Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Quantum +/- Gravity = ?


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 hazelm

hazelm

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1062 posts

Posted 28 August 2019 - 07:41 AM

Mash quantum and gravity and find a new kind of quantum time order.    Who's on first?  Or second?  Keep reading.  The plot thickens like the La Brea Tar Pits. 

 

https://www.scienced...p Science News)



#2 ralfcis

ralfcis

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 945 posts

Posted 28 August 2019 - 09:16 PM

https://photos.app.g...X1Y5VjDHgFoUYBA

 

I just wanted to check the answer using special relativity instead of general. The pink and yellow lines are the death rays. The green lines are the instantaneous lines of causal simultaneity. They allow you to tell who goes first in the causal time frame which is independent of perspective time. (Long explanation why in my thread.)

 

Let's start with the death rays sent out at t=2 on both on-board clocks. This is causally simultaneous because both times are joined by a green line of instantaneous simultaneity. They both hit each other at t=4, which also share a green line of causal simultaneity so neither would have survived. Notice the pink line has to travel twice as far and yet they die simultaneously. I will be explaining how this is possible in my thread.

 

But Alice travelling at .6c makes a dumb move when her clock hits 4, she stops dead in space (relative to Bob) which has the same effect gravity would have on making her age slower than Bob who remains stopped. The green lines change their slope for 3 years until the relative velocities balance out at a new value of 0. 

 

If Alice and Bob fire their death rays at t=4,  Alice will die at 6 when Bob is 6.67 in causal time (not perspective time) and then Bob will die at 8 when Alice would have been 7 in causal time. Alice would have died first. (Her stop is equivalent to her being in stronger gravity)  Bob lives 1.33 yrs longer than Alice but Alice dies 1 yr before Bob. Crazy because those times are not equal. (Long explanation in my thread.)

 

If Alice and Bob fire their death rays at t=5, there is no longer causal simultaneity. Alice's t=5 is causally simultaneous with t=5.33 for Bob and Bob's t=5 is causally simultaneous with Alice's t=4.75. Alice has to wait to fire.  Alice will die at 7 when Bob is 8 in causal time (not perspective time) and then Bob will die at 9 when Alice would have been 8 in causal time. Bob lives 1 yr longer than Alice and Alice dies 1 yr before Bob which makes sense.

 

If Alice and Bob fire their death rays at t=6, there is no longer causal simultaneity. Alice's t=6 is causally simultaneous with t=6.67 for Bob and Bob's t=6 is causally simultaneous with Alice's t=5.5. Alice has to wait to fire.  Alice will die at 8 when Bob is 9 in causal time (not perspective time) and then Bob will die at 10 when Alice would have been 9 in causal time. Bob lives 1 yr longer than Alice and Alice dies 1 yr before Bob which makes sense.

 

If Alice and Bob fire their death rays at t=7, there is no longer causal simultaneity. Alice's t=7 is causally simultaneous with t=8 for Bob and Bob's t=7 is causally simultaneous with Alice's t=6.25. Alice has to wait to fire.  Alice will die at 9 when Bob is 10 in causal time (not perspective time) and then Bob will die at 11 when Alice would have been 10 in causal time. Bob lives 1 yr longer than Alice and Alice dies 1 yr before Bob which makes sense.

 

Once they get past t=8, Alice will always fire a year after Bob because she lost a year during the 3 yrs after her stop. She will permanently die 1 yr before Bob even though she is no longer in the equivalent gravity well of relative velocity imbalance. Her clock is permanently screwed for her to die even if she leaves the gravity well.

 

However, if Alice had sped up instead of stopped, she would have caused Bob's clock to be permanently screwed slower than hers so he would have been easy prey for her. 

 

The rest of the article is written to sell stories as relativity is all about the invariance of causality. If superposition were possible with relativity then that would falsify relativity because causality would no longer be invariant. So mixing relativistic effects of gravity with quantum superposition would mean relativity is wrong so there's nothing to mix in the first place. These guys are frauds. They might as well have written an article about the superposition of conservation of energy for future perpetual motion technology. Boy, people are stupid.


Edited by ralfcis, 28 August 2019 - 09:36 PM.


