|
Post by ColcordMama on May 9, 2012 12:11:17 GMT -7
Excellent point, CWI. Not even getting into the multiverse theory, too.
|
|
|
Post by Cwi555 on May 10, 2012 17:17:06 GMT -7
We can go to the multiverse as well if you like
|
|
|
Post by ColcordMama on May 10, 2012 18:57:34 GMT -7
Really?? NOW you're talking...! I have a theory about multiverse. What if those moments we all experience...deja vu and the like...are really rips in the fabric separating multiverses? Or pinholes? You get that feeling that you've been there before, maybe you just saw into another you who did? What if the universes cross each other even on different planes and they swap paint? Wouldn't that account for a lot of odd phenomena?
|
|
|
Post by Cwi555 on May 10, 2012 23:24:58 GMT -7
A lot depends on which multiverse you prescribe to. - There is the M theory which is an extension of string theory. It states that each universe is it's own P membrane created by collisions within 11 or 26 dimensions depending on the observer,.
- There is the quantum multiverse which is an interpretation of quantum mechanics in which the universal wave function is an objective reality, with all possible past and future events are real each representing it's own world or universe.
- Most religions mention specific alternate places/planes of existence such has heavens and hells, with hinduism, and buddism specifically mentioning alternate planes with the hindu puranic documents going one further and mentioning infinite universes.
From a scientific standpoint, it has been proven a long time ago that the universe cannot exist with simply 4 dimensions. (x, y, z, time) Your thoughts on it are as plausible as theirs are.
|
|
|
Post by ColcordMama on May 11, 2012 16:08:08 GMT -7
I was referring to the quantum multiverse theory. I'm no physicist and never will be LOL but this sort of thing fascinates me, as does nanotechnology and several other ***** areas of study you wouldn't expect from a grandma. If I blunder in my discussions, that's why. All I have to my credit is interest in the topic but I can talk all day on a beginner level if the other party to the discussion has patience.
|
|
|
Post by Cwi555 on May 11, 2012 19:47:14 GMT -7
I was referring to the quantum multiverse theory. I'm no physicist and never will be LOL but this sort of thing fascinates me, as does nanotechnology and several other ***** areas of study you wouldn't expect from a grandma. If I blunder in my discussions, that's why. All I have to my credit is interest in the topic but I can talk all day on a beginner level if the other party to the discussion has patience. The quantum multiverse theory has fallen out of favor for string theory/M theory. The main reason for that is that aspects of them both preclude each other. Neither fully work and are effectively full of wholes. I've went through the math in the Nth detail trying to understand, but both 'assume' several factors. If you study the MWI (Multiworld/multiverse) theories they start struggling at the point of Quantum decoherence. Specifically it falls apart with what is known as the 'measurement problem. Lets use Schrodinger's single non-relativistic particle Time dependent equation as an example; where m is the particle's mass, V is its potential energy, ∇2 is the Laplacian, and Ψ is the wavefunction (more precisely, in this context, it is called the "position-space wavefunction" As the wave function evolves, it turns into linear super positions of different states, BUT, and that's a big but, actual measurements find themselves definite state. In other words, the actual measurement to verify the predicted results from the equation are deterministic. The act of measuring it, changes the results, so that the results change based on the observer taking the measurements. The why of that has yet to be answered. The results of all experiments fall apart where they meet reality. How does measuring something change the measurements based simply upon who took them? Then there is the single particle double slit experiment. A single particle is fired at a double split target in which the particle entered both slits simultaneously. That tends to get into quantum tunneling, and wave particle duality. On a side note as an example of how 'scientist' throw out bull S*** to answer questions they haven't a clue on, Einstein when faced with the problem of a particle acting like a wave coined the term 'wave particle duality', and when faced with the delta v energy problem of a 'particles mass changing direction in a sinusoidal wave from positive to negative displacement he came out with the BS that it was a photon that had no mass. That is BS by itself, but experiment after experiment has been designed around it, and not one anyway ever actually proved it. The largest looked for predicted spatial distortions in the space time continuum in the wake of the earths passing through space. When the answers didn't come us as predicted by Einstein, they changed the math and threw out the data blaming it on 'bad equipment'. Never mind that every single experiment leading up to and and following it has had the same 'anomaly'. It is my contention that the particles do have waves, and that there is another particle unseen, and unmeasurable due to being in another dimension but tied to the particle in this verse spiraling around the electromagnetic wave portion connected to that wave. Picture a magnetic rod with two ball magnets spun just fast enough to not make contact with the rod, but not fast enough to escape it. If you aimed such a set up at the double slit experiment, quantum mechanics would force the alterverse particle to interact with this verse in a manner that is measurable but only when it is observed. All other times, the particle is not in this universe. That is why the deterministic results of the Schrodinger equation. That would require a host of dimensions to perform such a feat. I also believe we witness through that double slit experiment that which particle is noted, depends on observation, and that both change places constantly and simultaneously in and out of this verse and others. Thats before we get to time. Time has been suspected of working as a wave as well. If in fact it is a wave/particle which is suspected based on measured experiments where the decay rate of short lived radioisotopes 'varied' displaying a pattern consistent with the oscillations of a sinusoidal wave.
|
|
|
Post by ColcordMama on May 12, 2012 11:05:35 GMT -7
That's waaaaaaaay above my pay grade, dear. I tried, I really did, but you lost me. Schrodinger? Isn't he the one who had the cat?
|
|
|
Post by Cwi555 on May 12, 2012 16:32:51 GMT -7
Yes, That was the one with the cat.
Put another way, the basic problem with the theory is when you take measurements. In Quantum terms, it means if you measure 11.5" someone else may measure the same thing and it be 11" and yet someone else, 13". All three are right at the same time.
In short, it isn't real until it's observed by someone. That snaps the object out of space time and fixes it in a deterministic fashion. (You measured it as 11.5").
|
|
elac
Just got here
Posts: 5
|
Post by elac on May 14, 2012 9:40:41 GMT -7
Not really relevant, but I love Schrodinger's cat. I'm afraid, though, that most of my experience with alternate realities comes from comics, scifi/fantasy, and Quantum Leap.
|
|
|
Post by Cwi555 on May 15, 2012 13:35:35 GMT -7
Not really relevant, but I love Schrodinger's cat. I'm afraid, though, that most of my experience with alternate realities comes from comics, scifi/fantasy, and Quantum Leap. Just having your mind open to it is more than most.
|
|
|
Post by mud on May 17, 2012 19:12:32 GMT -7
glad you posted that again, thanks
|
|
|
Post by missasip on May 17, 2012 19:22:37 GMT -7
Well as long as I keep running beside you guys in the Parallel Universe and can somehow manage to keep up, I'll have to just live with it.... Jimmy
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2012 21:58:05 GMT -7
Fascinating.
I love reading your posts cwi...makes me feel smarter just knowing you.
|
|