 3, he writes,

Similarily, the laws of gravity and light seem totally dissimilar. They obey different physical assumptions and different mathematics. Attempts to splice these two forces have always failed. However, if we add one more dimension, a fifth dimension, to the previous four dimensions of space and time, then equations governing light and grvaity appear to merge together like two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Light, in fact, can be explained inthe fifth dimension. In this way, we see the laws of light and gravity become simpler in five dimensions.

NATHAN MYHRVOLD

I found the email debate between Smolin and Susskind to be quite interesting. Unfortunately, it mixes several issues. The Anthropic Principle (AP) gets mixed up with their other agendas. Smolin advocates his CNS, and less explicitly loop quantum gravity. Susskind is an advocate of eternal inflation and string theory. These biases are completely natural, but in the process the purported question of the value of the AP gets somewhat lost in the shuffle. I would have liked more discussion of the AP directly

The thing I like about the oppositon of minds who embrace the Solvay attitude, is that it forces another to bring forward a history that few of us would have seen. So outside of the comments of opposing views what kind of harmony could have been produced?


SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE



Leonnard Susskind and Lee Smolin

While this is a conversation written by physicists for physicists, it should nonetheless be of interest for Edge readers as it's in the context of previous Edge features with the authors, it's instructive as to how science is done, and it's a debate that clarifies, not detracts.

Quantum Geometry

Mathematics is not the rigid and rigidity-producing schema that the layman thinks it is; rather, in it we find ourselves at that meeting point of constraint and freedom that is the very essence of human nature.

- Hermann Weyl

I know I said I would post the discussion between Susskind and Smolin again for refreshing but I wanted to post the issue of Quantum Geometry first and then move there.

My area of research is superstring theory, a theory that purports to give us a quantum theory of gravity as well as a unified theory of all forces and all matter. As such, superstring theory has the potential to realize Einstein's long sought dream of a single, all encompassing, theory of the universe. One of the strangest features of superstring theory is that it requires the universe to have more than three spatial dimensions. Much of my research has focused on the physical implications and mathematical properties of these extra dimensions --- studies that collectively go under the heading "quantum geometry".

Quantum geometry differs in substantial ways from the classical geometry underlying general relativity. For instance, topology change (the ``tearing" of space) is a sensible feature of quantum geometry even though, from a classical perspective, it involves singularities. As another example, two different classical spacetime geometries can give rise to identical physical implications, again at odds with conclusions based on classical general relativity.

If one did not understand where this geometry will begin, then it does not make much sense for a person to consider the mathematics that will arise from this situation?

The Elegant Universe, by Brian Greene, pg 231 and Pg 232

"But now, almost a century after Einstein's tour-de-force, string theory gives us a quantum-mechanical discription of gravity that, by necessity, modifies general relativity when distances involved become as short as the Planck length. Since Reinmannian geometry is the mathetical core of genral relativity, this means that it too must be modified in order to reflect faithfully the new short distance physics of string theory. Whereas general relativity asserts that the curved properties of the universe are described by Reinmannian geometry, string theory asserts this is true only if we examine the fabric of the universe on large enough scales. On scales as small as planck length a new kind of geometry must emerge, one that aligns with the new physics of string theory. This new geometry is called, quantum geometry."

So I have shown I thnk the importance of the math involved and how it might address the quantum nature of the world in small things. We find, we can be quite comfortable in looking at the achievemets of Einstein, in leading us to a good perception about things on a cosmological scale. But moving back to the "quantum geometry," what are we describing here?

Quantum gravity is perhaps the most important open problem in fundamental physics. It is the problem of merging quantum mechanics and general relativity, the two great conceptual revolutions in the physics of the twentieth century. The loop and spinfoam approach, presented in this book, is one of the leading research programs in the field. The first part of the book discusses the reformulation of the basis of classical and quantum Hamiltonian physics required by general relativity. The second part covers the basic technical research directions. Appendices include a detailed history of the subject of quantum gravity, hard-to-find mathematical material, and a discussion of some philosophical issues raised by the subject. This fascinating text is ideal for graduate students entering the field, as well as researchers already working in quantum gravity. It will also appeal to philosophers and other scholars interested in the nature of space and time.

