Black Holes Feed On Quantum Foam, Says Cosmologist

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by cav755, Apr 2, 2014.

  1. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    'Einstein: Ether and Relativity'
    http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html

    "Think of waves on the surface of water. Here we can describe two entirely different things. Either we may observe how the undulatory surface forming the boundary between water and air alters in the course of time; or else-with the help of small floats, for instance - we can observe how the position of the separate particles of water alters in the course of time. If the existence of such floats for tracking the motion of the particles of a fluid were a fundamental impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium."

    if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the aether as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that aether consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium having mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.

    Watch the following video starting at 0:45 to see a visual representation of the state of the aether. What is referred to as a twist in spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether.

    [video=youtube;s9ITt44-EHE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9ITt44-EHE[/video]

    "Imagine the Earth as if it were immersed in honey," says Francis Everitt of Stanford University in California, the mission's chief scientist. "As the planet rotates, the honey around it would swirl, and it's the same with space and time."

    The 'swirl' is more correctly described as the state of displacement of the aether.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    But that's not what he said, is it?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    You think he meant space is filled with honey?

    Honey has mass and so does the aether.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,583
    Maybe so. Here is what Gribbin says in Q is for Quantum, page 63, Copyright 1998: "Initially, de Broglie developed an interpretation of QM in which the wave 'steered' a real, material particle; this was obscured by the Copenhagen Interpretation, which dominated thinking after 1927, but it bears many similarities to the 'hidden variables' interpretation put forward by David Bohm and others, and now once again taken seriously by many physicists."
     
  8. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    And it will be taken even more seriously once physicists understand there are no such things as hidden variables. Entanglement is, due to conservation of momentum, each of the downconverted pair being able to determine the state of the other.
     
  9. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,583
    I don't think so. The famous "Entangled particles" may just have their individual states established at the moment of "entanglement", and so the information of one state automatically tells the state of the other, by a process of elimination, not FTL communication, and not because one particle can "determine" the state of the other.
     
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    It maybe a while before they catch up to you.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    de Broglie was ahead of all of us almost 100 years ago.
     
  12. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    Tells, knows, is able to determine...symantics. The particles are not physically or superluminally connected. If they can tell the state of the other then nothing has to be hidden. Your statement is saying hidden variables is superfluous as one state automatically being able to tell the state of the other means one of the pair has the information available to it to tell the state of the other; the information is not hidden. There are no hidden variables.

    They should be called known variables.
     
  13. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    So was Lord Kelvin. Rutherford, and Hoyle.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    We're still waiting for mainstream physics to figure out de Broglie was correct.
     
  15. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,583
    You would have a point if what "hidden variables" meant was hidden information. But it means that there is a hidden mechanism for the presence of particles, even when they are not being observed. That presence allows "locality" vs. "non-locality". The Dance of the Photons is a good book to get an explanation of the meaning of non-locality as it applies to the delayed choice quantum erasure experiments. And I know you are familiar with the Bell Theorems, because we discussed them recently. Bell never believed that his theorems eliminated the possibility that there were hidden variables.
     
  16. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox

    "Heisenberg's principle was an attempt to provide a classical explanation of a quantum effect sometimes called non-locality. According to EPR there were two possible explanations. Either there was some interaction between the particles, even though they were separated, or the information about the outcome of all possible measurements was already present in both particles. The EPR authors preferred the second explanation according to which that information was encoded in some 'hidden parameters'."

    All possible measurements are not already present in both particles. There are no encoded 'hidden parameters'.
     
  17. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,583
    Well, the nuances of the history are quite well explored, and the impression I have of what hidden variables means is that the other interpretations of QM are not wrong, they are just incomplete. You can argue that is not necessary to establish local reality, and I can disagree. I think the QM interpretations debate, simply put, is about either the particle is there even if it is not observed (local reality), or it is not there unless it is observed (non-locality).
     
  18. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    The whole hidden variable stuff seems nonsensical to me. There is just the math associated with figuring out what occurs physically in nature. There is not the classical math and the quantum mechanics math. There is just the math.
     
  19. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,583
    I think we agree to the extent that there is some realty. The right math will attempt to correspond precisely to it. We don't have the math yet because we don't understand reality yet.
     
  20. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    The most correct explanation as to what occurs physically in nature is aether has mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
     
  21. BlackHoley Banned Banned

    Messages:
    340
    How much displacing do you really think is going down on the quantum foam level? As I understand it, energy is constantly appearing and disappearing so quickly you can't even measure the effects of it on the scales we can measure the effects of the wave function.
     
  22. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,583
    I certainly can abide with an aether that carries waves, and the hypothesis that particles are composed of complex standing wave patterns means that mass can be formed within the medium. It is the particles though, in that hypothesis, that have mass, if by mass we mean that they have weight when under the influence gravity.

    Aether that is not occupied with the presence of particles or objects has no weight in my hypothesis. It always carries gravity waves though, so there isn't a clear distinction between it having weight, and it not having weight. The presence of waves implies wave intersections, which cause high density spots at the point of intersection in the medium, and it is complex patterns of wave intersections and their associated high density spots that cause the presence of particles. The medium, aether if you like, has wave energy traversing it from all directions at all points in space, so I guess that could mean aether has mass, but it isn't the same as particles and objects that have mass.
     
  23. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    Virtual particles, with mass, popping into and out of existence out of nothing in a time scale too short to measure is more of the absurd nonsense in order to deny understanding aether has mass.
     

Share This Page