A Greek physicist decided to use some of her mother’s cuisine tactics and may now have discovered the theory of everything. Fotini Markopoulou Kalamara has developed a framework for combining relativity and quantum theory that is much more elegant than string theory, because it does not presuppose space and matter but instead gives rise to space and matter, as we’d hoped all along a theory of everything would do. (Her original paper is a humbling experience). Also, it’s testable. And it’s based on the work of Roger Penrose, who is a bit of a colossal genius.

But the most interesting bit, which is not stressed in the Scientific American article, is that her solution is functionally equivalent to calling the universe a quantum computer, and that is awfully close to what Wolfram has been braying about in A New Kind of Science.

So it’s plausible that it’s all finally coming together now, and that soon we can all die happy.

Personally, I would be very pleased for a Greek to end up discovering the theory of everything. This would more than make up for the 2 millenia of wrong science that was inflicted upon humanity by her fellow compatriot Aristotle. And I was wondering if anyone has her phone number.

[Thu, Nov 28 2002 – 06:10] eurof (email) What the fuck is the article on about? Stefan, if you pretend to understand it could you perhaps post a translation into english. I mean, I’m smart, but there are limits. The only cool thing about this would be if someone could build a time machine and i could go back into the past and go LONG France Telecom (the future would be even better). Otherwise, I fail to see the point.

What is so objectionable about aristotle, by the way? I vetoed it as a name for my soon to arrive progeny, should it prove a bloke, but i always thought of aristotle as harmless stuff, man being a political animal etc, golden mean, blah blah; pretty much common sense, nothing to have a cow about.

[Thu, Nov 28 2002 – 07:09] Stefan (email) The Earth-at-the-center-of-the-universe hypothesis overstayed its welcome by a thousand years and sent many a fine astronomer to the stake. If it hadn’t been for Aristotle we would have had our theory of everything centuries ago and you could have been long France Telecom.

[Thu, Nov 28 2002 – 09:33] eurof (email) i’m sure the prevalence of the earth first belief wasn’t all Aristotle’s doing. he was just making a mistake all of us do, thinking we are more important than we really are. on a more personal note, you in particular are prone to this fallacy so watch who you criticise.

also he was making it without the ability to observe things through telescopes etc, unlike that cheat galileo. at least Aristotle was probably pretty sure the earth was round.

[Fri, Nov 29 2002 – 16:27] Matthew (email) one of roger penrose’s signature achievements was the development of a non-repeating helix pattern which he claimed kimberly-clark stole for its extra-soft, three-ply toilet paper. the non-repeating pattern means the paper doesn’t bunch on the roll, apparently. he sued after spotting his pattern as it was about to be used. true story. don’t know if he won.

[Mon, Dec 02 2002 – 08:44] eurof (email) so let me get this straight. there he was standing with his trousers round his ankles and no doubt a big poo floating in the toilet, and he takes a strip of bogpaper and before he wipes his bum takes a good hard look at it and goes “but wait! that’s my special non-repeating helix pattern!! the thieving swine!!”

no way. i’d reckon you have to get really close before you see the ply. and no-one looks at bogpaper before it’s used. what WAS he doing? it could be really sick.

[Mon, Dec 02 2002 – 09:01] Charles Kenny (www) (email) Maybe Penrose has perfected the art of reading braille with his bum, and so immediately detected the unique pattern as he was wiping his buttocks with the paper? On another note, what has Penrose got to do with (1) Aristotle, (2) everything? And, Stefan, why would we be better off with a theory of everything? What has superstring theory done for me lately?

[Mon, Dec 02 2002 – 09:11] Charles Kenny (www) (email) oh, and having just looked at the article, although I haven’t got a clue what she’s going on about, I do now vaguely understand the Penrose link, and I’d also bet it falls squarely into the category of “it’s probably bollox, but she’s a woman and she’s cute” scientific reportage. How sexist, I know.

[Mon, Dec 02 2002 – 10:09] Matthew (www) (email) ye of little faith:

Mathematician Sues Kimberly-Clark Unit Over Its Toilet Paper — At Heart of the Messy Issue Is Tissue’s Quilted Design; Is It the `Penrose Pattern’?

By Matthew Rose

Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal

798 words

14 April 1997

The Wall Street Journal

B8A

English

(Copyright (c) 1997, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)

LONDON — Sir Roger Penrose has seen his work on quantum physics and relativity theory celebrated in countless papers. But it was toilet paper that really got the renowned mathematician’s attention.