The same vigor with which string theory/M theory is attack for is fundamental points about the nature of the geometric world is no less important then what achivements and attempts are made by Rovelli. Each aspect of the societal influence theoretists and physics people engage in, is part and parcel of the individuals who are, hands on with the Elephant.


Edward Witten

Reflections on the Fate of Spacetime

Compton and Graviton Scatterings?

Sometimes it is very difficult to express what you want to say when you have so much information in your head. That you know it has to be expressed most carefully in order for one to get the jest of what is being implied when making statements. It is indeed a struggle for me to be clear in this regard, but hopefully, recogizing the requirements of the physicist and the theoretician, that such scholar attributes can be waivered for the commoner?






Compton scattering detector

Compton scattering happens when a photon interacts with an electron - the photon leaves the interaction with a lower energy and the electron has a higher energy. The energies of the outgoing photon and electron along with the angle at which these two leave the interaction allow determination of the energy and direction of the original photon.






What the heck is a Graviton

1. A quantizied gravitational wave...........
2. They travel at the speed of light
3. They have never been experimentally proven to exist.
4. They have been theoretically proven?
5. They permeate all dimensions.

Particle Physics Probes Of Extra Spacetime
Dimensions


The exact expression may be found in (15,17). It is important to note that due to integrating over the effective density of states, the radiated graviton appears to have a continuous mass distribution; this corresponds to the probability of emitting gravitons with different extra dimensional momenta. The observables for graviton production, such as the γ/Z angular and energy distributions in e+e− collisions

Visiting Scientist Sends Physics World Spinning

This summer, Afshar, Flores and Knoesel are conducting follow-up experiments in Rowan's state-of-the-art Science Hall to determine whether they can validate Afshar’s initial findings for single photons. In the experiment at Rowan, the team is using a single photon source instead of a beam. Some critics have pointed out that the results of the experiment with a laser beam could be explained in terms of classical physics. Thus, the use of single particles is critical and would be able to finally determine the validity of Afshar’s claims.

If the next round of experiments does support Afshar’s findings, this can mean a whole new way of looking at quantum theory among physicists, who have long-accepted the opinion of Einstein's rival on the subject, Danish scientist Niels Bohr. And that can have meaning for the lay community as well.

Flores noted, "It is likely that the interpretation problems of quantum mechanics are a hint that there is something new to learn about our physical world. There might be either a new force or a new physical property to be discovered. The problems of quantum mechanics will not be resolved unless they are exposed and studied. Thus, doing this experiment at Rowan is an exciting prospect."

The ideas presenting the way in whch we have percieved the quantum mechanical spacetime fabric, I am asking, that if applied to string considerations we have indeedd changed the language attributes of the same field that is understood in Compton scattering?


Dying to Know, by Max Tegmark



Three quarks indicated by red, green and blue spheres (lower left) are localized by the gluon field.

A quark-antiquark pair created from the gluon field is illustrated by the green-antigreen (magenta) quark pair on the right. These quark pairs give rise to a meson cloud around the proton.

The masses of the quarks illustrated in this diagram account for only 3% of the proton mass. The gluon field is responsible for the remaining 97% of the proton's mass and is the origin of mass in most everything around us.

Experimentalists probe the structure of the proton by scattering electrons (white line) off quarks which interact by exchanging a quantum of light (wavy line) known as a photon.

Quantum Mechanical Discription of the Spacetime Fabric

Richard Feynman developed the path integral formulation of quantum mechanics in 1948 (some preliminaries were worked out earlier, in the course of his doctoral thesis work with John Archibald Wheeler) as a description of quantum theory corresponding to the action principle of classical mechanics. It replaces the classical notion of a single, unique history for a system with a sum, or functional integral, over an infinity of possible histories to compute a quantum amplitude.

I do not know if I have fallen astray from the interesting perspective strings has alloted to us, in the way in which we have always percieve the quantum mechanical discription based on some," sum over history" of all interactions.

