A Jewel at the Heart of Quantum Physics

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 12:23 PM
link   

The revelation that particle interactions, the most basic events in nature, may be consequences of geometry significantly advances a decades-long effort to reformulate quantum field theory


“The degree of efficiency is mind-boggling,” said Jacob Bourjaily, a theoretical physicist at Harvard University and one of the researchers who developed the new idea. “You can easily do, on paper, computations that were infeasible even with a computer before.”


The amplituhedron looks like an intricate, multifaceted jewel in higher dimensions. Encoded in its volume are the most basic features of reality that can be calculated

Source

I'm not gonna pretend I understand quantum physics, but from what I read, this seems like a very interesting development. I'd be interested in seeing responses from other members, especially ones who are knowledgeable with this sort of thing.




posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by trollz
 


No offense OP but if you can't simplify this for the masses - being OP and all, isn't it kind of unfair to ask us to do it?



posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by MysteriousHusky
 


No, this is for people interested in such things. I'm sure there are plenty here who will understand what is being discussed in the article I linked. Like I said, I don't know much about quantum physics either... That is why I posted it, to see what others have to say.



posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by trollz
 


It is a development that helps streamline predicting particles movements and developments for sure, but more importantly it helps hint that we need to rethink the idea of space time. Ive been saying this for years: space time is not a three dimensional event- meaning that what happened yesterday and tomorrow really happens at the same time. Space time is flat, just curved.

We are living in a painting. It is all one predictable event. You may think that it is so elaborate that this must not be so; that we have free will. But I can guarantee this: if a computer were to observe your behavior for hundreds of years, or to make you more comfortable- thousands, hundreds of thousands, your every breath, blink of an eye, thought process, every single bit of you could be predicted.

Our past and future are a part of a single line. If anything in that line were to change, the entire universe would. Time does not exist.



posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Dynamike
 


Thanks for breaking it down in laments terms. Space time I can wrap my head around. Could this be the break advocates of String Theory have been looking for?



posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by trollz
 




“They are very powerful calculational techniques, but they are also incredibly suggestive,” Skinner said. “They suggest that thinking in terms of space-time was not the right way of going about this.”


This is certainly a very profound statement.
One that could lead to some new discoveries.



posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Dynamike
 


I'm going to start by saying I understand what you're saying.

I'm going to finish by saying I don't understand how the hell that's supposed to work.

But while you're in the process of giving me the third grade sparknotes version, I'll toss this question in as well: does this mean destiny is real?
edit on 24-9-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2013 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Dynamike
reply to post by trollz
 

We are living in a painting. It is all one predictable event. You may think that it is so elaborate that this must not be so; that we have free will. But I can guarantee this: if a computer were to observe your behavior for hundreds of years, or to make you more comfortable- thousands, hundreds of thousands, your every breath, blink of an eye, thought process, every single bit of you could be predicted.

Not necessarily. We know that if we have x particles with a half life of 1 hour then after 1 hour half of them will have decayed. However, if we take one particle then after 1 hour there is a 50:50 chance it will have decayed.

So if our thought processes involve millions of particles then you are probably right since all firing neurons are based on practically certain probabilities BUT what if some neurons fire based on the odd radioactive ions here and there and since the volume is low the probability becomes essentially random. This would add uncertainty into our thought processes and thus not be predictable.

NB even an android brain would be influenced like this if the neural net was constructed of small enough nodes.

Neither "thought processes" would be random incoherent processes since the vast majority of thought would be based on near predictable outcomes but those few differences would add the occasional mysterious "eureka" moments or the occasional decision turn left when normally we would go right for example.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 03:02 AM
link   
reply to post by yorkshirelad
 


To define your 50/50, which is much like how a particle acts when it is in a wave form- as it can only be in a probable location only to be determined upon the moment it interacts with another particle, we would agree that this is a result based on chance that can not be calculated, correct?

I would agree with you there. However, that does not leave out the possibility that we may discover a way to precisely calculate every probability and narrow it down to a certainty.

