It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Advances in quantum research are like a broken zipper.

page: 1
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Advances in quantum physics are like a broken zipper. As we slowly pull it up, what is below it becomes unzipped. The analogy being that what we once held as rules and laws in the sciences, some start to come apart at the seams.

I consider myself to having an open mind as I am sure many others have the same impression of their own self. To me, it means that I rarely jump to instant conclusions when presented with new material that does not immediately fit into the box we know as reality. Once it fails a scientific truth, however, I have to seriously degrade it. Scientific truths being such rules that if violated, would mean that most other things we have created that were built around that understanding, could not exist.

This is really the basis of the scientific method. A gauntlet that most everything we experience must pass through unscathed, in order to be examined in full as a new, or novel discovery. Those that understand science, know this as the holy grail of the discipline, and the reason why science is so resistant to anything that would change fundamental, basic rules as we know them.

Today, the forefront of Science is deeply saturated into understanding Quantum Physics. Trouble is, some evidence discovered when attempting to utilize quantum methods, seem to violate some of our really well healed theories, like the nature of the space/time continuum, or the general laws of relativity and the laws of Thermodynamics.

In order for both quantum and classical “theories” to co-exist, there has to be a way of modifying these dearly held laws, using scientific correlations between them that do not violate principles understood by all of the creations we have made that used them as a basis of research. That, is a daunting task for sure and defines the allegory of stuffing the poop back into the horse.

So, with that introduction, let’s look at some rather interesting poop.

We understand the speed of light to be finite, unless slowed down by refractive influence traveling through transparent materials, or gravitational lensing. These slow-downs are miniscule and the speed of light in free space (a vacuum) is constant, regardless of the speed or direction of an object emitting that light. Light deals with fundamental particles called photons, but they also behave like waves.

So, a few questions come up:

What is the speed of the propagation of gravity?

What is the speed of the propagation of magnetism?

Einstein's relativistic equation for gravity based on general relativity demands that gravity travels at the speed of light. However, quantum science is departing from that view.

Although they are not “particles’ (the “graviton” has not been identified), and are thought of as waves, they do have a propagation speed in which they influence objects around them, and this “speed” is most likely faster than light.

Quantum physics has shown us already that through quantum entanglement, the information about one particle is transferred to another entangled particle instantaneously, regardless of the distance between them.

It would follow that the true nature of magnetism and gravity can only be explained in a quantum environment, and if so, imagine the tasks we have of re-thinking and repairing our great truths!

So, for the sake of an example, let’s say a star explodes.
Since the gravitational environment has certainly changed for any object near that star and beyond, when is that information available?

According to what science thinks today, it is anywhere from infinity (which is fairly close to instantaneously, but never gets there.), to 20x the speed of light (with some of the heaviest math that is conveniently left out of here, but referenced at the end of the post).

We would require quantum methods to measure it, which as of yet, we do not have. In any case, many scientists are saying that the “information” reaches us long before we would ever see the explosion.


Let’s say again, that a gigantic permanent magnetic object instantly appeared out of nowhere in the solar system (bear with me). Again, new science suggests that the propagation of the magnetic influence has a “speed”, and again ranges from instantaneous (infinity), to 20x the speed of light.

The original theories that magnetic flux propagation followed the speed of light are being severely challenged. The thinking here states that even being Millions of miles away from that “event”, the information reaches us long before we would ever see that object. Note this is not magnetic radiation, but the sudden presence of a permanent magnetic field, if such a thing could be produced.

The point of all of this is, we can already measure gravity, as well as magnetism. The conundrum is having situations like this so we can have opportunities measure them. Even what we can simulate in CERN, would require the ability to measure quantum effects, in which we are in our infancy.

It appears, certainly without sufficient evidence, that the entire universe(s) could be intricately entangled.

Where, and when will the breakthrough come in quantum physics that will allow us to truly understand the nature of gravity and magnetism? I think it is close, but wonder if it will happen in any of our lifetimes.

Anyway, poop for thought.
It is a good time to turn this over to those on ATS that think about such stuff.

Thanks, and eager to discuss anything valuable or not in this short diatribe.

Some interesting links:

Naked Science - Measuring Gravity


Well, there are a number of teams around the world who are trying to build detectors to detect these ripples of gravity moving through space. The sensitivity you need to that is absolutely mind boggling. You're talking about distances of about a mile that you're sending light beams down and you're trying to see whether gravity is causing that distance to ripple by about the size of an atom. So, you've got an experimental setup a mile long and you're trying to detect something that's moving by the width of an atom.


MetaResearch on Gravity and Magnetism (+ heavy math for those that like it.

