I'll keep this short as possible.

To observe an atom, is make it leap into a new configuration.

If each time we observe something, even at macroscopic scales, then according to the Copenhagen Interpretation, the universe must quantum leap each time.

To view the universe as an entire atom, is quantum consmology.

Q: If this is so, then to say an atom leaped upon observation, then so must the universe as a whole.

:m:

Not really. No one can observe the entire universe, and by the time we make observations on the universe, it is no longer a quantum object.

A single energetic change though, contained within the universe via observation COULD make it quantum leap... In other words, this universe is self-contained, and if a slight defined observation is made, something changes within its own consistency.

No. The universe obeys classical dynamics at late times.

But this is a Copenhagen Interpretational View, which is HIGHLY accepted today.

That the universe is a quantum system? No, the universe was a quantum system at one time, but today it is very certainly a classical system. Are you arguing this?

You can't just use the Copenhagen interpretation to justify everything that you say.

If observation of the universe causes its collapse, fine.

Can you observe everything in the universe at once? No.

Has the universe collapsed? No.

Is it useful to debate the possibility of observation causing the universe to collapse? Probably not.

Is anthropic/anthropomorphic reasoning equal to religion? When you apply the notion of preferential treatment to us as observers, absolutely.

Is this entire facet of "physics" useful beyond bong-talk? No.

Can this facet be saved by replacing mysticism with the every day concept of annealing? Yes.

Why has this not been done? Because physics in this era is just as dogmatic and inflexible as any other religion.

A concrete example? Most prophets/physicists exclaim "I'm right, you're wrong" instead of "Let's work to understand each other". A google search for "religious persecution"/"physics blog" provides plenty of examples.

Religion and physics are both entirely founded on the art of "do as I say, not as I do". And both adamantly deny being nothing like the other. How sad, but we all know that those who suffer from mental illness do not generally see it for themselves. It's really not their fault.

Is it really possible for an entire group of people to be deluded? Absolutely. It's referred to as group-think.

Is Catholicism/string theory incorrect? I couldn't possibly know.

Why do I claim to not suffer from religious and scientific delusion? Refer to the last question/answer.

Would we recognize Zarathustra's overman if they were right in our face? No. They wouldn't have had time to speak out before being drown by the masses like so many unwanted kittens.

Am I being sarcastic? Partially, but more like satirical.

Do I make popcorn and enjoy the show regardless? Absolutely.

''That the universe is a quantum system? No, the universe was a quantum system at one time, but today it is very certainly a classical system.''

The universe is ruled by physics, therego, its a quantum configuration. That cannot be denied. Also, if Hawking want's us to see the universe as a single atom, then the universe itself is a quantum system.

Is this entire facet of "physics" useful beyond bong-talk? No.

I'm sure that the people who have had their lives saved because an MRI found a tumor would disagree with you.

Ben, I did not mean to imply that the facet (field) of nuclear imaging is on the same level as the anthropic principle and universal scale observer induced wavefunction collapse.

For one, nuclear imaging is based on fact...

I also suppose that non-physicists undergoing chemotherapy would also benefit from the supposed anti-nausea properties attributed to bong hits. My bad. (Wow, twisting my words IS fun. I had no idea.)

''That the universe is a quantum system? No,... if Hawking want's us to see the universe as a single atom, then the universe itself is a quantum system...
I can see a bit of quandary here. Well, how this point would appear from the AWT (http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=74593) perspective?

Every gradually collapsing object will reach the moment, where it's surface density gradient (expressed by its surface energy gradient) will exceed its inner mass/energy density at the center. Simply because the gravitational field inside of every massive object is flat (believe it or not, inside of Earth is weightlessness), while the gravitational force/curvature of space-time (and the energy density by Einstein's field equations as well) remains highest somewhere near the surface:

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/bh_collapse.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/simulace/quantum_wave.gif

Can you see, guys, the problem? While the classical Schwarzschild's solution of black hole is quite relevant from formal point of view, it's just steady state solution, which is assuming , the highest curvature of space-time is exactly at the center of massive object from it's very beginning. This is the situation, which can never occur spontaneously inside of real massive object, indeed. The another derived problem is, the convergence of steady-state models can - but necesarilly doesn't have to - follow the time evolution of corresponding time-dependent model. By such view, even the carefull solution of steady-state models by iterative way can miss the physicall y relevant solution completelly. And this is the thing, which is sometimes quite difficult to explain to formal theorists - and I am pretty sure, nobody of relativity theorists hasn't considered it till now.

