Prev: Proton Smaller Than Thought—May Rewrite Laws of Physics
Next: Proper Time at any rate
From: Yousuf Khan on 10 Jul 2010 16:05
On 7/10/2010 12:20 AM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 7/9/10 11:17 AM, Yousuf Khan wrote:
>
>>
>> One of the latest theories postulates that space is nothing more than a
>> bunch of qubits in a quantum computer.
>>
>> Yousuf Khan
>
> What is the source of this "postulate", Yousuf?
>

See the link I posted for Charles.

Yousuf Khan
From: Raymond Yohros on 12 Jul 2010 13:16
On Jul 10, 7:02 am, Yousuf Khan <bbb...(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 7/10/2010 12:12 AM, Raymond Yohros wrote:
> > On Jul 9, 1:21 am, Yousuf Khan<bbb...(a)yahoo.com>  wrote:
> >> On 7/9/2010 3:19 AM, Raymond Yohros wrote:
>
> >>> please see my point. i don't mean that there are more neutrinos that
> >>> photons. what i mean is that there should be more neutrinos TRAVELING..
> >>> nuclear reactions create proportional (neutrino,photonic) outputs.
> >>> photons interact alot more with matter so they stay behind.
> >>> neutrinos keep ridding and ridding. they can be in this planet now
> >>> and in some other a few minutes later. they are not easy to stop.
> >>> photons arriving here are used and reused by baryonic matter in
> >>> all types of processes.
>
> >> Well, I'm not going to belabour the point, but I definitely did not read
> >> it that way. Your language is a little confusing sometimes. Sometimes
> >> it's better to just use point form.
>
> > i misspell the word ride. sorry for that!
>
> No, no, I got that, but the paragraph itself creates misunderstandings
> about what you're trying to say.
>

yes, i guess i use to many words.
there could be more photons than neutrinos in the universe.
but there should be more neutrinos than photons traveling because
they are not easy to stop. they interact a lot less (weakly)
so as you point out, they can be 10 billion years old
and still be riding!

> >>>> These particular neutrinos are not like the neutrinos we see today
> >>>> These ones would be billions of times less massive than today's
> >>>> neutrinos. And today's neutrinos are already some of the least massive
> >>>> particles in the universe.
>
> > what neutrinos are you talking about?
>
> The neutrinos in the original article I posted, the ones that are
> supposed to be 10 billion light years across by themselves.
>

yes, i got it now. but why "billions" of times liter than younger
neutrinos?

photons are the second riders because they stop and wonder
around a lot more. even when they keep bouncing,
their travel distances can be affected by baryonic matter.


> >>>> Oh, BTW, a neutrino with a wavefunction that's 10 billion light years
> >>>> can be anywhere within that wavefunction at any instant. That means it
> >>>> can pop up anywhere within the 10 billion light years instantly. That
> >>>> means it's way faster than light.
>
> >>> this does not make any sense!
> >>> wimps are suppose to be a lot more massive that neutrinos
> >>> and they do not exist. this are just artifacts to try
> >>> to coup with observation because of incomplete neutrino
> >>> understandings.
>
> >> Welcome to the weird world of quantum mechanics. The speed of light is
> >> inconsequential to it, since that speed is governed by the laws of
> >> Special Relativity. When scientists say that we have two different laws
> >> of physics, a quantum one and a relativistic one, they really mean it:
> >> they are both laws and they are incompatible with each other. It's like
> >> states laws vs. federal laws in the United States. But unlike the US
> >> laws, there isn't a hierarchy where one law takes precedence over
> >> another, here there's no Supreme Court to adjudicate.

>
> > quantum cosmology is like the supreme court and the idea is
> > to unify this two theories with elegant explanations that make sense
> > in both the macro and micro realms.
>
> Right now, we got two district courts, and no supreme court. If the
> district courts interpret the laws differently then it's the supreme
> court's job to resolve the differences.
>

i don't understand politics.
isn't the job of quantum cosmology to find common
ground between the two schools of thoath?
i know it has not happen jet.

> >> Anyways, in QM, particles don't travel through space. They exist in
> >> space inside a wavefunction, and they just pop up anywhere within the
> >> confines of the wavefunction without moving through the spaces in
> >> between. Since they're not "moving" through space, but simply appearing
> >> and disappearing from space, they don't have to worry about the speed
> >> limit.

>
> > yes, a square motion goes from one value to another without
> > going through the space in between. a ramp or triangle
> > its continuos.
>
> I don't quite understand what you're referring to here.
>

in a synth you have the following wave functions:
saw or ramp, triangle, square, and sin wave(circular)

you can mix functions and
you can change frequency and amplitude with operators
and controllers and/or modulate properties.

xample. if you have a source value of 1 and a target value of 1024,
in a square function the synth will go from 1 to 1024 without going
through the values in between. you can choose the rate in wish
this happens. on a triangle function, it will go from 1 to 1024
going through all the values in between and then back to 1.

a sin fuction its analog for a sin wave motion.

