Posted on 05/26/2021 8:19:24 AM PDT by BenLurkin
The quantum world is notoriously weird. Single particles can be in two places at once, for example. Only by making an observation do we force it to 'choose'. Before an observation we can only assign probabilities to the likely outcomes.
Such a picture cannot be reconciled with a smooth, continuous fabric of space-time. According to Einstein, space-time is warped by matter and energy, but quantum physics says matter and energy exist in multiple states simultaneously — they can be both here and over there.
According to Einstein, space-time is like a stage that remains in place whether actors are treading its boards or not —even if there were no stars or planets dancing around, space-time would still be there. However, physicists Laurent Freidel, Robert Leigh, and Djordje Minic think...space-time doesn't exist independently of the objects in it. Space-time is defined by the way objects interact. That would make space-time an artifact of the quantum world itself, not something to be combined with it.
The attraction of this theory — called modular space-time — is that it might help solve another long-standing problem in theoretical physics regarding something called locality, and a notorious phenomenon in quantum physics called entanglement. Physicists can set up a situation whereby they bring two particles together and link their quantum properties. They then separate them by a large distance and find they are still linked. Change the properties of one and the other will change instantly, as if information has traveled from one to the other faster than the speed of light in direct violation of relativity.
Modular space-time theory can accommodate such behavior by redefining what it means to be separated. If space-time emerges from the quantum world, then being closer in a quantum sense is more fundamental than being close in a physical sense.
(Excerpt) Read more at livescience.com ...
“Time was invented so that everything didn’t happen at once’’.- Albert Einstein.
I know what you mean!
I have developed an aversion to veggies. Especially broccoli.
However I continue to love bacon!
I do like tomatoes and avocados...but aren’t they both fruits?
Sorry for the rambling; just sitting outside on the balcony enjoying the happiest sound on Earth: children playing in the playground next door. :)
“Religion”: a belief system shared by a lot of people
“Cult”: a belief system shared by only a few people
“Insanity”: a belief system unique to one individual.
Those definitions apply universally, with the exception of one’s own belief system. That one, as you know, is axiomatically true.
I bet Einstein and God have extremely interesting conversations in Heaven.
Indeed. Einstein did believe in God. Did God believe in Einstein?
He created him, so I guess He does! :)
God has given us so many people who contributed to the world. Michaelangelo, Da Vinci, Rembrandt and Joe Biden! ;)
“God does not play dice.” I think that’s the quote.
Space can't be infinite so there is a wall out there somewhere, just don't ask what is on the other side of that wall.
We have astro physicists at the top. Jao the puppet is into string theory. Commie La is into black ho theory.
Thanks to you dsrtsage.
I wish I had a dollar for every time they said “Einstein was wrong about ______ .”, and then they realized Einstein is/was correct.
And yet they still froth at the thought of “in the beginning the LORD GOD ALMIGHTY created the heavens and the earth, and said ‘light, be”.” But have no trouble with the philosophy of naturalism, e.g. “ the universe sprang into existence because it had to” (some dead dude), in direct opposition of all logic and observation.
The heavens declare the glory of God(even if rejected by smart observer/philosophers).
I think God made it complex IOT separate the believer from the “ let us assume(er).
Exactamundo.
price gouger...
That riddle tests the limitations of language, not physics.
Right, we really should not call the pressure waves that produce sound in our ears (brains) “sound waves”.
We don’t call the light waves that produce vision in our brains “vision rays”, so we shouldn’t call pressure waves “sound waves”.
Having said that, the riddle does pose a rhetorical question regarding physics - the fact that sound does not exist until there is an ear (brain) to hear it.
Leaving aside all the confusion created by our imperfect language, what you are asking is whether or not a thing can exist outside of our consciousness. I think we will know the answer when we have a better understanding of what consciousness really is.
“...what you are asking is whether or not a thing can exist outside of our consciousness....”
No, I must have been unclear.
I am not referring to anything that philosophical - it’s purely physical.
I am simply referring to the fact that a tree falling in the forest creates pressure variations in material (including air) which vibrate at different frequencies - but these vibrations don’t become sound until they vibrate an eardrum and are interpreted as sound by a brain.
We shouldn’t call them sound waves - we should call them pressure waves or something.
To illustrate, a totally deaf person can feel the waves - the vibrations - but can’t interpret them as sound.
With sight, we don’t make the same mistake. We call them “light waves” -not “sight waves”. Light waves can travel through space, but sight doesn’t happen until light waves reach a brain capable of vision.
Interesting, do tell please...
Time and causality are caused by mass expansion. When you try to look back in time to find the origin of the universe you find that none exists, because time didn’t exist before expansion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.