WP (Read about Laplace)

The Heitler-London theory.

In the fringe, but certainly interesting:

Souls on Distorted Awakening.




posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 02:47 PM
link   
The more I learn about QP, the more regard I give to the simulation hypothesis.

Warning, language:
Camper Killer Commentary #10 "Is Reality Real?"



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: charlyv
Advances in quantum physics are like a broken zipper. As we slowly pull it up, what is below it becomes unzipped. The analogy being that what we once held as rules and laws in the sciences, some start to come apart at the seams.


Not really.

The interesting thing about science and physics is that every time a new discovery is made, it doesn't reject the old theory, but incorporates it into a grander scheme of things. Quantum Mechanics does not invalidate Newtonian Mechanics; it includes it within the fold. Finding quarks does not invalidate the atomic model; it incorporates it. It's kind of like using a microscope. You see something with the naked eye, place it under a microscope, and new worlds are revealed. That doesn't mean the naked eye view of the world is invalid. In fact, it's quite useful. Both views are valid descriptions of the object, but one does not preclude the other.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: CraftBuilder

Ok. Well then, take me to your programmer.


edit on 29-11-2015 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   
The very thing that we use to look at these problems might be a good place to start.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Isnt gravity just space trying to reclaim space , and the more mass, the more valuable the space is so more gravity ?

Nice thread op



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 03:31 PM
link   
There are a lot of things incorporated into our science that are not right. You can pick and choose testing to prove something if you believe it is true and then modify the parameters of a test if it turns out wrong. Then someone retests it with those parameters and can say the evidence is correct, even though the evidence is not correct.

Consensus of the time governs what is acceptable procedure. Much of the basics of our knowledge is misguided because of that. A theory when accepted governs what procedures build off of it. A belief in something that was not completely true, cut by Occams Razor, can lead to many falsities over the years.

At least parts of all evidence are correct but many times it is misapplied too. Most evidence is specific to a designated situation. It may be applied sometimes to different parameters but not always. Principles can be messed up.

As an example, H2O is considered water yet the water we drink is not just H2O. It is a complex molecular structure built onto the H2O platform. That is what is in my well and comes out of our faucets. That single fallacy has messed up a lot of people, H2O is actually only attainable for an instant in the lab and it will pull other elements quickly out of any container it is stored in or from the air that touches it. If it did not, there would be little chance for the present life on this planet. But most people are fed the belief that what they are drinking is H2O when in fact it is real water. We parrot what we are taught even though it is not completely correct, water is a more accurate interpretation to what is in a lake.

We are led to believe a lot of half truths even through science because not all the information concerning the evidence and parameters is given to us.

No problem, as long as everyone believes that H20 is water, I guess it is. we are fed a lot more misinterpretations and lies than that in society. We were trained to believe it is good to believe in lies, remember Santa delivers gifts to you at Christmas until you learn he is not real.

Nobody high up ever said they knew what gravity was, they just define it's properties and know how to measure it. I took an online course on this subject to find if anything new was found but not so far. But people assume that science knows what gravity is caused from. Maybe in another ten years they will, but not as of yet, they have a lot of testing to do to determine what it is. The course was free from here... www.futurelearn.com... I thought it was interesting. I did the last week ahead of schedule because I want to take another course there starting monday. It is free unless you want proof, I don't need proof of my knowledge though. I am sixty, no young people believe anyone over sixty anyway, papers or not. We all have alzheimer disease over sixty, we only remember what is important to us.

edit on 29-11-2015 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: charlyv



According to what science thinks today, it is anywhere from infinity (which is fairly close to instantaneously, but never gets there.), to 20x the speed of light (with some of the heaviest math that is conveniently left out of here, but referenced at the end of the post).
...


That is not what science thinks.

Are you seriously using Van Flandern as your reference for physics?



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 04:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: moebius
a reply to: charlyv



According to what science thinks today, it is anywhere from infinity (which is fairly close to instantaneously, but never gets there.), to 20x the speed of light (with some of the heaviest math that is conveniently left out of here, but referenced at the end of the post).
...


That is not what science thinks.

Are you seriously using Van Flandern as your reference for physics?

I agree. When I googled this I couldn't find any examples of gravity propagating faster than light.

EDIT: However, I did find this:
arxiv.org - Aberration and the Speed of Gravity...

