Tsung-Dao Lee: Symmetries & asymmetries

0:00 Yes, there you have it. Charles Reynolds Distinguished Lecturer in Physics. We thought that perhaps we would do the third Charles Reynolds Distinguished Lecturer in Physics. We will ask our colleague to tell you who was Charles Reynolds. I think it's only fitting that we will add one more comment about it. It's something very exciting that we all heard about half an hour ago, perhaps we are one of the first people to hear this, and that is in fact, as you all know, the work of Professor Reynolds, the exotopic effect, showed that the BCS phenomena has to do something to the medium effect, which they just superposed, but in fact it was apparently a talk that Professor Lee gave... In Hoboken, in Stevens College, which basically nobody was interested in it, after that talk, he received about one hour of questions only on the discovery of parity violation, except for one person. Illinois, the train at that time was going very slow, even slower than today, and on the train he actually worked out the solution for the DCS theory, the gap formula, and as you can imagine it must have been quite an exciting week in the life of a very young scientist by the name of Hugh Lee. I told him in one week he got the Nobel Prize and initiated a second one. Professor Fideli came to us from Columbia University, and in fact we'll be talking about synophys and asynophys. Perhaps... His history and his work is very well known, but perhaps I would like to give you a little bit of an introduction to Reagan, which is slightly personal, an introduction to the work that he did. Obviously, when he received his Ph.D. in 1950 from Chicago, he went to Berkeley. The Institute of Advanced Study, Columbia, back to Princeton, back to Columbia. Obviously, his work, the most famous one that he has done when he was in his 20s, I might say, was the work which has essentially solved the puzzle at that time, the puzzle about two particles, they call them tau and theta, which appear to be identical except for some parity transformation, and they...

2:30 And we essentially suggested the unthinkable, that symmetry, which at that time was accepted to be a fundamental symmetry of nature, would only be seen as if it was violated. The most amazing thing is that, essentially, anybody in Uganda that had data on that, people that had data in their bubble chamber decay pictures, they actually had, because eventually all they had to do was just do the experiment, and that essentially created a major havoc. In fact, in order to get the situation under control, Columbia University had decided to Take a press conference, January 19, 1957, the first announcement of a major physics discovery by a press conference. Essentially because there were so many rumors, nobody knew what exactly was happening. Professor Lee was getting called at midnight and said, is it true, is it true? And people just wanted to know if it's true that it turned out to be true. I want to tell you from my own experience that, in fact, in 1957, right after that, there was a famous conference called the Rehoboth Conference. Rehoboth is a town in Israel, a white-line institute, and some very distinguished people came to that place and made the public discussion was very good. As a little boy, I couldn't read the paper, but my father showed me a picture of all these people standing, and I said, who are these people? And he says, these are the smallest people in the world. So today we have with us, a piece of this history, essentially one of the smallest people in the world. This is to summarize the people of the other forces.

5:00 There are three forces. One is the strong force that binds the nucleus together, and that is the electromagnetic and the weak combined negative, we call that the weak electromagnetic gravity. The theory underlies the strong forces, what we call quantum thermodynamics. And the theory underlines category in the SU2 plus human theory and underlines the gravity in general relativity. Both of you probably have heard of relativity and there are a couple of many other names. That's all right because we do not require more understanding of all these terms than I did. And SU2 plus human theory from you, then you understand it better. But, however, these are just normal touches that we think we should be familiar with what our present status is. What we want to emphasize is that all these theories and strategies are based on symmetry. And yet, most symmetry common universities are not. This dichotomy of theory relying on symmetry and experiment These are all finding violations, and that is one of the basic puzzles of our time. Why do we believe in symmetry when the world we live in is filled up with asymmetry? And this was then ensured one of my basic themes, that is, perhaps maximum asymmetrical possibility means the same perfect symmetry. Let me illustrate the point by taking a familiar problem solved by Euler in the 18th century.

