Was Woit GNORW ?

1. Was Woit GNORW ? From Quantum to Cosmos: Fundamental Physics in Space for the Next Decade International Workshop Airlie Center Warrenton, VA, USA July 6-10, 2008 Alvin J. Sanders George T. Gillies Ernst Schmutzer

3. Forthcoming Paper . Implications upon Theory Discrimination of an Accurate Measurement of the Time Rate of Change of the Gravitational Constant and Other Cosmological Parameters A.J. Sanders*, G.T. Gillies**, and E. Schmutzer*** * Department of Physics, University of Tennessee Mailing address: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, MS 6054, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA ** Department of Physics, University of Virginia, USA *** University of Jena (Emeritus), Germany Abstract • A substantial improvement in the accuracy of Ġ tests would make it realistic to speak in terms of a measurement of Ġ, rather than merely a smaller upper bound on |Ġ|. We show below that the accuracy |Ġ/G| ~ 10-14/yr would be sufficient, given the accuracy of other cosmological parameters, to observe effects predicted by extra-dimension theories and, hence, to discriminate among different models. The Ġ design goal for the SEE (Satellite Energy Exchange) mission is (Ġ/G)~ 10-14/yr.

4. Purpose of Talk • To discuss methods aimed at the testing of new theoretical models • Not to support or refute any particular model

5. What Worries Woit • “String” theory has never made a falsifiable prediction. • Resolutions of various new problems tend to pile on more new complications, with more new parameters. • Now  so many parameters that it is virtually untestable. • The anthropic, multiple-universe defense is a copout. • Non-string approaches are suppressed &/or not funded. • The Standard Model needs a failure to shake it up. • String theory has left physics and become math.

6. Fun Phys Sig Event • SIGNIFICANT EVENTS - SCIENCE EVENTS 12/14/01 • Theory Derives Parameters of Relativity Theory • Two Russian physicists in Project SEE (Satellite Energy Exchange) of the Fundamental Physics program have succeeded in using "brane theory"-- a generalization of "string theory"-- to calculate the Parameterized Post Newtonian (PPN) parameters beta and gamma. This is the first calculation of any PPN parameters from brane theory. This new result is a major step toward testing which classes of brane theory are consistent with experimental evidence. • The physicists are Vitaly Melnikov and Vladimir Ivashchuk. Prof. Melnikov, the president of the Russian Gravitational Society, presented an invited talk at the 2000 Fundamental Physics investigator workshop. • Citation: V.D. Ivashchuk, V.S. Manko, & V.N. Melnikov, "PPN Parameters for General Black Hole and Spherically Symmetric p-Brane Solutions", Gravitation & Cosmology v. 6 No.3 (23), pp. 219-224 (2001). (Excerpt; edited)

7. Fun Phys Sig Event Melnikov & Ivashchuk Black Hole p-brane Solutions (n – 1) internal Ricci-flat spaces b – 1 = sS(Qs/GM)2fs fs are simple functions of the dimensions of the subspaces. fs> 0 in physically interesting cases.b > 1 . g – 1 = – sS(Qs/GM)2fs’ The functions fs’are slightly different from fs fs’ are not guaranteed positive. | b – 1| & | g – 1| must be same order of magnitude • Also found spherically symmetric block-orthogonal solutions

8. Our Approach for this Paper • Seek out theoretical papers that give some level of numerical prediction • Calculate further results • Infer implicit functions • Compare models by their results

10. How Useful is This? Small fraction of theories survive, if: • Order-of-Mag measurement of  • ~10-13/yr measurement of G-dot/G • The vertical spread in Fig 3 of implicit functions ( vs G-dot) is not a fluke Therefore Potentially Helpful to the Community

11. Dependence of |Ġ/G| on the GR-Violation Parameter xAfter Fig. 1 of Perrotta et al.

12. Comments on Figures 2 & 3 • Ġ/Gvs  in Perrotta et al. = their Fig. 1 = output of numerical model Our Fig. 2 is inferred as fit to numbers read from this. Ġ/G = a for IGĠ/G = a’ + b’for NMC a = –3.44e–10/yr a’ = –5.61e–11 b’ = –7.24e–9 • Perrotta et al. give  vs  explicitly (requires a bit of digging):  = 1/(4) for IG  = 1/(32p) for NMC • Both G-dot and w depend on x • Therefore G-dot and  are implicit functions of each other Result = our Fig 3 • Note: Perrotta et al made no comment about such implicit functions or big the differences therein (or differences from Chiba)

13. Projective Einheitliche Feldtheorie Projective Unified Field Theory (PUFT) E. Schmutzer • With WMAP values of H (71 km/sec/pc) and other parameters: Ġ/G= – 1.7 x 10-12/yr • Author presents many other numerical results

14. Generic and Chronic Problems • Theoretical papers often stop short of numerical results • Eitherno graphs or no physical quantities in graphsin most theoretical papers • Quantitative predictions (in SI units) needed to set experimental goals • Natural units frustrate dimensional analysis

15. Summary • Are Models Testable? • Yes,if theorists carry the algebra far enough and provide graphs and numerical results • Difficult otherwise

16. Acknowledgements • NASA FunPhys grant NAG 8-1442 • UT Scholarly Achievement grant • NATO Linkage grant • UT/ORNL Science Alliance grants • Venzo de Sabbata (deceased) • Vitaly Melnikov, Kirill Bronnikov, Voladya Ivashchuk , Nikolai Kolosnitsyn