Talks

This course provides a thorough introduction to the bosonic string based on the Polyakov path integral and conformal field theory. We introduce central ideas of string theory, the tools of conformal field theory, the Polyakov path integral, and the covariant quantization of the string. We discuss string interactions and cover the tree-level and one loop amplitudes. More advanced topics such as T-duality and D-branes will be taught as part of the course. The course is geared for M.Sc. and Ph.D. students enrolled in Collaborative Ph.D. Program in Theoretical Physics. Required previous course work: Quantum Field Theory (AM516 or equivalent). The course evaluation will be based on regular problem sets that will be handed in during the term. The primary text is the book: 'String theory. Vol. 1: An introduction to the bosonic string. J. Polchinski (Santa Barbara, KITP) . 1998. 402pp. Cambridge, UK: Univ. Pr. (1998) 402 p.' All interested students should contact Alex Buchel at abuchel@uwo.ca as soon as possible.

This course provides a thorough introduction to the bosonic string based on the Polyakov path integral and conformal field theory. We introduce central ideas of string theory, the tools of conformal field theory, the Polyakov path integral, and the covariant quantization of the string. We discuss string interactions and cover the tree-level and one loop amplitudes. More advanced topics such as T-duality and D-branes will be taught as part of the course. The course is geared for M.Sc. and Ph.D. students enrolled in Collaborative Ph.D. Program in Theoretical Physics. Required previous course work: Quantum Field Theory (AM516 or equivalent). The course evaluation will be based on regular problem sets that will be handed in during the term. The primary text is the book: 'String theory. Vol. 1: An introduction to the bosonic string. J. Polchinski (Santa Barbara, KITP) . 1998. 402pp. Cambridge, UK: Univ. Pr. (1998) 402 p.' All interested students should contact Alex Buchel at abuchel@uwo.ca as soon as possible.

Philosophy of physics, puzzles about the content and status of foundational principles – the logic of physicists’ basic assumptions, especially with regards to space and time, and the history of science, e.g. exactly how Einstein made his discoveries.

Removing the mystery from quantum mechanics, the Bohmian perspective – a way of describing the motion of quantum particles, and applying this to spacetime singularities (where gravity becomes infinite) like those inside a black hole.

Quantum gravity, quantum processes in the early universe, evaporation of black holes, limits on the measurements made by real detectors (coupled to the environment), and with regards to mathematical problems, studying techniques rather than finding solutions.

The nature of time, probability and quantum mechanics, philosophy of physics and metaphysics, especially issues involving the role of mathematical tools like symmetry in physics, and applying this formal apparatus to the philosophy of mind.

Black holes are regions of space with gravity so strong that nothing can escape from them, not even light. This isn't science fiction - there's even a gigantic black hole at the center of our galaxy. It's hard to imagine a more effective way to irrevocably erase and destroy a computer's hard drive than to drop it into a nice big black hole. But is the information on that drive really gone forever? Paradoxically, there's a good chance that not only does the information come back, it comes back in the blink of an eye. This surprise return of the information is based on the same principles that might someday make reliable quantum computers a reality. In fact, engineers are already exploiting these principles to help distribute software and stream video over the internet. And that's where the tornadoes come in...

We know the mathematical laws of quantum mechanics, but as yet we are not so sure why those laws should be inevitable. In the simpler but related environment of classical inference, we also know the laws (of probability). With better understanding of quantum mechanics as the eventual goal, Kevin Knuth and I have been probing the foundations of inference. The world we wish to infer is a partially-ordered set ('poset') of states, which may as often supposed be exclusive, but need not be (e.g. A might be a requirement for B). In inference, a state of mind about the world degrades from perfect knowledge through logical OR, which allows for uncertain alternatives. We don't need AND, and we don't need NOT; we just need OR. This display of acceptable states of mind is [close to] a mathematical 'lattice'. We find that the OR structure by itself (!) forces the ordinary rules of probability calculus. No other rules are compatible with the structure of a lattice, so the ordinary rules are inevitable. The standard Shannon information/entropy is likewise inevitable. Taking this idea further, the OR of states of mind gives a lattice of 'Questions' that might be useful for automated learning. Disconcertingly, this lattice is very much larger (in class aleph-2), and the natural valuations on it exhibit large range. I will present this extension, and ask whether we can rationally foresee its use in practical application.