Skip to main content

Paul Halpern - Five Way Interview

Paul Halpern is a professor of physics at Saint Joseph's University and the author of 18 popular science books, including Collider, Flashes of Creation, The Quantum Labyrinth, Einstein's Dice and Schrödinger's Cat, and Synchronicity. He is the recipient of a Guggenheim fellowship and is a fellow of the American Physical Society. He lives near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. His latest title is The Allure of the Multiverse.

Why science?

Science embodies humanity’s longstanding passion to understand its world and to probe its frontiers.  Ancient peoples looked to the stars and strived to decipher celestial patterns, with the aim of not only predicting astral occurrences, but also trying to comprehend the fundaments of nature and how it affects human lives.  As science developed, humankind’s knowledge of the world and its vital laws grew, along with a greater sense of its barriers and limitations. Interest in multiverse ideas bears on the question of whether or not science is willing to intuit what lies beyond those frontiers, without the prospect of direct observation, with the goal of potentially obtaining a more complete theory of the measurable, observable universe.

Why this book?

Noting the increased mention of the term “multiverse” in the media, I set out to learn everything I could about the history of the topic, and current controversies surrounding it.  In my research, involving numerous interviews and looks at oral histories, I was struck by the stark contradictions in physicists’ views of what is genuine science and what is simply too wild to be discussed.  For example, some researchers dismiss eternal inflation, but advocate instead for the collision of membranes in a higher dimension. Such judgements often seem to be a matter of taste, rather than strict rules about direct measurability.

You present a balanced view in the book: what is your own position on the MWI, a multiverse driven by eternal inflation and the string theory landscape?

My personal view on multiverse theories is that we must strive to exhaust all testable possibilities before reluctantly taking steps that involve elements that are not directly detectable.  Therefore, regarding quantum measurement, it would be wonderfully if scientists developed a complete portrait of spontaneous localization of observables that explain measurements of parameters as distinct as spin and position, yet we are not there yet.  In lieu of that, the MWI has value as a potential alternative.  Similarly, if cosmologists proved that inflation occurs only once, for our own universe, there would be no need for a bubble multiverse.  However, on the contrary, as Andrei Linde showed, inflation seems to be relatively simple to trigger.  Finally, while I think we should remain open-minded to string theory, we must also continue to explore models of quantum gravity that don’t necessitate such a mind-boggling large landscape of possibilities.

What’s next?

I am currently preparing a talk about J. Robert Oppenheimer, John Wheeler, and the golden age of general relativity for the April Meeting of the American Physical Society.  The talk will be in a session honouring the work of the accomplished astrophysicist and historian of science Virginia Trimble, who recently won the Pais Prize for the History of Physics.

What’s exciting you at the moment?

I am thrilled that the history of science and culture has been honoured by recent films such as Oppenheimer and Maestro, both of which I enjoyed very much.  I would very much like to see an increased emphasis in society on scientific and cultural achievements, including greater recognition of new artists and musicians who are blazing novel trails in their fields. 

Photograph © St Joseph's University


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more