Maybe that's what the OP is referring to? Basically, I think what it means is the SUN is moving towards where our sun IS, not where it was 8 minutes ago. However, if the sun were to blink out of existence, our Earth wouldn't respond for 8 minutes. Gravity isn't propogating faster than teh speed of light. A poster on the internet put it this way:

TL;DR the gravity vector always points at the instantaneous position of the source, the wave that bends the spacetime travels at c

www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments /1kjp6z/does_gravity_travel_at_the_speed_of_light_if_the/cbppd4b


It's quite bizarre. Here's another:
www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/gb6y3/what_is_the_sp eed_of_gravity/c1m9h3j

He sums up his post this way:

So what does that mean? It means that the "speed of gravity" is the speed of light … technically. Changes in the geometry of spacetime actually propagate at the speed of light, but the apparent effects of gravitation end up being instantaneous in all real-world dynamical systems, because things don't start or stop moving or gain or lose mass instantaneously for no reason. Once you factor in everything you need to in order to model a real system behaving in a realistic manner, you find that all the aberrations you might expect because of a finite speed of light end up canceling out, so gravity acts like it's instantaneous, even though the underlying phenomenon is most definitely not.

The universe is pretty damn cool, if you ask me.

Still trying to mentally grasp how the Earth is gravitationally vectored in on where the sun is RIGHT NOW, not 8 minutes ago, but if the sun were to disappear, the Earth wouldn't know it for 8 minutes.
edit on 11/29/2015 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 05:19 PM
link   
a reply to: schuyler




The interesting thing about science and physics is that every time a new discovery is made, it doesn't reject the old theory, but incorporates it into a grander scheme of things. Quantum Mechanics does not invalidate Newtonian Mechanics; it includes it within the fold.


There are the subtle but important contradictions with Newtonian mechanics that presently create great problems with the unity of theories, especially the second Laplace theorum as well as original works by Heisenberg. If aberation causes time differentials to exist in gravitational and/or magnetic propagation, they do temporarily invalidate what we hold as the Laws of Thermodynamics as they add or subtract energy that we really do not understand where it enters or exits the system. To really go forward from there, we must come up with what that is, and it is incredibly perplexing. Not to say it wont be found, but it is still missing.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: moebius
a reply to: charlyv



According to what science thinks today, it is anywhere from infinity (which is fairly close to instantaneously, but never gets there.), to 20x the speed of light (with some of the heaviest math that is conveniently left out of here, but referenced at the end of the post).
...


That is not what science thinks.

Are you seriously using Van Flandern as your reference for physics?


Science is evolving. He is one of many that claim we possess knowledge that has been kept from the public, but is not a deep researcher. He talks about these enigma's but has no proof. When it comes to Laplace and Heisenberg, however, they attack special relativity with some serious math and observations. Quantum researchers that use their work as a foundation have seriously upset the applecart with some astounding revelations, which require re-thinking how important our conscious minds are to results of some experiments... Heavy stuff.

BTW: Check out the work of Nichola Tesla, in the last reference in my post. He actually created scalar waves that he claimed had no propagational delay and did not obey the inverse square law of propagation loss. His revelations are marveled to this day, and he really was on to something before he was literally destroyed by Edison....
edit on 29-11-2015 by charlyv because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 05:38 PM
link   
So I'm wondering how the Earth is gravitationally vectored in on where the sun is RIGHT NOW, not 8 minutes ago, but if the sun were to disappear, the Earth wouldn't know it for 8 minutes.

I found this link and hope it's useful to other laymen like myself:
math.ucr.edu - Does Gravity Travel at the Speed of Light?...

In the simple newtonian model, gravity propagates instantaneously: the force exerted by a massive object points directly toward that object's present position. For example, even though the Sun is 500 light seconds from the Earth, newtonian gravity describes a force on Earth directed towards the Sun's position "now," not its position 500 seconds ago. Putting a "light travel delay" (technically called "retardation") into newtonian gravity would make orbits unstable, leading to predictions that clearly contradict Solar System observations.


In general relativity, on the other hand, gravity propagates at the speed of light; that is, the motion of a massive object creates a distortion in the curvature of spacetime that moves outward at light speed. This might seem to contradict the Solar System observations described above, but remember that general relativity is conceptually very different from newtonian gravity, so a direct comparison is not so simple. Strictly speaking, gravity is not a "force" in general relativity, and a description in terms of speed and direction can be tricky. For weak fields, though, one can describe the theory in a sort of newtonian language. In that case, one finds that the "force" in GR is not quite central—it does not point directly towards the source of the gravitational field—and that it depends on velocity as well as position. The net result is that the effect of propagation delay is almost exactly cancelled, and general relativity very nearly reproduces the newtonian result.

edit on 11/29/2015 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: charlyv

I know nothing.... i admit.... you may as well call me Jon Snow!


