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.
Scientists Discover a Jewel at the Heart of Quantum Physics
page: 5share:
JadeStar
Einstein's relativity explains WHY this happens.
So far you haven't.
Care to describe the mechanism for such? Show your work.
The theory I am talking about can thoroughly explain "why". However, I do not wish to hijack this topic doing so, maybe I will start another topic about it.
In the mean time, while you wait, Google why Nikola Tesla disagreed with Einstein's space-time delusion. Its a good start, which I agree with in part.
reply to post by Mon1k3r
Thanks!
Just that paragraph gave me a whole new perspective on the grand scheme of things..
If you live in space, you do what space does, and you have no choice. You understand that your entire physical being is 99.99% empty space, so therefore, you are pretty much space and there's no escaping that fundamental truth.
Thanks!
reply to post by SLAYER69
The concept of quantum geometry from which properties emerge at the heart of Quantum Physics has been around for a few years now.
Many of the stranger Quantum theories and observations can be best explained in terms of quantum geometry rather than field theory, spooky action at a distance for one.
Current theoretical physics has already built new ideas on this approach. The theory that spacetime (and consequently space and time) are emergent properties of the quantum geometry and not universal constants is gaining momentum (pun not intended), the single dimension universe is a new theory that ties in with this. This theory postulates that as an object increases in energy it decreases in dimension and that a single point one-dimensional origin is where the Universe began, this in turn suggests that the multi-dimensional universe we know and love is a low-energy 'defocused' universe, which makes sense when you consider the traditional Euclidian dimensions are in fact the same dimension rotated in space (symmetry). When viewed like this it is easy to see that space emerges from this defocused geometry and if space is an emergent property then so must time as they are part of the same construct, i.e. spacetime.
This also links E=MC2 back into quantum physics as clearly Einstein was saying energy = mass but it needs the speed of light to make it work (C). Why would this be the case? Well if the speed of light is in fact not a universal 'speed limit' but an energy threshold beyond which 3 dimensional space collapses into 2 dimensions (and presumably at another point one-dimension), which we struggle to observe, then this not only makes sense of the violations of the speed of light and causality we observe in quantum particles but reunites Newtonian and Quantum Physics, the 'Holy Grail' of modern physics.
You can search all of this, there are a number of papers that cover various parts of this. What is most interesting is that we are seeing a convergence of theory in this area, which is a good indication that the quantum geometry theory is more likely than not. We are a few years off a Universal Theory but it looks to be within our grasp if this new line of investigation stands up, and all the signs are that it will.
The concept of quantum geometry from which properties emerge at the heart of Quantum Physics has been around for a few years now.
Many of the stranger Quantum theories and observations can be best explained in terms of quantum geometry rather than field theory, spooky action at a distance for one.
Current theoretical physics has already built new ideas on this approach. The theory that spacetime (and consequently space and time) are emergent properties of the quantum geometry and not universal constants is gaining momentum (pun not intended), the single dimension universe is a new theory that ties in with this. This theory postulates that as an object increases in energy it decreases in dimension and that a single point one-dimensional origin is where the Universe began, this in turn suggests that the multi-dimensional universe we know and love is a low-energy 'defocused' universe, which makes sense when you consider the traditional Euclidian dimensions are in fact the same dimension rotated in space (symmetry). When viewed like this it is easy to see that space emerges from this defocused geometry and if space is an emergent property then so must time as they are part of the same construct, i.e. spacetime.
This also links E=MC2 back into quantum physics as clearly Einstein was saying energy = mass but it needs the speed of light to make it work (C). Why would this be the case? Well if the speed of light is in fact not a universal 'speed limit' but an energy threshold beyond which 3 dimensional space collapses into 2 dimensions (and presumably at another point one-dimension), which we struggle to observe, then this not only makes sense of the violations of the speed of light and causality we observe in quantum particles but reunites Newtonian and Quantum Physics, the 'Holy Grail' of modern physics.