> >> These are among the many rules that scientists already know about that
> >> can bypass the speed of light. Wormholes and the Casimir Effect are
> >> other things that can do it. Cosmic Inflation which happened just after
> >> the Big Bang also expanded the Universe faster than the speed of light..
>
> > like the analogy of the folded page. if you move through a shorter
> > spacetime you can get faster than going all the way around
> > even at c.
>
> That's a wormhole.
>
> > but that does not mean that things can move faster that light.
>
> If you're bypassing spacetime, then the concept of speed (i.e. traveling
> from one point in space to another point in a certain amount of time) is
> rendered meaningless because you're not using time to move over that
> distance, you're using some other dimension.
>
>         Yousuf Khan
>

it will be like a square type of motion.

regards
r.y
From: Yousuf Khan on 13 Jul 2010 08:03
On 7/12/2010 11:16 PM, Raymond Yohros wrote:
> On Jul 10, 7:02 am, Yousuf Khan<bbb...(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>> These particular neutrinos are not like the neutrinos we see today
>>>>>> These ones would be billions of times less massive than today's
>>>>>> neutrinos. And today's neutrinos are already some of the least massive
>>>>>> particles in the universe.
>>
>>> what neutrinos are you talking about?
>>
>> The neutrinos in the original article I posted, the ones that are
>> supposed to be 10 billion light years across by themselves.
>>
>
> yes, i got it now. but why "billions" of times liter than younger
> neutrinos?

Well simply because these neutrinos have been "stretched" by spacetime
during the Cosmic Inflation period. Cosmic Inflation is the period
immediately after the Big Bang occurred, where the universe went from
something smaller than an atom to something about 80% as big as it is
now, all within less than a second!

Inflation (cosmology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_inflation

If a neutrino was created just before Inflation, right after Inflation,
that neutrino's wavefunction will have been stretched immensely. to
about 10 billion light years. A normal neutrino would have a
sub-microscopic wavefunction. These ancient neutrinos started out as
normal neutrinos, but got stretched to high-heaven, therefore they have
less mass since they have more parts of space to exist in.

And you'll notice that for the universe to expand so quickly, it had to
do it *faster* than the speed of light. Another example of how to bypass
the speed of light.

> photons are the second riders because they stop and wonder
> around a lot more. even when they keep bouncing,
> their travel distances can be affected by baryonic matter.

Well, not all photons are stopping and moseying around. Some are coming
directly at us from the furthest parts of the universe, without going
anywhere else in between. So those photons can be over 13 billion years
old themselves.

>>> quantum cosmology is like the supreme court and the idea is
>>> to unify this two theories with elegant explanations that make sense
>>> in both the macro and micro realms.
>>
>> Right now, we got two district courts, and no supreme court. If the
>> district courts interpret the laws differently then it's the supreme
>> court's job to resolve the differences.
>>
>
> i don't understand politics.
> isn't the job of quantum cosmology to find common
> ground between the two schools of thoath?
> i know it has not happen jet.

Right now, there is no quantum gravity laws yet. There are just a bunch
of proposals for some. You may have heard of some of them, Superstring
theory, M-Theory, Loop Quantum Gravity, etc.

Once we know which one is the right one (if any of them), then we'll
know how things work in all scales of the universe, and even if they
transition from one level to another.

>>>> Anyways, in QM, particles don't travel through space. They exist in
>>>> space inside a wavefunction, and they just pop up anywhere within the
>>>> confines of the wavefunction without moving through the spaces in
>>>> between. Since they're not "moving" through space, but simply appearing
>>>> and disappearing from space, they don't have to worry about the speed
>>>> limit.
>
>>
>>> yes, a square motion goes from one value to another without
>>> going through the space in between. a ramp or triangle
>>> its continuos.
>>
>> I don't quite understand what you're referring to here.
>>
>
> in a synth you have the following wave functions:
> saw or ramp, triangle, square, and sin wave(circular)


Well, actually, you'll find that a square wave is really a very steep
trapezoid. It's not as instant as you think, however it is useful to
think of it as instant and ignore the small ramp time.

square:
_
_| |_

trapezoid:
_
_/ \_


>> If you're bypassing spacetime, then the concept of speed (i.e. traveling
>> from one point in space to another point in a certain amount of time) is
>> rendered meaningless because you're not using time to move over that
>> distance, you're using some other dimension.
>>
>> Yousuf Khan
>>
>
> it will be like a square type of motion.
>
> regards
> r.y

Yes, you can think of it that way, even though a synth's square function
is not really that square.

However, in QM, it really is instantly from one place to another without
going through the stuff in between. In fact, in QM, you can even have
the same particle existing in two or more places simultaneously. In
reality, this particle is probably traveling through another dimension
and bypassing time, and we just see it as instantly being one place or
another, or even in two places at the same time.

