Thermos aquaticus
Well-Known Member
The vibration of atoms is real and independent of my brain.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What was the Big Bang
- Thread starter ThePainefulTruth
- Start date
The vibration of atoms is real and independent of my brain.
Time is a measure of entropy which always increases as time moves progresses forward (see times arrow).
The human concept of time is arbitrary.
ThePainefulTruth
Romantic-Cynic
For the best intuitive and up to date explanation of TIQM, see Ruth Kastner's Understanding Our Unseen Reality, 2015--though with your background you might prefer a high-test math rendition. She's the one that came up with the term "Quantumland", and visualizing quantum transactions occurring in a timeless Quantumland, instead of backward and forward in time, as it had been previously characterized.
Thermos aquaticus
Well-Known Member
The units of time we choose are arbitrary, but the concept of time is inextricably tied to physical realities.
Yes, entropy .
Thermos aquaticus
Well-Known Member
I would agree with that. From other books and papers I have read it seems that the arrow of time should not have a set direction except for entropy. It would appear that entropy is the only thing that makes sense of time. It is also interesting that entropy is statistical or stochastic in nature which aligns really well with quantum mechanics.
Well, maybe Einstein. Maxwell, Michelson, and Morley all thought there was an ether. It was only after the interpretation due to Einstein that the ether was found to be unnecessary.
At least at this point, dark energy is indistinguishable from the cosmological constant. it can be *interpreted* as an energy density for a vacuum.
Space itself is curved. That is determined by distances within space of different points. Nothing need be in the space for that to make sense.
We are talking about definitions, though.
It's quite easy: their probabilities are correlated when the particles are created (at the same location). Those correlations propagate. They most certainly *are* affected by space and time as witnessed by both spatial and temporal derivatives in the basic equations.
Sorry, but not even close.
The problem with interpretations of QM is usually that people attempt to use classical concepts in their interpretations. But classical physics is the OLD and OUTDATED view. QM is the modern view. We should explain the OLD in terms of the NEW, not the other way around.
What QM provides is a way to predict the probabilities of events. Those probabilities and correlations between those probabilities are described in terms of the wave function for a system. QM gives very precise rules for how those wave functions propagate, interact, and can be used for calculating probabilities.
In particular, in the double slit experiment, the wave functions from the two slits interfere and that interference pattern is observed as a probability of detecting a particle at various locations.
In the EPR experiment, a pair of particles is produced, which means the *pair* is described by a wave function. That wave function propagates, maintaining the correlation between the particles. When an observation is made from one, the correlation that is already there can say something about measurements of the other.
exchemist
Veteran Member
Yes you are quite right, I was wrong about this. They had to wait for Einstein to show how to get rid of the mathematical inelegance of Maxwell's equation for a "moving" observer.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Not really, 'time' measure always involves movement, whether it is the movement of celestial bodies, or pendulums, electronic oscillators, etc..
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
Fine. So here is a question if you don't mind, perhaps speculative, what is the possible relationship between the omnipresent dark energy and the omnipresent zpe?
On Edit. I subsequently found an article that discusses this very question...
"A major discovery in astrophysics in the late 1990s was the finding from type Ia supernovae redshift-luminosity observations that the expansion of the universe is accelerating. This led to the concept of dark energy, which is in effect a resurrection of Einstein's cosmological constant. (The universe now appears to consist of about 70 percent dark energy, 25 percent dark matter and five percent ordinary matter.) Zero-point energy has the desired property of driving an accelerated expansion, and thus having the requisite properties of dark energy, but to an absurdly greater degree than required, i.e. 120 orders of magnitude. ...."
Continues...
Calphysics Institute: Introduction to Zero-Point Energy
Last edited:
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Let me give this a shot. The term "zero point energy" can be a bit misleading. QM tells us that even at zero K there will be motion. But at this temperature and scale relying on classic Newtonian Mechanics will get you the wrong answer. It does not apply. There is no energy at zpe. It is only a way of getting across the notion that motion does not necessarily mean There is kinetic energy.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
It appears you have never heard of the Casimir Effect!
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
I have heard of it. How does that support your beliefs? I do not this no that is a case of zpe.
Ben Dhyan
Veteran Member
I do not understand what you mean by "I do not this no that is a case of zpe"? Anyways if you do not know about zpe, here is an excellent introduction..
Calphysics Institute: Introduction to Zero-Point Energy
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Sorry, my tablet has all sorts of autocorrect issues. And after reviewing it myself grant that you might have a point here.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
the measure of it......is in your head
Exactly. We know there is something interesting going on with the relationship of dark energy (as an energy density of a vacuum) and the 'zero point energy'. The problem is that any 'reasonable' calculation of the zero point energy is way,w ay,w ay off the actual observation of the density of dark energy. Some sort of cancellation is going on and nobody seems to know why. In some ways, it is easier to get *complete* cancellation (leading to a zero cosmological constant) than it is to get cancellation to one part in 10^120 that is not complete. How the cancellation happens *almost* but not entirely, is a basic question in quantum gravity.
I just took at look at it. It's an interesting way to describe the calculations involved in quantum mechanics. The 'bowtie' is simply an example of a projection operator with the 'offer' a ket and the 'acceptance' a bra vector. The problem is that in no way does this eliminate the basic issue in QM: that it is inherently probabilistic. As described in this book, the 'collapse' of a potential transaction is *exactly* the collapse of a wave function, or in other interpretations, the splitting of potential universes.
I guess, in a sense, the 'quantumland' of this book is simply the overarching Hilbert space upon which the operators of QM work and in which the 'states' exist.