When Sir Roger examined the “Kleenex quilted toilet tissue,” made by the British unit of Kimberly-Clark Corp., what he saw was no ordinary piece of toilet paper. Embossed on the surface he discovered a series of interlocking diamonds. They bore an uncanny resemblance to “the Penrose Pattern,” a highly complex geometric formula he devised in the 1970s to prove that a nonrepeating pattern could exist, solving one of the great conundrums of the natural world.

“He wasn’t pleased,” says Sir Roger’s lawyer, Richard Kempner a partner at Addleshaw Booth & Co in Leeds, England. So, Sir Roger and Pentaplex Ltd., the Yorkshire, England, company that owns the licensing rights to his work, are going after the toilet paper with court papers, having sued Kimberly-Clark Ltd. for breach of copyright in the High Court in London.

“When it comes to the population of Great Britain being invited by a multinational to wipe their bottoms on what appears to be the work of a Knight of the Realm without his permission, then a last stand must be taken,” said David Bradley, a director of Pentaplex Ltd., in a statement.

A spokeswoman for Kimberly-Clark declined to comment, saying the company hadn’t seen the entire lawsuit, which was filed on April 4. (The right to manufacture the Kleenex toilet tissue brand was sold last year to Swedish pulp and paper company Svenska Cellulosa AB. The plaintiffs say they may seek redress from SCA after the current case is resolved. SCA couldn’t be reached for comment.)

From a scientific standpoint, the Penrose Pattern was a critical breakthrough. Scientists had argued it was impossible to create a predictable pattern using adjacent geometric shapes that would never repeat itself. The best previous effort was a pattern that used several hundred thousand different shapes.

Sir Roger, a mathematics professor at Oxford University, using a notebook and pencil managed to create a nonrepeating pattern using only two different shapes: a fat diamond and a thin diamond. Some of the patterns created by his formula appear the same — a five-petaled flower, for example — but if traced far enough, always turn out to be distinguishable.

This may seem like a trivial way to pass time, but in 1974 the discovery was revolutionary. “It created a whole new phase of matter,” says Paul Steinhart, a physics professor at the University of Pennsylvania, who has researched the practical implications of the Penrose Pattern. It created “materials with properties you never thought were possible.”

Simply put, a material such as aluminum is defined by the arrangement of its crystals, which were always thought to exist in repeating patterns. Creating a substance made from “quasi-crystals,” which like the Penrose Pattern are random — or aperiodic — changes its nature, usually making it harder. For example, products containing quasi-crystals make excellent nonscratch coatings for frying pans.

The same logic also makes for better toilet paper. A premium brand launched in the United Kingdom in 1993, Kimberly-Clark’s Kleenex quilted toilet tissue is embossed with a pattern to fluff up the tissue, making it “thicker and softer,” according to company literature.

Sir Roger’s writ argues that making the tissue fluffier allows manufacturers to reduce the amount of paper used on each roll. But if the pattern repeats itself, the tissue would likely bunch up, looking unattractive. That can be corrected using a Penrose-type pattern which lets the paper sit evenly on the roll, the suit contends.

If the plaintiffs win, they can claim damages under British law equal to the Kleenex brand’s U.K. profits. They can also demand that all remaining examples of the toilet paper be destroyed.

Some lawyers, however, argue that this area of law is imprecise. Distinguishing between an idea, and the expression of that idea is difficult, says Morag Macdonald a partner at Bird & Bird who specializes in intellectual-property law. Similar dilemmas occur in legal disputes over medical breakthroughs and some types of computer-programming language.

Mr. Kempner, Sir Roger’s lawyer, says the patterns are so similar that the burden of proof lies with Kimberly-Clark to prove either that it didn’t copy the pattern, or that it came up with the idea on its own.

But this case has its own special wrinkle, Ms. Macdonald says: “If [the pattern] is nonrepeating, how can they be copying it?”

Document j000000020011007dt4e0092f

[Mon, Dec 02 2002 – 11:15] eurof (email) Some journalist you are. You missed the whole point of the story. This would have been my angle. Headline:

Does Eminent Scientist Sniff his Poo from the Paper?

Embarrassed knight: just checking the pattern. A likely story, sneers Kimberly Clark. Lawsuit ongoing.

[Tue, Dec 03 2002 – 06:12] charles No, I believe *you*, Matty (tho’ google search could not find outcome –lexis-nexis, anyone?), but I don’t believe the cute greek physicist has found the answer to everything.

[Tue, Dec 03 2002 – 09:45] Matthew (www) (email) no record of any end to the case in our database or in sec filings. assume it’s still going on or was settled.