Under the heading of "Time and the Quantum," Pg 189 Fabric of the Cosmo, by Brian Greene a interesting statement of historical proportions that askes questions about the nature of the way in which we percieve same. A better indication of the Full Monty, is demonstrated as well?:)

The beam splitter is not a labratory variety, either, but is a intervening galaxy whose gravitatinal pull can act like a lens that focuses passing photons and directs them to earth,as in Figure 7.3. Although no one has yet carried out this experiment, in principle, if enough photons from the quasar are collected, they should fill out an interference pattern on a long-exposure photographic plate, just as in the labratory beam-splitter experiment. But if we put another photon detector near te end of one route or the other, it which provide which path information for the phtons, thereby destroying the interference pattern.

I have shown, where this extra dimension was added by Kaluza in 1919, and unless I am quoting the references to Kaku wrong, then such considerations would to me, have changed the way in which we would percieve all these interactions? Something then has happened to the spacetime fabric and how all these interactions would be conceptually addressed? Hence the reference to what String Theorists have done, by changing the disciption to one of strings?

Similarily, the laws of gravity and light seem totally dissimilar. They obey different physical assumptions and different mathematics. Attempts to splice these two forces have always failed. However, if we add one more dimension, a fifth dimension, to the previous four dimensions of space and time, then equations governing light and gravity appear to merge together like two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Light, in fact, can be explained inthe fifth dimension. In this way, we see the laws of light and gravity become simpler in five dimensions.

It has been relatively quiet here in the GP-B Mission Operations Center, since the strong solar flares and geomagnetic storm three weeks ago. Our team continues to adjust the flow rate of the excess helium from the Dewar during the present a 6-week “hot” season, where the spacecraft is continually in sunlight throughout each orbit. (See last week’s highlights for a discussion of the spacecraft’s seasons.)


Immediately to me, the instantaneous feature of photon expression would have detailed a topological value, where such gravitation/photon would demonstrated of itself a continuity of expression? If such geometrical tendencies would have considered the dynamical relationship of the orbital on cosmological correlations then such energy perceptions would have immediately painted a portrait for us, of what has existed in the past, what continues to exist, and what will exist in the future?

Strings Change Quantum Mechanical Discription of the World?

Often times harmonical oscillators can disguise themselves in dialogue, and opposition, and bring about a "signatured state" of recognition? Have they become entangled? Have they defined themselves in terms of new elemental features of existance?

Has strings presented itself as a new issue in entanglement and the "new physics," it would represent?

Physicists have succeeded in entangling five photons for the first time. Although four photons have been entangled before, five is the minimum number needed for universal error correction in quantum computation. Moreover, the same team has demonstrated a process called "open-destination teleportation" for the first time (Z Zhao et al. 2004 Nature 430 54). The results represent a major breakthrough in efforts to exploit the laws of quantum mechanics in quantum information processing.

By taking advantage of quantum phenomena such as entanglement, teleportation and superposition, a quantum computer could, in principle, outperform a classical computer in certain computational tasks. Entanglement allows particles to have a much closer relationship than is possible in classical physics. For example, two photons can be entangled such that if one is horizontally polarized, the other is always vertically polarized, and vice versa, no matter how far apart they are. In quantum teleportation, complete information about the quantum state of a particle is instantaneously transferred by the sender, who is usually called Alice, to a receiver called Bob. Quantum superposition, meanwhile, allows a particle to be in two or more quantum states at the same time

What Do We Mean When We Say "Continuum"?

Here's a description Albert Einstein gave on p. 83 of his Relativity: The Special and the General Theory:

The surface of a marble table is spread out in front of me. I can get from any one point on this table to any other point by passing continuously from one point to a "neighboring" one, and repeating this process a (large) number of times, or, in other words, by going from point to point without executing "jumps." I am sure the reader will appreciate with sufficient clearness what I mean here by "neighbouring" and by "jumps" (if he is not too pedantic). We express this property of the surface by describing the latter as a continuum

There has been some what of a issue here when I have spoken of two points, and I would like to say that I am using this to reference the space in between, like Q<->Q measure, to signify the energy and curvature implied in this space.