7:30 Another problem of buckling is that if you have a rod and this is without any force, then when the force exceeds the critical value determined by the momentum of inertia and the length, then it buckles. What we would like to understand is the relationship between the buckling, which is obviously asymmetrical. And the symmetry of the process. In fact, I have here a four-factor pointer which can simulate the law. So therefore, I have either force, the force is the slope, and then the symmetry. But if the force is bigger, as calculated by Euler, of this critical value, then it starts to be possible. Let us look at the shape of the process. If the shape is circular, that's perfect symmetry. Obviously, the property can't happen in any direction. So, if this is circular process, it may buckle this way, may buckle that way. And there exists an infinite number of ways you can buckle, an infinite number of ways of asymmetry. And that would be called initial commutations. Is that the veracity of everything? Suppose it's not so good. It's rectangular, like this. Then you can buckle here. So, the possibility of asymmetric configuration is drastically reduced when you symmetry it. When there's no symmetry of the crossing, you have only one buckle. In this case, let us ask, suppose we are in this world, doing that, so we live in a world where this world does not exist. How can I tell the original configuration?

10:00 So you know, we are in one of these infinities. And how can we give original information? Let's concentrate on that scenario. That is, we agree that you have many ways to behave in mathematics. If you are in one of the asymmetrical possibilities, first we just refresh our memory that circular process should be perfect symmetry, we are using the weight of asymmetrical properties. But these different asymmetrical properties, if we are in this configuration, then they are connected. Because it may buckle here and may buckle there. So if I move from one part of the computer into the next one, that causes no ending. The origin is circular. Is that very clear to everyone? Suppose I take this origin is circular. Then you start applying for exceeding the critical value for you. It will buckle here. It may buckle here, it may buckle there. Because you start with symmetrical configuration, then if I change it with one asymmetrical dot, we put another one, that causes no energy when they are the same. That means if you are located in this asymmetrical configuration, you can use original shape by pushing them a little. If there is excitation, that causes zero energy.

12:30 Then you know the original one remains the same. It will not have the parity yet, but it will. Is that parity, everyone? So in other words, not only the perfect symmetry can generate infinite number of asymmetrical possibilities. Because we start with the perfect symmetry, the infinite varieties are conducted by the same symmetry that we start with. And because they are connected by the same symmetry, they have the same energy configuration, therefore, they have the zero energy excitation mode, and that can be tested, technically we call it NAMU, ghost of NAMU. So it's not a, so first, it's philosophically very simplified. Look at symmetry, you can use it in your life. The second, there are the least asymmetric connectives, asymmetries, and there's ways to help, even if we are located in the same place. And that's the power. We can live in a world which is full of asymmetries, yet we can put on a cap to know the theory. This is the prologue to this talk, and I would like to stop. I will cover the first. Symmetries and asymmetry in nature and in human artifacts. Symmetry, validation, parity, charge conjugation and time reverser. Evacuation, source of asymmetry and spontaneous values. Let me start with this painting by Holmgren. There was a 17th century Chinese painter who founded the school of landscape painting, which based on rather geometrical shapes, somewhat similar to Sejian's work. This is a very poor Xerox copy.

15:00 And you can see that there is an approximate bilateral symmetry in this. But suppose I would make it, the original of this way is in the Shanghai Museum of Art. Suppose I want to make it absolutely symmetrical by relying on almost any symmetry. By using the Xerox machine, which we can easily do. We can do that. Now, you see, for a homologous painting, it's not a realistic thing. So it's a little abstract of nature. But in a sense, you may see that it's a friendly abstraction. So somehow, it gives you the theme of the rock. But this one, definitely not the end. In fact, if you will do some hiking and you will encounter a Pomeranian mountain like this, you may say, well, there may be a TV crew hidden behind. But if you see something like this, you probably should turn back. Only the past. What a silly trick. This displays an important role in microscopic objects. In macroscopic objects, mostly they are not the same. So if you see suddenly a macroscopic object with this shape, you know there is something vitally wrong. But there are exceptions. The exceptions are crystal structures. This is a metric we've taken from my hometown, Suzhou. From the garden, for this talk, I would like to concentrate on the lattice windows. Each lattice window, Suzhou is famous for the variety. These are all from Suzhou. The lattice windows have a certain symmetry, and I will now introduce the basic terminology. P stands for primitive cell, which means nothing, and each window is a unit.