But if we lean on what we do know, then I would say that your example is flawed. And take my example to help you understand my reasoning.

Imagine if a program was self aware to an extent. And it tried to 'discover' its own code in order to determine its consciousness or thought process. Lets imagine (or maybe we wouldnt have to image because this may be an actual barrier) that the program would not be able to discover this because the very program it operates on is the code that it is trying to discover, i.e. you would need to be an outside observer to see the code because it would not be observable from within.

What I am trying to say here is that if you were a being on a higher dimension, one that would see the entire universe as a giant ball all rolled up from beginning to end, you would see the entire "program" as one entity. The fact that the "program" or universe is operated upon a code that has variables seems quite irrelevant because the only thing that matters is what the being observes.

If there are variables that could alter our observable reality, then I would have to assume that the calculations are done on a completely different plane and would effect the entire universe as one constant entity.

The only way you could convince me otherwise would be to build a time machine and go back to change something. That is the only essence of free will; to change something that DID, DOES, or WILL occur. When you tell me that what occurs is just a probability then I see only multiple universes where the other probabilities played out- this is essentially meaning that THERE IS NO FREE WILL. We are what we are predicted to be.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 03:07 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


I think so. Destiny seems to be logical.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 03:15 AM
link   

MysteriousHusky
reply to post by Dynamike
 


Thanks for breaking it down in laments terms. Space time I can wrap my head around. Could this be the break advocates of String Theory have been looking for?


Well I think string theory has already proven itself to be more than just a conjecture. It seems that this only proves that people try to relate too many forces together at all scales. This is somewhat preposterous because not all forces interact with each other at all of the dimensions. Some interact with each other differently at different dimensions or not at all. When you look at a particles all the way down to scale it is like getting a real close up of your monitor screen and seeing the pixels and then trying to blow up the pixel to the size of your screen and expecting similarities. I think this article is about as close to a unifying theory as we can get.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 03:37 AM
link   
Hmmm...I wonder how the model manifests itself in the unfolding reality.
Quantised bits of reality that interact with each other in a multi dimensional fractal geometry at the Planck scale.


This fractal geomotery at the Planck scale seems to be everywhere yet nowhere....
Kind of like "space" itself.
edit on 25-9-2013 by Jukiodone because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 04:34 AM
link   
They guy who created the X-prize dreamed of going into space as a kid. So did the girl who funded the prize. And so did many of the people who forked out 200k. As a man thinketh in his heart so is he. What you think about is manifesting.

Here's a story.... it happened just in July....

I was on vacation. i was drunk and high. And really high for that matter. I got this idea that popped into my mind. (which sometimes happens when I'm that far gone). It said to me "what happens is that when you imagine something you're actually building it in the 4th dimension". So I wrote that down after even though I could barely write. I thought it was pretty interesting.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 04:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Dynamike
 


This is the only part I think you're missing (highlighted):

Trees aren't trees. They're really just a bunch of atoms.

Atoms aren't atoms. They're really just a bunch of subatomic particles.

Subatomic particles aren't subatomic particles. They're really just a bunch of wave/particle dualities. (For now - because we can't see beyond subatomic particles.)

My point is, we keep looking for what is making these images, but all that we keep finding is more images; and while its fun to try to create good concepts for the images that we become aware of, and it even fuels our creation of more concepts of good, it is really just a wild goose chase/scavenger hunt to try to find the cause of the images within the images.

So, what makes us believe any of it is any more than images that we are lead to see in order to have faith?

It could be two penguins having a snowball fight, and we just see trees. And those penguins are just images as well. Redundant, I know.

And the same goes for this amplituhedron. It is an image that might help define other images, and that is pretty cool, but in truth, the image of the designer, or concept creator of all of the images, won't be seen or known unless he wants to be.

He said he created us in his image, so this is where we should be looking - not at an amplituhedron - not for the real answer to these images, or this reality.
edit on 9/25/2013 by Bleeeeep because: fix



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Dynamike
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


I think so. Destiny seems to be logical.