Therefore, if we want to see, how the REAL Schwarzschild's BH solution CAN appear, we should always follow the time evolution of time-dependent model, not just the steady-state approximation of it. The above difference simply means, at certain moment of gravitational collapse, the energy density of black hole will exceed the internal energy density of collapsar, thus violating the elementary buyoance condition. The surface of such massive object will start to undulate in looking/waiting for possibility, how to collapse further. And whole the object will change into udulating quantum wave (see the animation on the above).

While the undulations of large black holes can be quite dynamic, we should realize, near/inside of black hole the energy spreading speed is quite minute, so that from internal observer perspective these undulations will appear as a rather slow process, followed by many gradualistic phase transform inside of nested quantum foam. Briefly speaking, from internal observer perspective the wildly undulating Universe/black hole can appear as a quite calm and "classical-only" object or the sequence of Big-Bangs and inflations at best.

I hope, now you all can understand better, how the AWT is working and how it can contribute to the quantum gravity theory.

I can see a bit of quandary here. Well, how this point would appear from the AWT (http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=74593) perspective?

Every gradually collapsing object will reach the moment, where it's surface density gradient (expressed by its surface energy gradient) will exceed its inner mass/energy density at the center. Simply because the gravitational field inside of every massive object is flat (believe it or not, inside of Earth is weightlessness), while the gravitational force/curvature of space-time (and the energy density by Einstein's field equations as well) remains highest somewhere near the surface:

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/bh_collapse.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/simulace/quantum_wave.gif

Can you see, guys, the problem? While the classical Schwarzschild's solution of black hole is quite relevant from formal point of view, it's just steady state solution, which is assuming , the highest curvature of space-time is exactly at the center of massive object from it's very beginning. This is the situation, which can never occur spontaneously inside of real massive object, indeed. The another derived problem is, the convergence of steady-state models can - but necesarilly doesn't have to - follow the time evolution of corresponding time-dependent model. By such view, even the carefull solution of steady-state models by iterative way can miss the physicall y relevant solution completelly. And this is the thing, which is sometimes quite difficult to explain to formal theorists - and I am pretty sure, nobody of relativity theorists hasn't considered it till now.

Therefore, if we want to see, how the REAL Schwarzschild's BH solution CAN appear, we should always follow the time evolution of time-dependent model, not just the steady-state approximation of it. The above difference simply means, at certain moment of gravitational collapse, the energy density of black hole will exceed the internal energy density of collapsar, thus violating the elementary buyoance condition. The surface of such massive object will start to undulate in looking/waiting for possibility, how to collapse further. And whole the object will change into udulating quantum wave (see the animation on the above).

While the undulations of large black holes can be quite dynamic, we should realize, near/inside of black hole the energy spreading speed is quite minute, so that from internal observer perspective these undulations will appear as a quite slow process, followed by many gradualistic phase transform. Briefly speaking, from internal observer perspective the wildly undulating Universe/black hole can appear as a quite calm and "classical-only" object.

I hope, now you all can understand better, how the AWT is working and how it can contribute to the quantum gravity theory.

I can see what you are meaning... but there is few holes to be considered...

...I can imagine dimensions, so is this is what it means?...
Yes, the Aether foam concept contains the hidden dimensions concept. The dimension means, every point of space is moving in many different directions independently. You can realize such motion by pendullum, hanging on another pendullum, recursivelly. Or you can imagine the surface of undualting foam, where each membrane undulating in one direction is supported by another membranes, which are undualting in another directions, recursivelly. This is the simplest way, how to bring the concept of hidden dimensions in real physical environment: again, it's a recursive foam concept.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/foam_spiral.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/Aether_Foam.gif

So yes, the Aether foam concept is firmly connected with the concept of hidden dimensions (and branes) of string theory. Does it mean, the LQG model, based on 3D spin foam is incorect? Surprisingly not, because the nested foam is basically 3D object, it just depends on the observational perspective, how many dimensions we want to see in this model. The infinitelly nested foam corresponds the infinite number of hidden dimensions, that's all.