17:30 Two is the two-fold rotation symmetry. That means if you rotate around this point from here to here, then that's a two-fold symmetry. So P2 means one day to day rotation. P6, if you rotate around this point, it's a six-fold conical symmetry. P4, if you rotate around this point, it's here, it's a four-fold symmetry. It is also important to note that in addition to the rotation of symmetry, P2, P4, P6, P1 will be no symmetry, P3 will be P4, there is also reflection symmetry and that can be seen by taking this axis. Here there is also reflection symmetry, the reflection symmetry of this axis, and that passes through the rotation symmetry axis into this form. So this diagram is rather interesting because the reflective distribution has to this line, but the location is located around this point. Do you follow me? This is quite interesting, but if we reflect this way, it reflects this symbol into the other one. These are two ancient symbols, which is the one and the other. One is the old Chinese symbol, is the good luck. You must forget about that. is the old Greek symbol, and it was used by early Christians. As a cross, because if the clock comes from the local, it would be very dangerous to carry the clock. So, the president used this as a cross. And this again makes it very easy to remember.

20:00 I always have difficulty remembering this, you see, because this is full-blown mathematics. And in fact... But not only the early Christians used the pattern, the Jewish culture, and this is a big comparison between these two. You can see the similarity of this Hebrew manuscript of the pattern. Isn't that quite clear? And in fact, I showed this to two rabbis in New York, and they've never seen before what happened. And around here, this, on the side here, this is the scripture. I believe that I have somewhere written down. The rest is all of that. Even those continuous... The original is in Oxford, the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... ...the... And so that aberration that was created by Hitler was a true aberration of the 20th century, of a very noble symbol of Garmadien, which he used throughout by both the Christians, the Greek Christians and the Jewish people.

22:30 All together, there are 17. And there are classified people, people we already know, and we see this level, for ancient science or art forms, this being central or the longest figure. So this one, two, four, three, six, these three positions of location are the same. The M means mirror, and 2M means the activity mirror action. And what's more important is that in this G, G is glide with that, you glide with that, glide with that, glide with that, glide with that. So these are all together 17 varieties and it was approved in 1924 by George Torrier. But actually, it's just enormous. But artisans way, way before, and this is the 14th century Ahamber in Rwanda, Spain. Since then, I've never been to Ahamber. Just around these corner beaches, there are various pathways. And two expeditions were conducted. I think the recent one was about 15 years ago, about a year ago. It's not so easy to simplify. We have all the patterns. You have to kind of have a photograph and look at it, and in fact it was verified. All 17 patterns we realized, of course, cannot be more than 17, but according to the theory of mathematics, it is correct that we did realize all 17 patterns. So, that means, in a sense, the Fourier's work was anticipated by Artisan, Witten, and Hawking. Another symmetry that is very important is the scaling symmetry.

25:00 Scaling symmetry, one of the earlier discoverers was Darcy Thompson, who observed that the shape of the seashell I have a very simple scaling block, by scaling on a unit. If you know the shape in a very small section, you can use the whole shape. So that's the scaling. Now this is a computer simulation, and you can use a very similar one. Arm, you imagine there's a center here. The radius coming out is the arm. Theta is a polar angle going this way. So this is along the different theta projection. But the of interest is phi at the Muser angle. That varies. So the dependence of r and the phi is the most interesting. Because if I take the logarithm of r, there's a linear with phi. Is that very clear? And the intercept you will find. So therefore if I take a small section... And I think you said you used the 1.3 and the log 5, the linear 5. Then from this section I will get the entire shape. So that's the... Now if you ask, why do you have scaling symmetry? The scaling symmetry is used in fractals applied to shapes of coastlines, mountains in the landscape, and many more demonstrators. And the reason is... We are going to do most mechanisms over traffic, for that matter, as a self-regulated mechanism. Once you assume a self-regulated mechanism, then simple power law or linear or subtraction of power will help you. And I will demo this by the end of the talk. But this is very clear about what scaling means. And knowing that the miniature time, you can use the larger time. About a few years ago, there was one photograph of the Thompson period, and it was auctioned off for 2 million dollars.

