People
and PlacesI learned about quantum field theory from Jan Lopuszanski. He was the advisor of my PhD Thesis (References [jad69a], [jad69b])). He did not advise me much. His main advice was: you must think for yourself. And I thank him for that. For many years he directed The Institute of Theoretical Physics of the University of Wroclaw. It is from him that I learned not only about mathematical physics, but also about the ways of life and about scientific ethics. Early in the 70's, from Roman Ingarden, I learned about Information as prior to Probability, about Open Systems and about the role of enthusiasm in research. I also learned from him about his strong version of First Things First Principle (Cf. [cov-ac]) : when something really interests you - make it not only your first thing, but make it also the only thing. He invited me several times to give seminars in the Nicholas Copernicus home town of Torun. It is there that I learned from Andrzej Kossakowski that there are Dissipative Semigroups, and how important they are. This later happened to be one of the main mathematical concepts that enabled the Quantum Future Project to make a start. My PhD Thesis was about the algebraic approach to quantum field theory and statistical mechanics. There were several pioneers of this idea. I mention those who influenced me the most. These were Huzichiro Araki, Hans Jorg Borchers, Rudolph Haag, and Daniel Kastler. I started in the late 60's with studying fresh preprints of H.J. Borchers and Lecture Notes of H. Araki (they were in German - so I had to learn some German). In 1970 I spent three months at CPT CNRS Marseille, where I met Daniel Kastler for the first time. In 1972 I spent a splendid three months in Rome, where I learned more about algebraic approaches from Sergio Doplicher. In 1975 I had an opportunity to discuss with C.N. Yang during my three month visit to SUNY. It's a pity I did not exploit this chance as I should. Instead I spent most of this time in the SUNY University Library hunting for papers and books about the paranormal. In 1975 I got a Humboldt Fellowship and I went for one year to Hamburg to learn from Rudolph Haag about the foundations of quantum theory. Somehow it turned out that, instead of learning these foundations, I spent all the next year learning about fibre bundles and all kinds of geometric ideas that might be useful for physics. I also learned from Haag, during a very important lecture, that mathematical structures that are used in theoretical physics must not make us their slaves. We must be prepared to abandon a mathematical structure - even if it is most beautiful and "natural" from a pure mathematical standpoint - when it can no longer accommodate the needs of physics; when it does not account for the experienced reality. It is from Haag that I learned the idea of events and the idea that algebras of observables need not be simple (and that they need not even be algebras). In the following years I visited Rudolph in Hamburg many times, learning more and more, discussing for long hours - but I never accomplished a paper there. There was so much to learn, so much to discuss, so much to think about, and there was no urgency to write. When I think back about these times, I have a feeling that the only thing that I accomplished there in Hamburg was not mine - perhaps I added my epsilon to convincing Rudolph that he should write his book about the algebraic approach. The persuading power of other friendly spirits was even greater than mine, so Rudolph gave in and now we have his Local Quantum Theory [haag92] in our libraries and on our desks. (note: Second Edition with an added chapter on Quantum Measurement should appear in 1996)
In 1982 I spent 10 months in Göttingen, where I benefited from discussions with Borchers. I also discussed general aspects of theories of gravitation with Hubert Goenner. Although this credits page is about science - not about the multiple facets of life - I want to make one exception. During Christmas of 1981, shocked by the Marshall Law that was supposed to put an end to Solidarity and to the Polish dream of freedom; separated from my family and from my home country, I developed pneumonia that was resistant to antibiotics and did not heal. If not for the exceptional care of Hansjoerg and Ursula Roos - I could easily have died. They offered me their home and - most important - their hearts. I can never give them enough thanks.
>From Göttingen I went for three months to CERN, where I met Robert Coquereaux for the first time. Soon we found that we were dreaming similar dreams. It was the beginning of our long collaboration. We discussed extra dimensions beyond those four of space and time. Later on I visited him several times at CPT CNRS Marseille and we wrote several papers on multidimensional universes and a book about Kaluza-Klein theories. Still later we discussed conformal group and the possibility that was neglected as uninteresting by Roger Penrose - that of our space-time being the Shilov boundary of a more fundamental conformal phase space. From these discussions we came to the conclusion that truly interesting things happen always on the boundary. The term boundary is meant here as a topological or differential geometric concept, but I like to extend this view beyond this domain. I believe that there are most interesting phenomena that take place on the boundary of physics. As with the Shilov boundary - which is a part of the topological boundary - not all what is on the boundary is interesting, but there is a part of the boundary that is important. I like to say that: it is the boundary that shapes the inside domain. Robert was also the first person that I exposed to my early ideas of QF. He read, he criticised, he listened and he asked for explanations. His comments acted as an important catalyst.
In Marseille I was also exposed to Daniel Kastler's enthusiasm about non-commutative geometry in general, and about Alain Connes and his work in particular. I could not resist, and I spent quite some time playing with abstract mathematical structures and forgetting completely about physics. Now I believe that I have awakened from this alluring dream. I am convinced now that real progress in physics must come from new physical ideas and not from mathematical structures - whatever power and beauty they offer. Mathematical structures are, for a physicist, what Sirens were for Odysseus. You should listen to them as they offer you the standards of beauty. But you should never stay with them too long. In fact, I think that it is also not good for Mathematics if the sharpest minds of mathematicians become hypnotized by the idea that their work may solve physical problems. This may bring short-term benefits but, I believe, at the cost of long-term progress. When wings of mathematicians become heavy, they fly at lower altitudes than they would fly otherwise. I would like to see them flying high in the sky - higher than my eye can see. Of course there is also applied mathematics. And that is most useful - but that is not what I am talking about.