But my take on it is the missing factor is the fact that all these so called 'laws' are actually just our perception of the universe. So yeah... im not sure if scientists realize that is the problem with their misunderstanding of quantum world



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 06:01 PM
link   
a reply to: CallYourBluff

I have great respect for the work of Robert Lanza. His work with stem cells and the regenerative capabilities in the human body are probably the forefront of this science presently. He incorporates quantum methods in his research and is a believer that our conscious mind has so many more abilities than we presently use, and also the way we approach experimentation actually changes the outcome and in essence creates reality. Here again, is a deep researcher who uses revelations in quantum research and produces results that still have so much mystery in their actual mechanisms. It is like jumping the gap, and not repairing the existing theories so they fully explain what is really happening. This is what I mean by the zipper analogy... Somewhere there is a profound and fundamental force in the universe that when we finally pin it down, will be a revelation that changes everything but explains why as well. Great video and thanks for the post.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: jonnywhite

Yes, one such example comes from MetaResearch (Flanders) that is also based on Laplace second thorum. The math in there is really mostly Laplace and Heisenberg, with his own statistical corellations... thus:


We conclude that the concept of frozen gravitational fields is acausal and paradoxical. Gravitational fields must continually regenerate, like a flowing waterfall. In doing so, they must consist of entities that propagate. And the speed of propagation of those entities must greatly exceed the speed of light.

Conclusion: The Speed of Gravity is ³ 2x1010 c

We conclude that gravitational fields, even “static” ones, continually regenerate through entities that must propagate at some very high speed, . We call this the speed of gravity. Equation [1] then tells us how orbits will expand in response to this large but finite propagation speed, since the field itself, and not merely changes in the field, will transfer momentum to orbiting target bodies. Rewriting equation [1] in a form suitable for comparisons with observations, we derive:


and the math that follows will give you a headache!



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: jonnywhite




So I'm wondering how the Earth is gravitationally vectored in on where the sun is RIGHT NOW, not 8 minutes ago, but if the sun were to disappear, the Earth wouldn't know it for 8 minutes.


That is causal to the older theories that gravity propagates with the speed of light, that many quantum researchers now say may not be true. These scientists, based on Laplace second theorum, postulate that the loss of the Sun would be almost immediately known at Earth... Paradoxical.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 06:30 PM
link   
a reply to: charlyv



So, a few questions come up:

What is the speed of the propagation of gravity?

What is the speed of the propagation of magnetism?

Einstein's relativistic equation for gravity based on general relativity demands that gravity travels at the speed of light. However, quantum science is departing from that view.

Although they are not “particles’ (the “graviton” has not been identified), and are thought of as waves, they do have a propagation speed in which they influence objects around them, and this “speed” is most likely faster than light.

It's issues like this which highlight the reason gravity has always been a major problem for physics. Science doesn't claim to have a definitive description of gravity, it just has different theories on the way gravity works. Personally I do not put much stock into the existence of so called gravity waves, I think we would have at least detected micro gravity waves or something like that by now. But we have detected nothing like that yet which leads me to believe we never will.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: charlyv

Even a broken zipper is right twice a day, or three times or whatever is necessary...
Hold on a minute...



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: ChaoticOrder




I think we would have at least detected micro gravity waves or something like that by now. But we have detected nothing like that yet which leads me to believe we never will.


We are close, according to that little blurb I ended the post with in the reference section.
The chips we have in our smart phones use some very rough and granular technologies to sense gravity as applied G forces, but not what these guys are doing. Miles of light wire, like a straight version of CERN, but modulating light and trying to detect the minuscule vibrations at the atomic level... can't be easy.



posted on Nov, 29 2015 @ 07:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: charlyv
a reply to: CallYourBluff

I have great respect for the work of Robert Lanza. His work with stem cells and the regenerative capabilities in the human body are probably the forefront of this science presently. He incorporates quantum methods in his research and is a believer that our conscious mind has so many more abilities than we presently use, and also the way we approach experimentation actually changes the outcome and in essence creates reality. Here again, is a deep researcher who uses revelations in quantum research and produces results that still have so much mystery in their actual mechanisms. It is like jumping the gap, and not repairing the existing theories so they fully explain what is really happening. This is what I mean by the zipper analogy... Somewhere there is a profound and fundamental force in the universe that when we finally pin it down, will be a revelation that changes everything but explains why as well. Great video and thanks for the post.

Thanks for your appreciation.The understanding of consciousness is definitely the missing piece of the jigsaw.
It's what I spend most of my time contemplating.
Good to know that others are still asking the same questions, rather than parroting what's expected.
Good post.




new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join