27:30 However, this one has the right physics level, and Thompson really happened to think of the wrong physics. We have to do this part more. Another example of great interest. In the same scaling, as observed by Hokusai, this is a part of the canvas painted by Hokusai and Yuno Setsuyo in one of the 36 schemes of 2D modeling. What I want to call your attention is that this moment out of the frame, the 2D, this is the beginning of 2D modeling. So, this is what I want you to do. Look at the energy contained by the waves of the large wavelengths and by the smaller ones. This is the problem that the large wavelengths, that we call air, will be infecting energy from the whole sea of Japan. But once it starts to pull around, the energy is being propagated from the large wavelengths to the smaller ones. The terminal spectrum turns out to be k to the minus 5 third power. k is wave number, is 2 pi divided by the length. So that tells you that the larger is the wavelength, the smaller is the k, the more energy. So you can get the feeling of the energy by measuring the gravity. And this is relative to a data chain score. But if you try to qualitatively analyze the two sides, that's not very different from the minor side. I would like to have a minor side. Don't be afraid of any equations, because I hope that you can keep your concentration for the human derived in this law.

30:00 And this gives you the essence of scaling. This law was derived by Pomogorov in 1941, also by 1945, and by 1948 because the war is more independent. So, our aim is to derive the K-95 series as represented by the two sides. So, when you put the mass into D1, the mass is not relevant, so the thing that we want to deal with is velocity. Distance traveled by time, the thing we are interested in is total energy, that's p squared, and we analyze p squared by the energy content in the small interval of the wavelength, the wavelength of the decay, the decay that you would like to know. Now, what is of interest is the total energy. This is the open system, so it doesn't go by the usual, the equation of the non-equilibrium. The thing is non-equilibrium is being fed by energy from large systems. So, yes, the total energy input is epsilon, and epsilon is the change of kinetic energy over time. And the assumption is this. You consider the weight number between two very small ones, that is, between large distance and very large distance, there is an interval of weight number where the energy is self-regulating. That means the energy transfers from log of k to a different k. It depends not on what kind of level, not on the detail of the wave, but only on the total energy input in the wavelength or wavelength itself. So that's the assumption. Assumption that it will work it out by itself is a little more.

32:30 That seems to be a very simple assumption. Let's see how we can get it. So the thing we are interested in is the two-dimensional analysis. Velocity is length, dimension, divided by time. Energy, we have to use unit mass, is v square dt, so you take v square divided by time, so it's L squared divided by time, still following me. K is wave number, the inverse of the wavelength, so it's 1 over L. Now what's the dimension of E that we need to subtract? From this formula, you see E times K, that means E multiplied by 1 over L. These should be a function only of. Once you make the idea that things can somehow help you, then there is also the second paradigm that's part of the anti-pharmacology. What is paradigm? Paradigm predicts means rise of symmetry. That is, take two systems, which are mirror images of each other, but otherwise entirely identical.

35:00 This would be if I take my right hand left hand, but that's not the entire identity, so we can imagine it could be the entire identity, except for the right one. Then it seems obvious if you start with two systems which are entirely identical except for the right hand difference, then you would expect that all subsequent evolution of these two systems should remain identical except for the original right hand thing. They don't seem to be self-evident. They haven't become self-evident. They don't seem to even need to look for good evidence. So that is why they were not discovered until 1967 by CSU in the 1960s. So most experiments which are at the bending of the light, the general relativity, like the gravity of the sun, that was clearly in the margin of disability. It was first measured in 1917, and improved many many years later. The discovery of the velocity light, like the Martin-Solomoni experiment, again searching them. There's some parity. Parity is that by about 1927, the technology had advanced to such an extent that in fact if you look, it's everywhere. Because if nobody look, you won't see anything. So this becomes, once you discover, it will be rather dramatic. But everybody just understood that within a few days, we can produce a new method. I will illustrate the meaning of the measurement by the first one was the rule, the rule scope was slightly complicated, and it followed a few days later by the pi of the Darwin, Legemann, and Wiley, and of the Galetti, and this is easier to explain, you start with the pi.

