Jump to content
Science Forums

Recommended Posts

Why isn't gravity just the shape of the fabric? Who is saying it has to be a field or a force?

Do only decohered particles have the ability to bend the fabric of spacetime?

 

Is the key to an unified theory, what can bend the virtual fabric of spacetime?

 

The quantum/classical boundary is likely the amount of mass-energy a particle has. ..but particles under than amount can bend spacetime when decohered.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Pure Crackpottery.

Posted Images

I think the temporal dimension is running the show. 

Time doesn't consider something real unless it is decohered or the mass energy of a virus? Time only ages objects that are real?

Are the spatial dimensions just housing for what the temporal dimension deems real?

Does time project reality into spatial dimensions?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I've been trying to separate the quantum field from spacetime this whole time, but now I think it is only the spatial dimensions that get granted to a physical/observed/decohered object.

Could the unification of QM with GR be spatial vs temporal? good god

No wonder the quantum field knows of future decoherence events ..it is time.

The quantum field doesn't care about distance ..because distance is a spatial thing.

Light flows on a path set by the fabric of spacetime ..which isn't spatial either ..it's virtual.

 

Lol, you are such a crank that you literally got someone to leave the forums from your pure stupidity.

 

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites

oh, nooes, I will miss them very much

 

I think I have a model close to describing our reality.

  • Pure/Unfiltered time at the core is capable of timelines in the future and backwards
  • The quantum fields layer on top of time. This layer doesn’t seem to filter out future time because the quantum field can know of future decoherence events. Nothing is physical in these layers, only quantum waves moving in the medium that is the quantum field. The electromagnetic force lives here also.
  • The holographic fabric of spacetime is next. This instructs physical mass how to flow (gravity). This layer is what filters time from going backwards or jumping to the future. It also handles time dilation volumes. This is where the boundary for the quantum/classical lives. Anything larger than 50,000 bounded atoms is automatically sent to the physical matter layer. Objects smaller can still be sent if they have a decoherence event in their path.
  • Next is the rest of the forces and then the spatial dimensions with physical matter.
Link to post
Share on other sites
a single cohered wave to land where it does?
 
If a wave is going through both slits ..it is the same wave, not two separate waves.
 
Interference isn't happening. It's just the path the quantum field assigns when there is a double slit.
 
The bare vertical gaps are a shadow of the sliver between the double slits. A path of diffraction is much stronger for a coherent wave. The gaps in the pattern is repeating the use of the sliver several times.
 
The physical water waves doing a double slit was just a coincidence.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
If we set an environment with only coherent laser light, we should be able to power whatever we want as long as normal light is not getting in causing decoherence and preventing quantum weirdness events from happening.

 

 

This is how plants work with photosynthesis. Is another reason leaves are a dark green because they need the light to be absorbed but remain on the outside to prevent decoherence inside and halting the quantum photosynthesis event from happening?

 

 

I think electricity could leap out of water into air if both volumes are devoid of decoherence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, that's... not how coherent light works, nor is it how photosynthisys works (that's why some plants are PURPLE instead of green...)

On electricity and water: Water by itself is a HORRIBLE conductor(it's actually an insulator), you need soluble impurities (like NA CL salts) for it to even reach semi-conductive states.

It would do you good to look up: Inductive power, Electro Mechanical/Motive Force (EMF), Polarity of light, Bell's Theorem, and for good measure electron-transport chains.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care what color the plant is, what matters is how opaque it is. 

 

I don't care water is a horrible conductor. We haven't tried it without incoherent light. The electricity would be in superposition ..it doesn't matter the medium as long as the medium if filled with free particles.

..."me not care so me say buzzwords" does not an idea make.

 

Take the standard doped MOSFET for example.

 

and into strange claims this goes.

 

Note the rules conveniently linked on every page. You've the right to make a fool of yourself, but at the same time posting incoherently is a no-no.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they are the same thing. Somewhere around 50,000 bonded atoms will automatically be decohered. Anything smaller requires a decoherence event in its path to be classical.

 

Can any volume of free particles, coherent light, and 30 micrometer objects (for interaction with particles without causing decoherence) be an environment for quantum weirdness events just waiting for us to do something with?

 

The most obvious "something" is upgrading quantum computers and harnessing photosynthesis. It's a long shot ..but, maybe even alchemy. Strong, unhindered, wireless power is another candidate. If we find a way to control coherent quantum waves, possibly with the electromagnetic force, we could make hoverboards.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Are all other types of quantum waves susceptible to this overwhelming cause of decoherence?

 

Does superposition, entanglement, or tunneling function if the wave they are made of is not coherent?

 

Does a Bose–Einstein condensate work because the lasers are using the, quantum-wave-friendly, coherent beams?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...