You can search all of this, there are a number of papers that cover various parts of this. What is most interesting is that we are seeing a convergence of theory in this area, which is a good indication that the quantum geometry theory is more likely than not. We are a few years off a Universal Theory but it looks to be within our grasp if this new line of investigation stands up, and all the signs are that it will.
Propulsion
reply to post by Mon1k3r
Just that paragraph gave me a whole new perspective on the grand scheme of things..
If you live in space, you do what space does, and you have no choice. You understand that your entire physical being is 99.99% empty space, so therefore, you are pretty much space and there's no escaping that fundamental truth.
Thanks!
Physicist Victor Stenger goes one further. He suggests that in fact the Universe is made of nothing.
To keep it brief, the underlying principle in all the fundamental physics constants (conservation of momentum, conservation of energy, etc.) is something called translational symmetry. Translational symmetry also underlies nothingness (qualified by what we know about quantum vacuums). The practical upshot of this is there needs to be no change in the fundamental laws of physics to get from a universe full of nothing to a universe full of matter.
It is increasingly likely that the Universe as we perceive it is simply an artefact of dissipation of energy (entropy) that results from the spontaneous breaking of the symmetry of nothing and we know from Einstein that all matter is ultimately a form of energy (E=MC2). Add to this that the relationship between Newtonian laws of conservation and translational symmetry is modulated by the principle of least action, which means the natural flow of energy from a high state to a low state, which ties directly into the entropy at the heart of the creation of the universe. It is now a perfectly reasonable concept that the universe really did come from nothing, and the physics behind this startling concept holds true.
This leads to the uncomfortable reality for many people, that the universe and everything in it, including us, are just patterns in a void.
So now they have a geometrical shape to play around with. Interesting that it happens to be several
pyramid structures pulled together.
The amplituhedron
leolady
pyramid structures pulled together.
The amplituhedron
The new method represents probabilities as pyramid-like structures, then combines the pyramids into one elegant gemstone-like structure called an amplituhedron, thereby massively simplifying the task of calculating particle interactions. Ultimately the amplituhedron could lead to the long-sought quantum theory of gravity.
leolady
reply to post by Thorneblood
one more example of old world mystics
And the other examples being....?
WeAre0ne
swanne
The problem with that, is that these "neurones" take billion of years to communicate between themselves, due to the distance and the relatively slow speed of light. If it's a brain, then it's the slowest, least efficient brain ever...
You are looking at it from a human perspective though, and you are leaving out the rest of the big picture.
1) Although to humans "a billion years" is a long time, to the Universe it may only seem like a millisecond or less.
2) The Universal brain is not just the interactions between stars, planets, and galaxies. It is also the interaction between all atoms, and sub-atomic particles, and all matter. From lighting strikes between the rain clouds and Earth, to the aurora borealis, to simple electrostatic discharges between your fingers and a door knob, and chemical reactions in a school science laboratory... all interactions that exists are functions of this giant Universal brain. Even our actual human brains are a part of the Universe as well, so our brains contribute to the One large Universal brain.
Not just the Macro, but the Micro as well. Every action is a thought in the giant Universal mind.edit on 17-12-2013 by WeAre0ne because: (no reason given)
Thank you WeAreOne - you stated it perfectly!
"Let's try to define it using geometry rather than math."
"The mystics will go mad with religious enthusiasm!"
"But it's just geometry. Surely they know geometry is abstract, and not a 1-to-1 ratio with reality."
"Trust me, they don't."
"The mystics will go mad with religious enthusiasm!"
"But it's just geometry. Surely they know geometry is abstract, and not a 1-to-1 ratio with reality."
"Trust me, they don't."
pgwodhouse
reply to post by SLAYER69
So now the G in the middle of the square and compass used in Masonic symbolism becomes a little less mysterious. Frame it with geometric tools and the G is clearly a geometric reference but also a reference to God as the source of Masonic thought.