“Distances” Determine Geometry

Describe an object with a table of distances between points.

Describe spacetime with a table of intervals between events

.It is not my purpose in this discussion to represent the general theory of relativity as a system that is as simple and as logical as possible, and with the minimum number of axioms; but my main object here is to develop this theory in such a way that the reader will feel that the path we have entered upon is psychologically the natural one, and that the underlying assumptions will seem to have the highest possible degree of security.

—Albert Einstein

Quantum Harmonic Oscillators

If the basis of this thinking has not emerged out of GR then what value could we have assigned zero point vibration? If the scalable features of GR could not have followed some geometrical thinking, then the world that we move too, in non-euclidean views, could have never revealled hyperdimensional thinking. Which needs a quantum mechanical thinking to emerge as well?


In the late 1950s, Weber became intrigued by the relationship between gravitational theory and laboratory experiments. His book, General Relativity and Gravitational Radiation, was published in 1961, and his paper describing how to build a gravitational wave detector first appeared in 1969. Weber's first detector consisted of a freely suspended aluminium cylinder weighing a few tonnes. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Weber announced that he had recorded simultaneous oscillations in detectors 1000 km apart, waves he believed originated from an astrophysical event. Many physicists were sceptical about the results, but these early experiments initiated research into gravitational waves that is still ongoing. Current gravitational wave experiments, such as the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory (LIGO) and Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA), are descendants of Weber's original work.

Geons, Blackholes & Quantum Foam, by John Archibald Wheeler, with Kenneth Ford, page 236, para 2.
"

This hypothetical entity, a gravitating body made up entirely of electromagnetic fields. I call geon(g for the gravity, e for electromagnetism," and on as the word root for"particle"). There is no evidence for geons in nature and later was able to show that they are unstable-they would quickly self-destruct if they were ever to form. Nevertheless it is tempting to think that nature has a way of exercising all the possibilties open to it. Perhaps geons had a transitory exitance early in history of the universe. Perhaps(as some students and I speculate much more recently), they provide an intermediate stage in the creation of the balckholes

."



Drawing by Glen Edwards, Utah State University, Logan, UT

If such thinking of the spacetime would have been moved from macroscopic thinking, how would we have ascertained the continued developement of GR from this as an microscopic view?



Without some way in which to look at the developing nature of GR, how would we not have not of considered the nature of these gravitational events in the cosmo? If we coud not scale the nature of the measure, between two points, what value would there ever be in considering the strength of the gravitational fields?

Gravitational waves can be viewed as ripples of the space-time. They occur in two fundamental states of polarization, usually known as 'cross' and 'plus'. The effect on matter of the passage of gravitational radiation is a squeezing and stretching, depending on the phase of the wave. For instance the effect on a ring of test masses is shown in fig. 1, in the reference frame that is in free fall with the center of mass. The upper raw refers to the plus polarization while the second to the cross polarization; the ring is deformed by the wave and the effect is shown at different phases

As we look back in time, here it is easy to see having understood this developement of gravitational wave detection that the principals underlying the developing thoughts came from Webber's expansive contractive, features of all things? It would manifest through all things and Kip Thorne deducing this understanding, was lead to consider LIGO as a important fucntion of discerningthese grviaational waves. INstead of Webber's way of thinking he developed another way in which to percieve this energy being deciminated in the bulk of our imaginations.

The Elastic Nature?

As I have explained in a earlier link I am fascinated by the images of bubbles that were demonstrated through a way of thinking of the early universe to arise as Bubble Nucleation.

These images all show the 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-fold eversions in the upper left, lower left, upper right, and lower right cornerse, respectively. First we see an early stage, with p fingers growing in the p-fold everion. Next we see an intermediate stage when the fingers have mostly overlapped. Finally we see the four halfway models. For p odd, these are doubly covered projective planes.