Alright... I'll try... And i might proove your points right all along, and it will be those put to shame for underestimating you...

Your diagrams show an oscillation, moving in sinudoidal and yet etherally-complex patterns, which are very hard to conceptualize. I can imagine dimensions, so is this is what it means?

1, that the universe is flat, because of wave and phase velocities of Aether Fields.

and

2. that the universe isn't really spherical or Bolic in nature... but rather an ''amost uniform,'' and ''almost flat expansion?

''While the classical Schwarzschild's solution of black hole is quite relevant from formal point of view, it's just steady state solution,''

Which is well said, but i wouldn't say right, because there is the paradox, that if this universe is indeed a black hole, then it is ''self-contained'' and that an energy within it's own vacua is providing it to accelerate, proven through our observations of the observable universe (I think its about 45 million ly away).
Thergo, saying this is a steady state universe/black hole, would be illogical due to the solution of self-contained energy, which would be provided by the negative density called ''zero-point energy,'' which paradoxically has everything, but itis itself, a point of nothing...
Also, there are the temperatures of gamma isotropic distribution to answer for, for it is itself a good arguement big bang happened. If these questions can be answered, without flaw in my eyes, the i see no more reason why AWT cannot be discredited.

I will provide some simple math, once my questions are hopefully answered.. :)

...yet etherally-complex patterns, which are very hard to conceptualize..
This is nothing less, nothing more then the rigorous solution of Schrodinger equation particle wave, confined by (gravitational) potential hole. It mean, it's a classical quantum wave oscillation.

The AWT (http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=74593) suplies many ways, how to understand such fluctuations. You can think, it's undulation of particle, whose energy density is proportional the cuvature and frequency. In general model, the quantum string is every classical Newtonian string, whose mass density is proportional to its energy density (both kinetic, both potencial one) in each moment and location.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/simulace/vmlwave.gif

On the simulation above we can see the quantum wave together with its energy density profile. We can see, the quantum string is formally quite normal classical string, the density of which is miraculously proportional its energy density. Does such physical system exists in real life? Yep, it does, for example it's an undulation of foam, whose density is proportional to the intensity of its shaking, i.e. the energy density. With respect of this, the quantum wave is classical wave of inertial string, formed by foam. Here even exists another classical models (http://www.physorg.com/printnews.php?newsid=78650511) of QM, so we aren't required to develop another and another interpretations of QM: we have it already from real life observations.

I mean, this is the classical interpretation of quantum mechanics without using any ad-hoc "spooky" concepts (like the other interpretatations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics) of QM are using). Here's nothing miraculous on quantum mechanics, we just never realized the mechanical model behind it. It's logical, because the fathers of QM were formal mathematicians, not practical physicists. They didn't care about some foam, capillary waves or supercritical vapor condensation, so they missed theses real life analogies. And the psychological disbelief in inertial environment concept (i.e. Aether) introduced by Einstein cannot help the development of natural models of reality. By such way, the theorists becomed victims of their own (dis)belief.

As the result all the interpreations of QM are nearly as formal, as their postulate definition.

Sounds reasonable in its foundation to me. It's certainly creative. Have you implemented any form of dynamics with it? Are there books on this?

Sounds reasonable in its foundation to me. Have you implemented any form of dynamics with it? Are there books on this?

Everything concerning the AWT is my private insight into situation. But the Aether is even more general stuff, then some foam. In AWT the foam is generated in situ by fluctuations of many particles.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/foam_part.gif

And these particles are formed by wave packets formed by another generation of foam. While the AWT is conceptually simple, it's quite difficult to model dynamic model of Aether. You can think, you're modelling the interior of black hole formed by another black hole recursivelly by Newtonian dynamic of dense gas. So you should create simulation of as many inertial particles, as you can to create realistic fluctuations of Aether. But currently I don't know about some multiparticle simulation of quite trivial supercritical foam, not say of some more dense, recursive stuff. Here's lot of work for whole generations of mathematicians and powerfull computers to simulate the Aether dynamics in corresponding fidelity ab-initio.