Or, perhaps those Masons are just a bunch of old guys who like to think they know some secrets or like to do good deeds.
You decide.
You left out cool handshakes
JadeStar
WeAre0ne
JadeStar
For instance, completely ridding the idea of "time" in science, because "time" doesn't exist. Hence destroying Einsteins "space-time" theory, and Relativity. Replace that with the fact that "time" is an illusion, and the so-called "time dilation" effect it caused by something else entirely.
Then why does your GPS work? Because if what you said was correct it wouldn't.
That is completely incorrect.
Science has discovered a phenomena that two identical atomic clocks show different times when one has been traveling faster than the other, or one is in a weaker gravitational field than the other. Knowledge of this phenomena allows us to keep clocks on GPS satellites synchronized with clocks on Earth, otherwise our GPS satellites would drift.
The phenomena exists no matter what theory you use to explain it.
You can explain it with Einsteins horrible theory of space-time, and Relativity, and call it "time dilation". Or you can explain it with the truth; that "time" doesn't even exist, only constant "change" does. Things that travel faster are changing faster, and if that thing is a clock, it will tick faster.
Einstein's relativity explains WHY this happens.
So far you haven't.
Care to describe the mechanism for such? Show your work.
edit on 17-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)
I will bite a little on this one....drag.
a clock traveling faster through the heliosphere is experiencing a drag effect from the plasma of that heliosphere
That plasma interacts with the clock on an electromagnetic level slowing down its rate of pulse. Since that interaction is at a calculated rate it can be compensated for.
Time is nothing more than a unit of measurement, its not a thing! If you move a ruler faster the inch’s on that ruler don’t suddenly shrink to being smaller.
Every time I hear mainstream folks spout off about Quantum this or Dark that, I cant help but lump them into the same basket as the New agers that spout off about vibrations and frequencies. Its mumbo jumbo that is supposed to make someone sound like they know what they are talking about but its still mumbo jumbo.
Mainstreamers like to rant about the “math” behind their work but lets face it their math is filled with imaginary numbers and assumptions that may or may not have a basis in reality. If the math works so well then why is it that we keep seeing theories overturned? Didn’t the math explain and underpin the theory? Was there no mathematical equation that supported that theory to make it a viable theory to begin with? What happened that invalidated that math?
edit on 18-12-2013 by Dragoon01 because: (no reason given)
reply to post by SLAYER69
Responding to ’Slayer', the ‘geometry’ of group-theory is linked to physicality as square planar and other ‘geometries’ are linked to EM spectral signatures, or to the equally important absence of current EM signatures as far as we can measure. Does this imply the ‘Jewel’ contains all the energy distributions there are, including gravity? If so, is the trick to find where in the ‘Jewel’-Grand Tensor (Amplituhedron) lies a gravity sub-matrix of certain dimensions - which also would mean gravity has a ‘geometry’. And does the full gravity subset extend beyond classical EM though having a ’toe’ in EM. Thus is gravity partially in the family of EM energies (though ‘weakly so) and does gravity have an as yet unrevealed role in Maxwell’s Equations? I am hinting at my personal obsession which is a belief that the speed of light ‘constancy’/limit is a property only within the EM subset of the Amplituhedron; also meaning gravity’s full 'geometry’ may be non-Newtonian ...also meaning simply that the full term for gravity might include components not measurable in 4-space?!?!?
Responding to ’Slayer', the ‘geometry’ of group-theory is linked to physicality as square planar and other ‘geometries’ are linked to EM spectral signatures, or to the equally important absence of current EM signatures as far as we can measure. Does this imply the ‘Jewel’ contains all the energy distributions there are, including gravity? If so, is the trick to find where in the ‘Jewel’-Grand Tensor (Amplituhedron) lies a gravity sub-matrix of certain dimensions - which also would mean gravity has a ‘geometry’. And does the full gravity subset extend beyond classical EM though having a ’toe’ in EM. Thus is gravity partially in the family of EM energies (though ‘weakly so) and does gravity have an as yet unrevealed role in Maxwell’s Equations? I am hinting at my personal obsession which is a belief that the speed of light ‘constancy’/limit is a property only within the EM subset of the Amplituhedron; also meaning gravity’s full 'geometry’ may be non-Newtonian ...also meaning simply that the full term for gravity might include components not measurable in 4-space?!?!?