If we had understood the early universe to have this continous nature and not have any tearing in it, how would such rotations have moved according to some method, that we might have considered the klein bottle or some other concept, that would lend itself to explain some of the ways and means, such dynamics could have unfold, enfolded and everted in the actions of that same cosmo?

It would be very difficult to speak to probability statistics, if you did not envelope the possibilites in some kind of configuration, or compared it to a Dalton Board. The Bell curve, or the pascal's triangle to consider how something could arise in certain situations? Might we have called the basis for a "new math" to emerge? If we had come to accept the departue point for Euclid's fifth postulate then what has we encouter inthe dynamcial world of Gauss? Einstein includethese calculation in the evolving feature of GR, so how could we not see this developing of a geometry that would lead to smooth and topological considerations?

The statistical sense of Maxwell distribution can be demonstrated with the aid of Galton board which consists of the wood board with many nails as shown in animation. Above the board the funnel is situated in which the particles of the sand or corns can be poured. If we drop one particle into this funnel, then it will fall colliding many nails and will deviate from the center of the board by chaotic way. If we pour the particles continuously, then the most of them will agglomerate in the center of the board and some amount will appear apart the center.

UNderstanding then that such cosmological event could be unfolding in the universe, visually to me, these configurations had to follow some pattern of consideration, or it just didn't make sense that such abstract math in topologies could ever work. So in looking at a previous comparison here the dynamical nature of the orbital seemed a valid comparison not only on a cosmological scale, but on a very small one as well?

A Holographical way of thinking?

Quantum Microstates: Gas Molecules in the Presence of a Gravitational Field

Andy Strominger:

This was a field theory that lived on a circle, which means it has one spatial dimension and one time dimension. We derived the fact that the quantum states of the black hole could be represented as the quantum states of this one-plus-one dimensional quantum field theory, and then we counted the states of this theory and found they exactly agreed with the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy.

I do not know of many who could not have concluded that microstates would have been something of an issue, as one recognizes this focus towards cosmological considerations. One aspect of Einstein’s general relativity, helped us recognize the value of gravitation that is extremely strong in situations where energy values are climbing. We had to look for these conditions and work them out?



Strominger: That was the problem we had to solve. In order to count microstates, you need a microscopic theory. Boltzmann had one–the theory of molecules. We needed a microscopic theory for black holes that had to have three characteristics: One, it had to include quantum mechanics. Two, it obviously had to include gravity, because black holes are the quintessential gravitational objects. And three, it had to be a theory in which we would be able to do the hard computations of strong interactions. I say strong interactions because the forces inside a black hole are large, and whenever you have a system in which forces are large it becomes hard to do a calculation.

The old version of string theory, pre-1995, had these first two features. It includes quantum mechanics and gravity, but the kinds of things we could calculate were pretty limited. All of a sudden in 1995, we learned how to calculate things when the interactions are strong. Suddenly we understood a lot about the theory. And so figuring out how to compute the entropy of black holes became a really obvious challenge. I, for one, felt it was incumbent upon the theory to give us a solution to the problem of computing the entropy, or it wasn't the right theory. Of course we were all gratified that it did.

If we did not have some way in which to move our considerations to the energy states that existed in the beginning of this universe what other measures would you use? How would you explain a cyclical model that Neil Turok and Steinhardt talked about and created for us?

Is this a predictive feature of our universe that had to have some probablity of expression and mathematically, if one wanted some framework, why not throw all things to the wind and say, Pascal's triangle will do?:)

The animation shows schematically the behavior of the gas molecules in the presence of a gravitational field. We can see in this figure that the concentration of molecules at the bottom of the vessel is higher than the one at the top of the vessel, and that the molecules being pushed upwards fall again under the action of the gravitational field.

One had to have some beginning with which to understand what could have emerged from such energy configurations. If such energies are concentrated and found to bring us to the supersymmetrical values assigned on that brane, then how would cooling functions of the CMB have figured a direct result would be expressive of those same events? Was there no way to measure chaoticness. Maybe it was all Fool’s Gold?:)

Inverse Fourth Power Law

By moving our perceptions to fifth dimenisonal views of Kaluza and KLein, I looked at methods that would help me explain that strange mathematical world that I had been lead too geometrically. If such a bulk existed, then how would we percieve scalable features of the energy distributed within the cosmo?