Have you studied computational fluid dynamics and foam modeling? CS students were using it to simulate the process whereby closed metal manifolds are internally reinforced by a foam of *metal*. Metal foam, all through the magic of annealing. HOW COOL! I love foam. When you think about it... Foam is pretty common.

Do you plan on releasing more information later?

So if two bodies are gravitating, is there some kind of foam "pop" rate that governs acceleration? Like a parachute, but "below" you, in the form of a suspending cushion?

That's the bad thing about bubble baths. The pop rate is always too great, and all the soap eventually settles into the water.

Do I see that the hexagon plays a part in the formation of foam in your model?

Have you studied computational fluid dynamics and foam modeling?
Yes, I'm experienced in CFD and physical simulations (this is partly the way, how I developed this model). But the exact modelling of Aether is not business for individual, as it requires the supercomputers. And I'm not even the profesional scientist, I'm just explaining, how this stuff is working. While the foam is rather complex system by itself, the Aether foam is even more complex system, being formed by dynamic system of fluctuations, not by normal foam filled by gas. It's formed by density fluctuations of dense particle system, formed by another density fluctuations. It's supposedly infinitelly recursive stuff.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/foam_part.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/dynafoam.gif

Therefore the significant property of Aether is, every formal, i.e. strictly causual model of Aether is just an approximation of it. None the formal model of Aether can never ever describe it in its entirety.

But here are many global aspects, which can become the subject of usefull formal model, like the Lagrangian curve and E8 particle group topologies. But my motivation is to understand, how the Aether is really formed, i.e. which nature are the hypothetical particles, which is formed by. This is the true conceptual challenge, not the modelling of Aether as such.

I like it.

Have you considered creating an open source farm application which allows people to donate CPU / GPU time?

I think I see from your simulation that density comes only with perturbation of the norm. Anything within that density is also less stationary than energy closer to the grid points.

Is feedback important? I suppose so.

An oscillator can be found through the equation:

E=nhf

Which inexorably leads to the solution that the Planck Consant is:

h=6.62606896(33)(10^-16)

Deviated of course, from:

E=hf - (from normal phase and group velocities)

They also have a matrix result of >

n=1, 2, 3

***Oscillators move back and forth the vacua it is allowed to propagate through, so for an AW configuration, would need to HAVE waves that travel in much the same way. In other words, ‘’undulations.’’

A wave, could tunnel under space as it is distorted by small, but calculatable gravitational effects as it MUST interact. This has been proved mathematically through unifying the gravity found in real matter, with the ZPE field. This means that perhaps, and I am only speculating here, that the ZPE field is cancelled out by a dual hypothesis> Not only is the Aether dragging matter, but matter is dragging the Aether.

****Oscillators are constitutional math to describe a superpositioning in space, existing in one space and then another into infinity.

An elastic Aether could be predicting also, that it is being stretched, because the distribution of matter is in fact causing a stress tensor, as found in Einsteins relativistic equations. It wouldn’t make sense to say the Aether dragged matter, unless both are simultaneous in operation. This might be a solution unto its own, as it could cause an inertial effect. Treating one of these theories alone, leads to errors, but unifying the two, solves the paradox.

only is the Aether dragging matter, but matter is dragging the Aether..
Yep, this can be an usefull point, especially at the case of dense matter, like this one near of black hole. We can say, the dense vacuum is going seamlessly into matter near the black hole horizon. So the matter motion will affect the Aether motion, definitelly.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/light_gravity.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/spacetime/black_hole_refl.gif http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/aether/gravityfield.gif

We can say, the event horizon is just the place of Aether, where the mass density gradient is so sharp, so that the so called total reflection occurs. It's not equivalent to the physical surface of black hole. The AWT even predicts the existence of many other event horizons bellow it. These horizons will get more and more dense gradually, until they'll transform into new generation of Aether foam inside of BH. We can say, the event horizon is the largest, outer brane of the generation of Aether foam, which gradually gets more dense inside of BH.

because the distribution of matter is in fact causing a stress tensor, as found in Einsteins relativistic equations.
The problem of classical model of GR is quite trivial, in fact. The Einstein's field equation is describing the dependence of space-time curvature to energy density. It basically says, the energy density of space-time is proportional to it's curvature.