#3 hazelm

hazelm

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1062 posts

Posted 29 August 2019 - 10:16 AM

https://photos.app.g...X1Y5VjDHgFoUYBA

 

I just wanted to check the answer using special relativity instead of general. The pink and yellow lines are the death rays. The green lines are the instantaneous lines of causal simultaneity. They allow you to tell who goes first in the causal time frame which is independent of perspective time. (Long explanation why in my thread.)

 

Let's start with the death rays sent out at t=2 on both on-board clocks. This is causally simultaneous because both times are joined by a green line of instantaneous simultaneity. They both hit each other at t=4, which also share a green line of causal simultaneity so neither would have survived. Notice the pink line has to travel twice as far and yet they die simultaneously. I will be explaining how this is possible in my thread.

 

But Alice travelling at .6c makes a dumb move when her clock hits 4, she stops dead in space (relative to Bob) which has the same effect gravity would have on making her age slower than Bob who remains stopped. The green lines change their slope for 3 years until the relative velocities balance out at a new value of 0. 

 

If Alice and Bob fire their death rays at t=4,  Alice will die at 6 when Bob is 6.67 in causal time (not perspective time) and then Bob will die at 8 when Alice would have been 7 in causal time. Alice would have died first. (Her stop is equivalent to her being in stronger gravity)  Bob lives 1.33 yrs longer than Alice but Alice dies 1 yr before Bob. Crazy because those times are not equal. (Long explanation in my thread.)

 

If Alice and Bob fire their death rays at t=5, there is no longer causal simultaneity. Alice's t=5 is causally simultaneous with t=5.33 for Bob and Bob's t=5 is causally simultaneous with Alice's t=4.75. Alice has to wait to fire.  Alice will die at 7 when Bob is 8 in causal time (not perspective time) and then Bob will die at 9 when Alice would have been 8 in causal time. Bob lives 1 yr longer than Alice and Alice dies 1 yr before Bob which makes sense.

 

If Alice and Bob fire their death rays at t=6, there is no longer causal simultaneity. Alice's t=6 is causally simultaneous with t=6.67 for Bob and Bob's t=6 is causally simultaneous with Alice's t=5.5. Alice has to wait to fire.  Alice will die at 8 when Bob is 9 in causal time (not perspective time) and then Bob will die at 10 when Alice would have been 9 in causal time. Bob lives 1 yr longer than Alice and Alice dies 1 yr before Bob which makes sense.

 

If Alice and Bob fire their death rays at t=7, there is no longer causal simultaneity. Alice's t=7 is causally simultaneous with t=8 for Bob and Bob's t=7 is causally simultaneous with Alice's t=6.25. Alice has to wait to fire.  Alice will die at 9 when Bob is 10 in causal time (not perspective time) and then Bob will die at 11 when Alice would have been 10 in causal time. Bob lives 1 yr longer than Alice and Alice dies 1 yr before Bob which makes sense.

 

Once they get past t=8, Alice will always fire a year after Bob because she lost a year during the 3 yrs after her stop. She will permanently die 1 yr before Bob even though she is no longer in the equivalent gravity well of relative velocity imbalance. Her clock is permanently screwed for her to die even if she leaves the gravity well.

 

However, if Alice had sped up instead of stopped, she would have caused Bob's clock to be permanently screwed slower than hers so he would have been easy prey for her. 

 

The rest of the article is written to sell stories as relativity is all about the invariance of causality. If superposition were possible with relativity then that would falsify relativity because causality would no longer be invariant. So mixing relativistic effects of gravity with quantum superposition would mean relativity is wrong so there's nothing to mix in the first place. These guys are frauds. They might as well have written an article about the superposition of conservation of energy for future perpetual motion technology. Boy, people are stupid.

Would you mind re-writing your story and exchanging Alice and Bob for any other people you choose.  Alice and Bob have worn out their welcome. 

 

Just kiddng, of course, but my protest of too many  Alice and Bob stories stands.  :yawn:



#4 ralfcis

ralfcis

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 945 posts

Posted 29 August 2019 - 01:26 PM

So you don't object to my explanation of the physics or me saying these highly regarded  guys are frauds, it's the names in my examples that you still object to. 


Edited by ralfcis, 29 August 2019 - 01:26 PM.


#5 hazelm

hazelm

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1062 posts

Posted 29 August 2019 - 02:29 PM

So you don't object to my explanation of the physics or me saying these highly regarded  guys are frauds, it's the names in my examples that you still object to. 