edit on 18-12-2013 by havanaja because: misquote]
edit
on 18-12-2013 by havanaja because: (no reason given)
extra DIV I love it. For those thinking science & mysticism are in opposition rather than being two sides of the same coin, even the article & thread headline
likely allude to an old Sanskrit phrase: Om Mani Padme Hum ( ॐ मणिपद्मे हूं )
There are many different interpretations, but I've always liked this one: God is the jewel in the heart of the lotus flower.
There are many different interpretations, but I've always liked this one: God is the jewel in the heart of the lotus flower.
Dragoon01
Mainstreamers like to rant about the “math” behind their work but lets face it their math is filled with imaginary numbers
Really? So where is your math?
Usually I find that people who present "alternative theories" with no math or basis in reality are a waste of time discussing physics with for the simple reason that the language of physics IS math.
Anyone can imagine anything, such as "plasmas from the heliosphere slowing down atomic clocks" (giggle) but the match does not bear that out. Nor would a plasma have any effect on an atomic clock.
There are plenty of people who challenged Einsteins work on actual solid footing with actual solid math but all of them have failed in one way or another as observational cosmology has pretty much verified most of what Einstein described.
edit on 18-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)
WeAre0ne
JadeStar
For instance, completely ridding the idea of "time" in science, because "time" doesn't exist. Hence destroying Einsteins "space-time" theory, and Relativity. Replace that with the fact that "time" is an illusion, and the so-called "time dilation" effect it caused by something else entirely.
Then why does your GPS work? Because if what you said was correct it wouldn't.
That is completely incorrect.
Science has discovered a phenomena that two identical atomic clocks show different times when one has been traveling faster than the other, or one is in a weaker gravitational field than the other. Knowledge of this phenomena allows us to keep clocks on GPS satellites synchronized with clocks on Earth, otherwise our GPS satellites would drift.
The phenomena exists no matter what theory you use to explain it.
You can explain it with Einsteins horrible theory of space-time, and Relativity, and call it "time dilation". Or you can explain it with the truth; that "time" doesn't even exist, only constant "change" does. Things that travel faster are changing faster, and if that thing is a clock, it will tick faster.
Einstein's calculations may still be accurate, to calculate the rate of change the clock would experience. But it has nothing to do with time.edit on 17-12-2013 by WeAre0ne because: (no reason given)
GPS triangulates a rough position. To have a more accurate GPS reading (i.e. 1mm left, right, towards, away, 2mm up, down) we need to have a thing called a "digital theodolite" or better known as a Total Station which is set up on a fixed point, of which co-ordinates, elevation (that is, x, y and z) is known. This digital theodolite now 'corrects' the rough GPS reading (which is accurate to...5 to 15 meters) through simple trigonometric calculations based on it's own precise position.
In order for GPS to triangulate a rough position on Earth, we need 4 satellites... and, okay, I digress, most of the time, for precision GPS work, we aren't always using GPS... GPS is just the American Military version of a GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System), the Russkies have one too - it's called GLONASS... the EU is developing (or has already developed by now) a GNSS as well, called Galileo, and the Chinese are in the works of activating their own GNSS system called COMPASS. Now, anyway, at any point on Earth, you must have 4 'visible' GNSS satellites in order to triangulate a position. 1 shoots a signal towards your GPS (really, GNSS, but I don't want to have to explain each time that GPS is a GNSS) device, another shoots a signal towards your GPS and the other satellite, and a third satellite communicates with the last 2 as well as your device... a fourth satellite is introduced in order to 'make up for lost time' if you will, since light does only, after all, travel at a finite speed, and we are dealing with monstrous distances, we use the last satellite as a sort of 'time checker'. Each satellite is equpped with a cesium atom timer which, we must admit, are pretty damn accurate... or do I mean precise? I don't really know, since time is such a difficult observation to measure objectively, so we can't know if I mean accurate, or precise, but if it's accurate it will be precise, but if it's precise, it won't be accurate (in this case) necessarily. The satellites themselves are always over at least one 'station' (big ass antenna receiver/sender) because they are literally spread out over the entirety of the planets surface, so they are communicating many things to many sources at many times.