http://superstruny.aspweb.cz/images/fyzika/relativity/yilmaz.gif

But the E=mc^2 equation always remain valid! It means, the curvature of space has an energy density, which can be expressed as an aditional (calibration) mass density. And this additional mass density corresponds the additional curvature of space. If we analyze the submission of space-time curvature, we can see, it occurs mostly near the surface of massive object, so it's compensating slightly the space-time curvature, caused by mass of object itself. From this result, when the massive object becomes sufficiently dense, it's surface energy density will become larger, then the energy density inside it. Such object cannot collapse anymore.

By such way, the Einstein's GR is the infinitelly recursive theory, in fact and the classical field equation is just a simplest extrapolation of it. Many other theories (the Heim's, Yilmaz's and so called double relativity) are taking account into higher derivatives of stress tensor in Einstein's field equations, but they're not generally accepted, as the general conceptual look is still missing here.

''We can say, the event horizon is just the place of Aether,''

A black hole itself, is it is able to stop a packet down to zero space and time, and ironically being a zero-time particle itself, it must drag the Aether Field around with it, at the speed of light, since black holes rotate at this speed. However, there is one snag. The outser-coundary must have a singularity, and this must not be forgotten. So then, i acnnot see the outer boundary as being the Aether itself.

It stresses such a tensor, because matter is but only crinkles, or folds of spacetime that are compactified.

...The outser-coundary must have a singularity..

In general, the AWT does not prohibit the formation of singularities. By AWT the black hole is behaving like dense undulating blob of vacuum, which is trying to collapse, but the negative curvature formed during such collapse will result into strong repulsive force. This keeps the whole black hole conditionally stable. But at the certain moment, the space-time can crush its own surface and it can create a daughter black hole(s) inside of former black hole. Such moment will become the "Big-Bang" event for the inner universe generation. Because the Universe is collapsing gradually, such event is more and more probable.

You can use the system of mercury droplets for explanation of the critical space-time curvature concept. The pile of tiny mercury droplets will not condense immediatelly, because the droplets are repelled mutually due their strong surface tension. This is because the occasional merging of two dropplets into single one is followed by temporal formation of thin "neck" with strong negative curvature, which is followed by repulsive force (the energy is trying to spread along as stright path, as possible). This keeps the system of mercury droplets conditionally stable.

But at the moment, when the pile of mercury dropplets will become a sufficiently heavy, the surface of dropplets at the center of pile will merge and whole pile will collapse like the nest full of eggs. At the case of black hole collapse we can say, the daughter Universe phase transform (Big Bang event, followed by inflation) has occured right now.

Whole process is driven just bycurvature of space, so we can say, the AWT is sort of geometrodynamical theory. The behavior of Universe is the consequence of the diffusive character of inertial energy spreading. The diffusion always occurs perpendiculary to the density gradient, i.e. along as straight path, as possible (principle of least action). At the case of curved surface of droplet (the "particle" in general..) this principle leads to the apparent paradox: the smaller is the droplet diameter, the shorter is the surface gradient path, but the more curved is the resulting energy path. This results in dynamic, metastable Universe behavior.

''By AWT the black hole is behaving like dense undulating blob of vacuum, which is trying to collapse.''

Not at all, because if the aether waves where subjected to the singularity, they would be blown to unimaginable proportional frequencies. It would defy all sense, since there is already a Hawking Radiation.

''but the negative curvature formed during such collapse will result into strong repulsive force. This keeps the whole black hole conditionally stable/''

But you can't say this either, because if it was a system as you say, there is no reason why energy cannot tunnel into black holes... such as the antiphotons, and positrons that are inexorably forced back. This would create stability, however, we should also expect rogue matter falling into its wrath, increasing its material volume, making it increase in size.

It would defy all sense, since there is already a Hawking Radiation..

I've nothing to say to such "argumentation".. Of course, here's already a Hawking Radiation, Olbers Paradox, Aharamov-Bohm effect and many other phenomena. How it can affect the subject of discussion?

I cannot argue with that either.... MMMMMMM,......