The angular movements needed to signal the presence of additional dimensions are incredibly small — just a millionth of a degree. In February, Adelberger and Heckel reported that they could find no evidence for extra dimensions over length scales down to 0.2 millimetres (ref. 11). But the quest goes on. The researchers are now designing an improved instrument to probe the existence of extra dimensions below 0.1 mm. Other physicists, such as John Price of the University of Colorado and Aharon Kapitulnik of Stanford University in California, are attempting to measure the gravitational influence on small test masses of tiny oscillating levers.

In previous posts I have outline the emergence and understanding of hyperdimensional realities that we were lead too. Our early forbearers(scientifically and artistic embued with vision) as they moved through the geometrical tendencies, that if followed , made me wonder about that this strange mathematical world. How would we describe it, and how would it make sense?

Our new picture is that the 3-D world is embedded in extra dimensions," says Savas Dimopoulos of Stanford University. "This gives us a totally new perspective for addressing theoretical and experimental problems.

Quantitative studies of future experiments to be carried out by LHC show that any signatures of missing energy can be used to probe the nature of gravity at small distances. The predicted effects could be accessible to the Tevatron Collider at Fermilab, but the higher energy LHC has the better chance.
These colliders are still under construction, but results also have consequences for "table-top" experiments, being carried out here at Stanford, as well as the University of Washington and the University of Colorado. Here’s the basic idea: imagine there are two extra dimensions on a scale of a millimeter. Next, take two massive particles separated by a meter, at which distance they obviously behave according to the well-known rules of 3-D space. But if you bring them very close, say closer than one millimeter, they become sensitive to the amount of extra space around. At close encounter the particles can exchange gravitons via the two extra dimensions, which changes the force law at very short distances. Instead of the Newtonian inverse square law you’ll have an inverse fourth power law. This signature is being looked for in the ongoing experiments.

As you look at the issue of two points(introduction to hyperdimensional realites of quark confinement as a example), it is well understood, by this point that such emergence had to be geometriclaly consistent on many levels. That such royal roads leading too, culminate in some realistic measure? In that mathematical realm, we had left off, and in recognition of the fifth postulate of euclid. By acceptance and creation of this extra dimension, it was well apparent, that such tendencies were developing along side with the physics as well.

But we had to determine where this mathematical realm had taken us, in terms of measure? We are quckly reminded of the place in which such measures become the constant rallying point around important questions of these views.



Physics at this high energy scale describes the universe as it existed during the first moments of the Big Bang. These high energy scales are completely beyond the range which can be created in the particle accelerators we currently have (or will have in the foreseeable future.) Most of the physical theories that we use to understand the universe that we live in also break down at the Planck scale. However, string theory shows unique promise in being able to describe the physics of the Planck scale and the Big Bang.

It wasn't a game anymore, that we did not suspect that reductionism might have taken us as far as the energy we could produce could take us? So we had to realize there was limitations to what we could percieve at such microscopic levels.

High energy particles have extremely small wavelengths and can probe subatomic distances: high energy particle accelerators serve as supermicroscopes:

To see What?

The structure of matter

(atoms/nuclei/nucleons/quarks)

Faced by these limitations and newly founded conceptual views based on the quantum mechanical discription of spacetime as strings, how would we be able to look at the cosmos with such expectancy? To know, that the views energetically described, would allow further developement of the theoretcial positons now faced with in those same reductionistic views?

What has happened as a result of considering the GR perspective of blackholes, that we had now assigned it relevance of views in cosmological considerations? Such joining of quantum mechanical views and GR, lead us to consider the sigificance of these same events on a cosmological scale. This view, had to be consistent, geometrically lead too?

If we discover the Planck scale near the TeV scale, this will represent the most profound discovery in physics in a century, and black hole production will be the most spectacular evidence of that new discovery