GPS....
don't f**** widdit. No. Seriously. Don't. It might break.
Cheers.
when man's subjective of experience or reality shifts from mere day dreaming (thinking) to direct experience of reality man will have to modify if
not rewrite the "laws" of physics. If you cave into yourself you'd see this isn't created into steps. just you need a method, watching your breath
won;t cut it. real spiritual sadhana must be taken up to enhance perception so that life can be known and joyed(-en)
JadeStar
My first thought when I saw this image was; "That's the way the sun works." I'm not sure why I drew that conclusion. Could someone please enlighten me? Am I completely off?
JadeStar
Dragoon01
Mainstreamers like to rant about the “math” behind their work but lets face it their math is filled with imaginary numbers
Really? So where is your math?
Usually I find that people who present "alternative theories" with no math or basis in reality are a waste of time discussing physics with for the simple reason that the language of physics IS math.
Anyone can imagine anything, such as "plasmas from the heliosphere slowing down atomic clocks" (giggle) but the match does not bear that out. Nor would a plasma have any effect on an atomic clock.
There are plenty of people who challenged Einsteins work on actual solid footing with actual solid math but all of them have failed in one way or another as observational cosmology has pretty much verified most of what Einstein described.
edit on 18-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)edit on 18-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)
From "How stuff works"
"The oscillation frequencies within the atom are determined by the mass of the nucleus and the gravity and electrostatic "spring" between the positive charge on the nucleus and the electron cloud surrounding it."
"Cesium atomic clocks employ a beam of cesium atoms. The clock separates cesium atoms of different energy levels by magnetic field."
Given that space plasmas carry charge, and magnetic fields they vary well can induce alterations in a space bound atomic clock.
I used the term "drag" as a shortcut. I am making no claim that Einstein is wrong (although I dont think he is right either) just offering a different explanation for the offset of atomic clocks in space.
2 +2 = 4
There's your math gigglesnort.
EDIT** Also just to add. Atomic clocks work by confining a plasma of Cesium (for example) inside of a magnetic trap. Then measuring the ions transition across a range and syncing that to an oscillator. If that mechanism is sitting inside of a lab with shielding then I dont doubt that you can get that to be very accurate, however if its flinging around the earth awash in space bound plasma thats carrying its own charges and non-neutral ionization then you must assume that it is being effected by those fields and its accuracy is questionable.
edit on 27-12-2013 by Dragoon01 because: (no reason given)
The idea of a 'master amplituhedron' with an infinite number of sides is intriguing. It's said that its volume would correspond to the amplitude of
all physical processes. This seems to suggest that there is an infinity of physical processes, and that a perfect description of the universe would
have to take account of this fact.
A polyhedron with an infinite number of sides is a sphere, hypersphere, or higher dimensional sphere.
One is reminded of the very old method of finding the area of a circle, by characterizing it as a polygon with greater and greater numbers of sides, approaching the shape of a circle more and more closely. They got better and better approximations of the area of a circle, which was useful, but inevitably fell short of perfect accuracy.
A polyhedron with an infinite number of sides is a sphere, hypersphere, or higher dimensional sphere.
One is reminded of the very old method of finding the area of a circle, by characterizing it as a polygon with greater and greater numbers of sides, approaching the shape of a circle more and more closely. They got better and better approximations of the area of a circle, which was useful, but inevitably fell short of perfect accuracy.