✎ Open Problems [The Physics Travel Guide]

You've loaded an old revision of the document! If you save it, you will create a new version with this data.

~~NOTOC~~

====== Open Problems ======

<WRAP group>
<WRAP half column> 
Our present understanding of nature is far from complete.

In addition to **unexplained observed phenomena**, like dark matter or dark energy, there are also many **technical problems** in our existing [[theories|theories]]. An example for such a technical problem is the hierarchy problem.

Moreover, there are things that we can describe but do not understand. These are not really problems but rather **puzzles**. An example is the still not understood masses and mixing angles of the elementary particles.

</WRAP>
<WRAP half column><nspages open_problems -h1 -textPages=""></WRAP>
</WRAP>

===== Lists of Open Problems =====

* http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/open_questions.html
  * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsolved_problems_in_physics
  * Chiral Fermions, see https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0102028.pdf

==== Quotes ====

<blockquote>The laws of physics seem to be composed out of five
fundamental ingredients:

* 1 Identical particles.
  * 2 Gauge interactions.
  * 3 Fermi statistics.
  * 4 Chiral fermions.
  * 5 Gravity.

The question is whether one can find a “deeper structure”
that gives rise to all five of these phenomena. In
addition to being consistent with our current understanding
of the universe, such a structure would be quite
appealing from a theoretical point of view: it would
unify and explain the origin of these seemingly mysterious
and disconnected phenomena.
The U(/1)xSU(2)xSU(3) Standard Model fails to
provide such a complete story for even the first four
phenomena. Although it describes identical particles,
gauge interactions, Fermi statistics, and chiral fermions
in a single theory, each of these components are introduced
independently and by hand. For example, field
theory is introduced to explain identical particles, vector
gauge fields are introduced to describe gauge interactions
Yang and Mills, 1954, and anticommuting fields
are introduced to explain Fermi statistics. One
wonders—where do these mysterious gauge symmetries
and anticommuting fields come from? Why does nature
choose such peculiar things as fermions and gauge
bosons to describe itself?

<cite>Colloquium: Photons and electrons as emergent phenomena Michael Levin and Xiao-Gang Wen https://journals.aps.org/rmp/pdf/10.1103/RevModPhys.77.871</cite></blockquote>

Please solve the following equation to prove you're human. 61 +5 =᠎ Please keep this field empty:

Edit summary

Note: By editing this page you agree to license your content under the following license: CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International

User Tools

Site Tools

Page Tools