 

So you don't object to my explanation of the physics or me saying these highly regarded  guys are frauds, it's the names in my examples that you still object to. 

Exactly.  I can't possibly object to your story since I do not understand it.     In fact, your story sounds vaguely familiar with the same persons testing out a new space/time idea and, as usual, getting nowhere.   I do confess that I get a glimmer of what you are saying. That's more than the old Alice/Bob stories ever achieved.

 

I've just read too many stories of Bob and Alice chasing each other around space and never really getting anywhere.  Let's give someone else a chance.  

 

By the way, when they are both finished whatever theory they are testing, do they argue about who won?.   Or, in the case of outer space travel - which is, as  of now. unfalsifyable - is it a draw?

 

To settle down and be serious:  the reason I posted that story was to see what physicists made of it.  I get the feeling they are tossing out something - relativity?  Or, gravity?  Or space/time?  Thank you.



#6 ralfcis

ralfcis

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 945 posts

Posted 29 August 2019 - 04:12 PM

Ok so now we're talking physics and you don't want a long story.

 

The premise is if you could superpose a planet with one of the nameless participants, you can affect the causality of time. The obvious conclusion should have been you can't superpose a planet because you can't affect the causality of time anymore than you can superpose whether Alice makes a stop or doesn't make a stop in my example. She either makes a stop or doesn't. She's either in a gravity well or she isn't. You've either determined the result of the superposition or you haven't. In Shroedinger's cat it's whether the cat is dead or alive not whether you've checked if the cat is dead or alive. This article seems to know nothing about the subject it's writing about and the scientists look like total clowns.



#7 hazelm

hazelm

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1062 posts

Posted 30 August 2019 - 07:06 AM

Ok so now we're talking physics and you don't want a long story.

 

The premise is if you could superpose a planet with one of the nameless participants, you can affect the causality of time. The obvious conclusion should have been you can't superpose a planet because you can't affect the causality of time anymore than you can superpose whether Alice makes a stop or doesn't make a stop in my example. She either makes a stop or doesn't. She's either in a gravity well or she isn't. You've either determined the result of the superposition or you haven't. In Shroedinger's cat it's whether the cat is dead or alive not whether you've checked if the cat is dead or alive. This article seems to know nothing about the subject it's writing about and the scientists look like total clowns.

And why did Shroedinger drag a poor, innocent cat into physics?  Never mind.  I think you are saying they are doing things with --- should I say they are doing pseudoscience because they are not doing it scientifically.  Like baking a cake and just looking at the baking powder can but  not adding the baking powder?

 

It's all right.  I have never accepted this space/time concept.  Nor - is it safe to say it? - relativity.  If I go to Pern, stay 20 years and come back,  I will still be 20 years older.

 

Good morning.  :spin:



#8 ralfcis

ralfcis

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 945 posts

Posted 30 August 2019 - 09:05 AM

Speaking of cake, they're trying to eat their cake and have it too. Once a decision is made, the choice ends. Superposition only exists during the multiple choice phase and ends when the choice is taken. They don't seem to understand this. Maybe they're multi-worlders where every decision you could have ever made is superposed in another parallel universe. When everything is possible, determining the truth is not.

 

PS. My example is outside of relativity because  relativity has only perspective time so it somehow supports causality without the concept of causal time or causal simultaneity, it has no way to determine age difference when Alice stops and no way to calculate incremental age difference before she re-unites with Bob.


Edited by ralfcis, 30 August 2019 - 09:18 AM.


#9 hazelm

hazelm

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1062 posts

Posted 30 August 2019 - 09:36 AM

Speaking of cake, they're trying to eat their cake and have it too. Once a decision is made, the choice ends. Superposition only exists during the multiple choice phase and ends when the choice is taken. They don't seem to understand this. Maybe they're multi-worlders where every decision you could have ever made is superposed in another parallel universe. When everything is possible, determining the truth is not.

 

PS. My example is outside of relativity because  relativity has only perspective time so it somehow supports causality without the concept of causal time or causal simultaneity, it has no way to determine age difference when Alice stops and no way to calculate incremental age difference before she re-unites with Bob.

Who said you can't explain physics without math.  Keep going.  :-)

 

We are all multi-worlders, assuming we do believe our universe exists.  We are just not all multi-universers - although I am.  Not the one that copies us.  Or repeats us. Other universes with their own systems make sense to me.