Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Chimp · 07-20-2003, 01:03 AM

John Archibald Wheeler has some very interesting ideas with feedback:

http://www.discover.com/june_02/featuniverse.html

Quote:

In his delayed-choice thought experiment, Wheeler suggests that a single photon emitted from a distant quasar (far right) can simultaneously follow two paths to Earth, even if those paths are separated by many light-years. Here one photon travels past two different galaxies, with both routes deflected by the gravitational pull of the galaxies. Stranger still, Wheeler theorizes, the observations astronomers make on Earth today decide the path the photon took billions of years ago.

The CTMU(conspansive duality-telic recursion) of Chris Langan also explains this type of "feedback".

If the locality principle is not going to be thrown into the trash heap, then a viable option is that space is something analogous to homogeneously distributed probability density functions(a perfect fluid?) i.e. increasing density gradients, giving the observed thermodynamic arrow of time. The observed cosmic expansion is a "relative" one! A "perspective effect" from our local vantage point. A shrinking object gives the illusion of receding motion. Increasing *refractive* density gradients give the appearence of a doppler-red-shift. Space increases density as matter is re-sized.

Spacetime then "remembers" the input! A quantum measurement is made, the action principle demands the shortest distance between two points be taken, whatever that may be. There is no instantaneous action at a distance!

Interesting... Either a creator with infinite god-like intelligence created this universe as a clockworks mechanism, or the creator and the mechanism are one and the same.

A universal quantum computer?

It seems that in order to continue with the idea of a physically infinite "multiverse" instantaneous communication at a distance must be accepted as an absurd axiom. But we must remember, Newtons classical reality was superceded by Albert Einstein's relativity! There is no action at a distance!

Instantaneous action at a distance was shown to be unecessary, by Einstein's theories of special and general relativity. How can an infinite multiverse be in accordance with probability theory if all of the separate universes are not in a type of corrspondence with each other? Who observes the entire multiverse?

So it can be shown that the multiverse DOES carry to much metaphysical, and heavy conceptual baggage. Goodbye multiverse

It appears that the best solution is that our universe is self contained. The locality principle is not violated.

Russell E. Rierson
analog57@yahoo.com

excreationist · 07-20-2003, 08:20 AM

That is a pretty interesting article.
Note that part of it says:

Quote:

...Does this mean humans are necessary to the existence of the universe? While conscious observers certainly partake in the creation of the participatory universe envisioned by Wheeler, they are not the only, or even primary, way by which quantum potentials become real. Ordinary matter and radiation play the dominant roles. Wheeler likes to use the example of a high-energy particle released by a radioactive element like radium in Earth's crust. The particle, as with the photons in the two-slit experiment, exists in many possible states at once, traveling in every possible direction, not quite real and solid until it interacts with something, say a piece of mica in Earth's crust. When that happens, one of those many different probable outcomes becomes real. In this case the mica, not a conscious being, is the object that transforms what might happen into what does happen. The trail of disrupted atoms left in the mica by the high-energy particle becomes part of the real world....

....Wheeler suspects that most of the universe consists of huge clouds of uncertainty that have not yet interacted either with a conscious observer or even with some lump of inanimate matter. He sees the universe as a vast arena containing realms where the past is not yet fixed.

It seems to me that when the past becomes fixed (through interaction with people, etc), it is just becoming definite for previously unexplored parts of the universe - rather than aspects of the past related to humans being affected (altering human history, like in "Back To The Future" where the present changed before his eyes). So there doesn't seem to be a feedback loop mentioned in that article. I don't understand what you're talking about as far as CTMU goes and I'm not very interested in CTMU anyway.

Chimp · 07-20-2003, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by excreationist

It seems to me that when the past becomes fixed (through interaction with people, etc), it is just becoming definite for previously unexplored parts of the universe - rather than aspects of the past related to humans being affected (altering human history, like in "Back To The Future" where the present changed before his eyes). So there doesn't seem to be a feedback loop mentioned in that article. I don't understand what you're talking about as far as CTMU goes and I'm not very interested in CTMU anyway.

The problem appears to be in the interpretation of the concept of "wave function collapse". How can this apparent instantaneous, and reverse time communication between particles take place? No information can travel faster than the speed of light. Either we accept that some sort of superluminal and reverse temporal communication is going on, or find a way to interpret the mechanism in terms of local action.

:banghead:

excreationist · 07-20-2003, 10:36 AM

Chimp:

Quote:

....How can this apparent instantaneous, and reverse time communication between particles take place? No information can travel faster than the speed of light.

That isn't necessarily a fact. BTW, Einstein, who believed things like that, never accepted quantum physics.
Apparently quantum entanglement can allow communication that is faster than the speed of light.
http://wirelessnewsfactor.com/perl/story/21850.html
http://www.mtnmath.com/whatth/node54.html
"Observations of one particle can instantaneously put constraints on observations of a second particle with which the first has become entangled even if the two particles are a billion light years apart"

Quote:

Either we accept that some sort of superluminal and reverse temporal communication is going on, or find a way to interpret the mechanism in terms of local action.

Maybe when undiscovered parts of the universe are in an indeterminate state, they contain their own parallel histories (mini-multiverses)... and when an indeterminate particle is forced to become definite, one of the alternate past becomes "real" and connects with the human part of the universe. (To keep consistent with MWI, there would be a split into 2 [or more] new parallel universes... one with definite particle states plus past A - and one with definite particle states plus past B.)