During a meditation where it became more than a meditation, I stood on a painting or poster of the universe, and couldn't get back in. The plasmic screen, is like a movie really. But destiny versus free will is a different story. The default position when a soul enters the (hard to describe because its very realistic, but akin to a digitial movie hologram realm) is via the movie, the idea of destiny, how things play out by default. I've been told that de je vu is actually the marker for the default movie that we are shown before we enter. Free Will is trying to take those frames and color them up with either intrinsic things such as: awareness, understanding, compassion, or even actions that make changes and buck the whole movie, or at least your portions of it and small areas within the larger.

That is actually the job. And we're supposed to be reporting for duty. An aware person is not just following destiny, for that is more an unquestioned life.

The universe isn't learning over and over as some think in various schools of thought such as the law of one, its just a movie. Its the people that enter that are learning, even if they just play the default roles for a while, changing roles, they'd be learning a lot. But picking it all up to awareness and pushing to override the body and codings is where the bigger growth is.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Bleeeeep
 


Well something about trees, even crystals, they seem to take in, transmute and reflect photons and light, full spectrum. So we're not alone here in the movie.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 07:18 AM
link   

trollz
I'm not gonna pretend I understand quantum physics, but from what I read, this seems like a very interesting development. I'd be interested in seeing responses from other members, especially ones who are knowledgeable with this sort of thing.


What this article is attempting to do is take the fundamental laws of physics and apply them in a form that we can visually understand.

This is nothing new.

I suggest you read into Spin networks to gain a better understanding of the article.

Here is a youtube clip that may help.




the irony BTW in doing this, is that at the quantum level of reality there are no dimensions. Dimensions are a product of the incoherent chaos crossing the threshold into order and forming the basis of the reality you experience.

But let me ask you a question....

If you were born with no eyes... do you think you could perceive the color blue??

Peace,

Korg.

edit on 25-9-2013 by Korg Trinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Unity_99
 


The photon's shape is not what creates the light, the photon is just an image, symbol, structure, body, or Word that represents light. Its function, or will, or spirit is what gives light to the structures or bodies of reality. Without a body to shine light upon or the will of the photon to produce light, the photon would do nothing. So, where does the function or will of a photon come from? Where did the image or concept of a photon come from? Where did the photons structure come from?

When there is no image, science says force. When there is an "irreducible" image, science says fundamental particle - as if to say the particle has a unique force and nothing to create its image.

If you could see what makes a photon a photon, you would still be looking at another image, right? That was my point.

The answer is God/The Trinity, and the concept it is producing - which is faithful children. It takes faith to see this is the message of the Bible - but its there.

Father is consciousness/awareness - the thinker of thoughts - creator of concept - the image creator. Spirit is will/motion - the force of all - the motion giver - the will that manifests desire/concept, Son is the body - the Word - the structure - the image.

Is it just a coincidence that reality behaves as mental images and the thought process? What is the true boundary of space? Is it unlike the depths surrounding a mental image? What is the motion of reality? Is it unlike the invisible force you use to manifest mental images? And what are the structures of the universe? Are they unlike the body of mental images - all embodiments of a symbol/image/or idea by a formless structure? Isn't the stuff mental images are made of like the aether or structure that all forms are made of. What is that body?

Do not confuse this as me saying we are God, cause I'm not. I'm saying all that is is the direct result of God/Trinity - having been formed by their thought process. We are like the trinity in our thought process but not our faith and understanding. All is in his image and we are in his/our likeness. The his/our is The Trinity/God. We are just like him in our thought process - [good] concept producers, but our faith/understanding is broken - it is our source of corruption.

Hope this wasn't too deep for you guys. I have a depth perception problem lol.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Bleeeeep
 


This is the science and technology forum, not the religion forum. If you want to draw correlations between quantum physics and religion, start a new thread there. This one is based on SCIENCE.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Dynamike
 


So essentially, everything that has happened, is happening, and will ever happen is exactly what's supposed to? No matter how horrible or senseless, it is meant to be?





new topics
top topics
 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join