Yousuf Khan
From: Raymond Yohros on 15 Jul 2010 11:58
On Jul 13, 7:03 am, Yousuf Khan <bbb...(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 7/12/2010 11:16 PM, Raymond Yohros wrote:
> Well simply because these neutrinos have been "stretched" by spacetime
> during the Cosmic Inflation period. Cosmic Inflation is the period
> immediately after the Big Bang occurred, where the universe went from
> something smaller than an atom to something about 80% as big as it is
> now, all within less than a second!
>
> Inflation (cosmology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_inflation

a second near the big bang is not the same as a second
in ordinary spacetime. for us, it goes with the flash of an eye
but near the bb, there where so many things going on
that it can take more than a lifetime to imagine.

>
> If a neutrino was created just before Inflation, right after Inflation,
> that neutrino's wavefunction will have been stretched immensely. to
> about 10 billion light years. A normal neutrino would have a
> sub-microscopic wavefunction. These ancient neutrinos started out as
> normal neutrinos, but got stretched to high-heaven, therefore they have
> less mass since they have more parts of space to exist in.
>

relik neutrinos
d bb was the biggest photo-neutrino mass production in history

>
> And you'll notice that for the universe to expand so quickly, it had to
> do it *faster* than the speed of light. Another example of how to bypass
> the speed of light.
>

this was inversely related to what was going on before
spacetime was of the size of an atom.


> > photons are the second riders because they stop and wonder
> > around a lot more. even when they keep bouncing,
> > their travel distances can be affected by baryonic matter.
>
> Well, not all photons are stopping and moseying around. Some are coming
> directly at us from the furthest parts of the universe, without going
> anywhere else in between. So those photons can be over 13 billion years
> old themselves.
>
> >>> quantum cosmology is like the supreme court and the idea is
> >>> to unify this two theories with elegant explanations that make sense
> >>> in both the macro and micro realms.
>
> >> Right now, we got two district courts, and no supreme court. If the
> >> district courts interpret the laws differently then it's the supreme
> >> court's job to resolve the differences.
>
> > i don't understand politics.
> > isn't the job of quantum cosmology to find common
> > ground between the two schools of thoath?
> > i know it has not happen jet.

>
> Right now, there is no quantum gravity laws yet. There are just a bunch
> of proposals for some. You may have heard of some of them, Superstring
> theory, M-Theory, Loop Quantum Gravity, etc.
>
> Once we know which one is the right one (if any of them), then we'll
> know how things work in all scales of the universe, and even if they
> transition from one level to another.
>

the best approach will be to enforce observations with the most
simple elegant explanations. there is no need for the word "super"
for strings that are really closer to simple 3d strands that can
define
wave-particle structure.

r.y

> > in a synth you have the following wave functions:
> > saw or ramp, triangle, square, and sin wave(circular)
>
> Well, actually, you'll find that a square wave is really a very steep
> trapezoid. It's not as instant as you think, however it is useful to
> think of it as instant and ignore the small ramp time.
>
> square:
> _
> _| |_
>
> trapezoid:
> _
> _/ \_
>
> >> If you're bypassing spacetime, then the concept of speed (i.e. traveling
> >> from one point in space to another point in a certain amount of time) is
> >> rendered meaningless because you're not using time to move over that
> >> distance, you're using some other dimension.
>
> > it will be like a square type of motion.
>
> Yes, you can think of it that way, even though a synth's square function
> is not really that square.
>
> However, in QM, it really is instantly from one place to another without
> going through the stuff in between. In fact, in QM, you can even have
> the same particle existing in two or more places simultaneously. In
> reality, this particle is probably traveling through another dimension
> and bypassing time, and we just see it as instantly being one place or
> another, or even in two places at the same time.
>
> Yousuf Khan

From: Yousuf Khan on 16 Jul 2010 16:07
On 7/15/2010 9:58 PM, Raymond Yohros wrote:
> On Jul 13, 7:03 am, Yousuf Khan<bbb...(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On 7/12/2010 11:16 PM, Raymond Yohros wrote:
>> Well simply because these neutrinos have been "stretched" by spacetime
>> during the Cosmic Inflation period. Cosmic Inflation is the period
>> immediately after the Big Bang occurred, where the universe went from
>> something smaller than an atom to something about 80% as big as it is
>> now, all within less than a second!
>>
>> Inflation (cosmology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_inflation
>
> a second near the big bang is not the same as a second
> in ordinary spacetime. for us, it goes with the flash of an eye
> but near the bb, there where so many things going on
> that it can take more than a lifetime to imagine.

Hell, never mind the Big Bang, even what's going on inside a small star
like the Sun is mind-boggling unimaginable to us. The fusion power in
the Sun is equal to 5.2E23 horsepower! That means 4 million tons of the
Sun's mass is turned into energy every second!

> the best approach will be to enforce observations with the most
> simple elegant explanations. there is no need for the word "super"
> for strings that are really closer to simple 3d strands that can
> define
> wave-particle structure.

Well, the "super" in Superstrings refers to the "Supersymmetry" which
was a previous generation quantum gravity theory that got incorporated
into String theory.

Yousuf Khan
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Prev: Proton Smaller Than Thought—May Rewrite Laws of Physics
Next: Proper Time at any rate