Chimp · 07-20-2003, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by excreationist
Chimp:

That isn't necessarily a fact. BTW, Einstein, who believed things like that, never accepted quantum physics.
Apparently quantum entanglement can allow communication that is faster than the speed of light.
http://wirelessnewsfactor.com/perl/story/21850.html
http://www.mtnmath.com/whatth/node54.html
"Observations of one particle can instantaneously put constraints on observations of a second particle with which the first has become entangled even if the two particles are a billion light years apart"

Maybe when undiscovered parts of the universe are in an indeterminate state, they contain their own parallel histories (mini-multiverses)... and when an indeterminate particle is forced to become definite, one of the alternate past becomes "real" and connects with the human part of the universe. (To keep consistent with MWI, there would be a split into 2 [or more] new parallel universes... one with definite particle states plus past A - and one with definite particle states plus past B.)

Interesting... Thanks for the links.

General relativity explains that the action is "local" Nothing travels faster than the speed of light while in vacuum including gravity propagation speeds, but it is a little complicated.

Stephen Hawking explains how particles can travel faster than light and backwards in time for brief periods below the Planck time. 10^(-43) sec.

The closed loop histories explanation of quantum fluctuations. Particles travelling forward, then backwards in time, annihilate one another. Hawking explains that these closed loop histories are confirmed by one interpretation of the Casmir effect.

This is allowed by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle for brief periods smaller than the Planck time. 10^(-43) sec.

http://clinton4.nara.gov/Initiatives.../shawking.html

Quote:

The possible particle histories have to include paths that travel faster than light and even paths that go back in time. Before anyone rushes out to patent a time machine let me say that in normal circumstances at least, one can not use this for time travel. However paths that go back in time are not just like angels dancing on a pin. They have real observational consequences. Even what we think of as empty space is full of particles moving in closed loops in space and time. That is they move forward in time on one side of the loop and backwards in time on the other side. These closed loops are said to be virtual particles because they can not be measured directly with a particle detector. However their effects can be measured indirectly. One way is to have a pair of metal plates close together. The effect of the plates is to reduce slightly the number of closed loops in the region between the plates relative to the number outside. There are thus more closed loops hitting the outside edges of the plates and bouncing off than there are hitting the inside edges. One would therefore expect there to be a small force pushing the plates together. This force, which was first predicted by the Turkish physicist Hendrick Casimir, has been observed experimentally. So we can be confident that closed particle loops really exist.

There coud also be a higher dimensional aspect to the "wave function" collapse. The higher dimensions are compacted to an extremely small size. Could it be that everything is only the "Planck length" apart in higher dimensions?

Russ

Chimp · 07-20-2003, 03:38 PM

THE UNREASONABLE EFFECTIVENSS OF MATHEMATICS IN THE NATURAL SCIENCES

Eugene Wigner

http://nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/level...er/Wigner.html

http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~his...ns/Wigner.html

Quote:

The enormous usefulness of mathematics in the natural sciences is something bordering on the mysterious

Why does mathematics correspond to the world?

fando · 07-20-2003, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Chimp
There coud also be a higher dimensional aspect to the "wave function" collapse. The higher dimensions are compacted to an extremely small size. Could it be that everything is only the "Planck length" apart in higher dimensions?

Intriguing thought, yet it is born of a desire to keep things classical. If everyhing were indeed connected within a Planck length in a special dimension, there would be all kinds of temporal issues. I understand that the notion that a past being chosen in the present can be disturbing, but I don't see the need to abandon it in favor of something seemingly more convoluted.

Chimp · 07-20-2003, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by fando
Intriguing thought, yet it is born of a desire to keep things classical. If everyhing were indeed connected within a Planck length in a special dimension, there would be all kinds of temporal issues. I understand that the notion that a past being chosen in the present can be disturbing, but I don't see the need to abandon it in favor of something seemingly more convoluted.

Excellent point fando

It appears that some type of instantaneous correlation or communication between regions of spacetime is happening, or it could be that spacetime has a type of "memory" analogous to a computer hardware

Perhaps there is a type of residual imaging going on at the microscopic quantum level? What if the so called "compactified dimensions" are fractal in nature?

A holographic spacetime?

Chimp

Marduk · 07-21-2003, 09:30 AM

"A holographic spacetime?"

I think the latest issue of Scientific American has a long article on our "holographic" universe.

Shake · 07-21-2003, 10:23 AM

Chimp posted this quote above:

Quote:

The possible particle histories have to include paths that travel faster than light and even paths that go back in time. Before anyone rushes out to patent a time machine let me say that in normal circumstances at least, one can not use this for time travel. However paths that go back in time are not just like angels dancing on a pin. They have real observational consequences. Even what we think of as empty space is full of particles moving in closed loops in space and time. That is they move forward in time on one side of the loop and backwards in time on the other side. These closed loops are said to be virtual particles because they can not be measured directly with a particle detector. However their effects can be measured indirectly. One way is to have a pair of metal plates close together. The effect of the plates is to reduce slightly the number of closed loops in the region between the plates relative to the number outside. There are thus more closed loops hitting the outside edges of the plates and bouncing off than there are hitting the inside edges. One would therefore expect there to be a small force pushing the plates together. This force, which was first predicted by the Turkish physicist Hendrick Casimir, has been observed experimentally. So we can be confident that closed particle loops really exist.

Forgive me if this seems a little simplistic, but how would one tell the difference between "a small force pushing the plates together" and a small gravitational force pulling the plates together? Or should it just have been phrased in a manner to illustrate the attractive force of gravity (as opposed to some new "pushing" force)?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-21-2003, 09:30 AM	#9
Marduk Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: the 10th planet Posts: 5,065	"A holographic spacetime?" I think the latest issue of Scientific American has a long article on our "holographic" universe.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.