37:30 At times, it is served as a mathematical article, and which is that the mirror is the same, right? All right. But, when it defades, it becomes into a mirror and a neutrino. And if you look at this neutrino, the neutrino, however, has a momentum going this way, and the spin going that way. It's always left. There are no right-handed neutrinos. So we start with a higher, high-plus. You look at high-plus, and it is squarely symmetrical, right-left symmetrical, it ends up with a neutrino, which has to do with it, I think, because it is, so therefore, higher neutrino. However, if we change the neutrino to an anti-neutral, right-hand neutral, left-hand neutral, that is, that means, you know, we change particles to antiparticles. We love changing its angular length. Nature doesn't have that. But if you change right or left, any part of the globe, the new genome will be handed to the new genome and back to the new genome, at least for this we have to remember. So therefore, this experiment by Wu et al. and the Biological and Developmental Sciences established the violation of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the violation of the right of antipathy with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right of antipathy with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right of symmetry with the definition of law and the definition of the right That was proven to be also not true, and this is where it's grounded by Koenig and Fitch, the CPI. You take another particle called Keilang-Zihong, and these are technical names. This is a spherical mathematical object, Keilang-Zihong, neutral, zero means definitely neutral.

40:00 Long is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7. Second is a limiter for a long time, 10 to the minus 7 So, no electric program, no magnetic moment, nothing. So, from electromechanism concern, it cannot be truly electrical. When it is decayed, it can decay to positron and electron. How do you know it can decay to two different modes? You apply it to magnetic field. So, one could go this way, another could go that way. There are two modes. Now, usually in a textbook you ask, why? Do electrons have negative charges? Electrons have negative charges because electrons have to be attracted by a product in order to become active. A product has positive charges, therefore electrons have negative charges. Now you ask, why do protons have positive charges? Well, that's because protons have to attract electrons. But of course we know that positive charges and negative charges are different. But which of which is totally relative? There's no absolute way, another means to determine that. But in this experiment, we found... The rate going one way and the rate going the other way is off by six tens of a percent. You say, well, six tens of a percent, that's very small. What's so great about that? All I can say is that it's very, very volatile. That means if you use a clock or a stopwatch, you can differentiate this sign from the other. By a means, you can just measure the other side. And that's the CPC. We'll come back to the CPC. These are the main components of our modern physics. So this means if I create a value of c, when c is positive or negative, the rates are different. It's also about cp, if I look through a mirror, this rate, this rate, this rate, both p, c, and c.

42:30 And from the KDK, by a more detailed analysis, we can conclude a work group that is also biology. So as we know, CPT is our right. That means if I change right to left, how can I make my task in the future? And then the same can be done. So here is why we have more or less followed about the charge and so on. But how about G? Why should anyone even be surprised about G validation? Because past and future clearly are different. We all know all that. That's obvious. So why should physicists even contemplate that we might live in a world past and future are symmetrical? And then along the path to the future, right to left, and path to the end of time. And this I want to demonstrate by using these circles representing airports. So you have New York, how are we discussing, let's say, JFK, Mississippi, Paris, Sydney, Hong Kong, San Francisco, Tokyo. X, I don't know which quarter it was. X should be an airport which has air connection only to New York. I don't know if it's far from Florida or not. Yeah, because it's so far from here. But I was just going to ask. The X in there is an airport, only has connections to New York. But each arrow signifies their flight. So there's one flight from X to New York, then another flight from New York to X. One flight from New York to Paris, and there's also a Paris to New York, one flight from New York to Sydney, and vice versa. And these lines represent air corridors. The equality of the flight in both directions is what we will make into the analog, to the microscopic reversibility.

45:00 We can go from this to here. Microscopic reversibility will be about a person who starts from the airport, got an airplane, and goes to New York. He or she will visit New York and then go back and then they get to look up the schedule and want to go to Paris and then they will go on to Rome and then he and she can then come back. So if you have microscopic reversibility like this, like this, they get with microscopic reversibility from here going about and then with the same, it does not work here with everyone. So microscopy, relativity, in time, macroscopy, suppose for reasons, for whatever the reason, the airline will still maintain the east flight from Aix to New York, most ways, New York to Paris, most ways and so on. So microscopy, relativity will be maintained. And for the sake of our discussion, let us assume all airlines use the same airplane, but the air schedule will not be told to anybody.