It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by swan001
reply to post by Bone75
Quantum only applies to particles. As soon as you have newtonian sized bodies, like galaxies, there is newtonian principles interfering. In other words, there is different laws governing atoms and different laws governing galaxies.
The quantum state of the universe is ultimately an experimental question and should be resolved by comparison with observation. The 'correct' quantum state should at the very least be compatible with our present-day cosmological data, including the large-scale homogeneity and isotropy and the small observed anisotropies in the cosmic microwave background. Computing classical predictions of this sort from any proposed initial quantum state remains however a formidable challenge. There are two reasons for this. The first is technical, the second conceptual.
The technical reason is that making predictions from a given initial quantum state requires a sufficiently good control of the dynamical laws of quantum gravity. With our current candidates for a quantum theory of gravity, such a control exists if the theory is first classically specialised to a cosmological model universe that only incorporates a few parameters to describe the universe. For example, a homogeneous model universe sets the matter density to be the same at every point in space, describing thus the matter distribution by just one parameter, the average density. It takes however an infinite number of parameters to describe the real universe: The matter density in the real universe is not the same at every point in space. It is currently not well understood how accurately the quantum dynamics of quantised cosmological models, with only a few parameters, approximate the quantum dynamics of the real universe, with its infinite number of parameters.
The conceptual reason goes right to the heart of quantum theory. In the overwhelming majority of applications of quantum theory, physicists are dealing with a comparatively small quantum system on the one hand (a molecule, or colliding elementary particles), and on the other hand with measuring devices (such as particle detectors) that can be understood largely without resorting to quantum physics. The standard ways in which physicists extract predictions from quantum theory make use of this two-fold view of the world - here the quantum system, there the measuring device. In quantum cosmology, where the quantum system is the whole universe, this standard view is not valid any more. What is required is a working conceptual understanding of how to make classical predictions from a quantum state when even the observers are part of the quantum system that they observe. In the pursuit of this understanding, quantum cosmologists have in the past two decades found much common ground with laboratory quantum physicists whose experiments can in certain circumstances exhibit quantum mechanical behaviour between two ends of a room, or in some recent experiments even between the two banks of the Danube.
Originally posted by darkstar57
your fractal theory of reality is bunk. sorry. the analogy breaks when confronted by the point like characteristics of protons, neutrons, electrons... as revealed by particle colliders. now take a look at galactic collisions. the analogy immediatly fails on comparison of particle collision results and galaxy collision results.
beauty and intrigiung does not equal truth.
Hello Eric. I'd like to congratulate you and your team and thank you for providing the world with this image. I'm curious as to why you posted one of the images with the rings if you're pretty sure they're not part of the atom. Could you provide us with any images that don't contain the rings?
It was the highest resolution image we took and the one that looked the best. Most of the other images are at ~ 4x lower resolution because we were optimising the image capture for fitting rather than display purposes. We've done more work at it does appear that the rings are related to lensing/phase shifting behaviours the atom.
Whenever this theory (or similar) gets brought up, I see a lot of people coming to the realisation of how small they are. Think about it the other way. Think about how big you are. Yes you.
By logic, if you decide to play along with this idea, then we are each a massive universe containing billions of galaxies and trillions of stars and planets. You are a God of your own body/universe, and you should treat it with love and respect. Otherwise your inhabitants (micro organisms) might not believe you exist.
You get where I'm going?
"It’s not a coincidence the image shares a striking similarity with blood vessels – a structure hundreds of thousands of times smaller. The fractal pattern that occurs in both is an efficient way to cover a large surface area. It also occurs in the neurons in our brain and in the system of airways in our lungs."