In the spring of 1988 I visited for one month Marco Modugno in
Florence. He asked me about quantum mechanics - can it be explained
in the language of differential geometry and connections?. I babbled
in response something about geoemetrical quantization - but soon
I had to stop telling him things that I did not fully understood myself.
We went to work. That collaboration of ours continues to this day in a
peculiar way: Marco will ask a question and I do not know what to answer.
He is not a guy who will buy cheap slogans. So I start to think. We discuss.
Some idea emerges from this discussion, sooner or later. I write a sketch
what it would mean in his beloved language of connections. Then he goes
to work to convert these not quite clear drafts into a rigorous mathematics.
Sometimes it works, sometimes not. Anyhow Marco is busy checking for quite
a time and I am free to think about quantum future and about enhancing
quantum theory - until again he asks a new question - and then I find again
that I do not understand even the most simple things about ordinary textbook
quantum theory.
It was in Florence, in 1990 that the idea
of the Quantum Future project appeared clearly in my mind. I wrote
its main skeleton while waiting long hours to submit my form for a visa
at the French Consulate there. Then I went to Marseille and there, the
still fragile idea hardened. I remembered discussions that I had with Philippe
Blanchard in 1988 in Bielefeld. I wrote to him proposing a joint
venture. And so the idea got its name and emerged from the world of dreams
to the world of facts. But Philippe is another story. He does not belong
to this page. He is not of the past. He belongs to the present, and to
the Future. And so my list of credits stops here. Later credits can be
found in the papers listed on QF Publications Page.
Authors
and IdeasI want to list the Authors whose writings left a noticable trace in my own thinking. Not always have I agreed with them. Sometimes I was first fascinated by some idea, but later on understood that it leads into a direction which is transversal to my own. But even then I want to list the name or the idea, because it is only in this way that I became more aware of what is my direction.
First of all I read everything what I could from John Archibald Wheeler. I never completely understood what he had in mind, but I was sure it must be something Big. I read David Finkelstein, first about Kinks, later about Space Time Code. I was fascinated by the originality of his ideas, but also by his way of writing about them. I read David Bohm - but the more I read, the more I knew that I must find my own way. I read everything from Henry P. Stapp, when he started to write about foudations of physics. I agreed with everything he wrote, and I thought -this is the way. It is from Stapp that I first read about events, learned that light is at the foundation of being, that classical and quantum must be unified. Perhaps I was not a careful reader, or perhaps I was jumping to conclusions before reading to the end. But I think that the Quantum Future project is a particularly nice and effective realization of his ideas. Nevertheless I am afraid that he might be of a different opinion. In the 70's I started to read Karl Popper asking from him whatever could relate to physics. Later on I read the book that he wrote with John Eccles. It was extremely important. He wished me well with Quantum Future, but then when I thought that I had something that he may truly like - it was unfortunately too late.
Now I want to acknowledge my more esotheric readings. As I already mentioned,
at some point I tried to read all that was written about paranormal phenomena.
But then I stopped. Probably it was when John Klauder told me that
these are certainly very interesting things, but one should not spend thinking
about them more than 15 minutes a day. Otherwise there is danger of losing
objectivity. I knew he was right. But I also knew that one day I must return.
When I was in Geneve in 1982, I found a very good British Bookshop there.
I browsed it all. Whenever I had an opportunity to come to CERN - I visited
the bookshop. There was not much about paranormal, but I discovered P.D.
Ouspensky and G.I. Gurdjieff. They were using a language that
I could understand and accept. They were also writing about things from
the realm of physics and psychology that I felt could be right. There were
also a lot of things that were beyond my comprehension - even with my good
will. But when I read from Ospensky that time is 3-dimensional -
I liked it. And when I read from Gurdjieff that the Universe is open
- otherwise it would dissapear too soon after its creation - then I remembered
Popper and I liked it too. There I also read that time is exceptional,
in the sense that it does not exist in the same objective sense
as other phenomena. I felt that it must be true. I read that knowledge
is not an abstract concept, that it is `material' - and I felt
it must be true too. There were more things that I thought must be true
- but they concerned psychology rather than physics and philosophy, so
I will not mention them on these pages. Later on I followed this path as
far as I could, but the more I read the more I was becoming convinced that
these are really only `fragments of an unknown teaching', and that
the real truth is not to be found in these books - that it waits to be
either discovered or created by us.
[haag92] R. Haag,Local Quantum Physics,
Springer Verlag, Berlin 1992.
[cov-ac] S.R. Covey, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective
People, Audio Casette, Simon&Schuster 68796-4
Kyoto, April 23, 1995
QF Home PageMetaphysics
Physics
Publications Extracts
from QF papers My
Guestbook
Last updated: March 9, 1998