The Anthropic Principle

Whoa!!! Waves and particles are not interchangeable. Go look up wave function.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function

A wave-function (as something that exists in reality) is a collection of quantum states that a particle can take. You can occupy any room in your house, but nobody confuses you with the house.

Nothing with energy content (standard model particles) can exist outside of space-time. But an empty wave-function could.

Cosmological models are indeed very complicated and difficult to articulate mathematically. I am amused that Occam's razor might turn out to be contradicted by a most outlandishly bizarre model that more closely matches reality. I got my idea for a multiverse model from some surgeon's near death experience. A multiverse interconnected by a quantum wave ocean (ocean meaning something infinite in size and dimensions) that connects an uncountable of number of universes with unique laws of physics, and occasionally spits new singularities. It is my model of the universe, inspired by what is both compatible with reality and spiritual insight.

Wave functions are invisible. The birth of the universe (as something that sprang from nothing) is illogical.

It's not entirely closed. There are powers that be that can defy the randomness and pick the quantum state (set of states) that must be. But such interventions fall under the jurisdiction of powers beyond man. The fact that we avoided nuclear war with the Soviets (25+ years ago) is an example that God is watching over us.

Religions are a construct of man that gives the Powers That Be a way to interact with us, to touch our lives, and to share with us the great experience of life.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The idea that wave-functions are real things and part of reality is not well known to the public. I don't know what percentage of the scientific community even agrees with that idea. It's a fairly new idea. But if it is true that quantum entanglement is made possible by the existence of a wave-function that is part of reality, then the paradigm changes.

If wave-functions are part of reality, then what about geodesics? What about the space-time continuum? Is there some invisible "thing" that we can't detect directly, yet it behaves like gravity and curvature of space-time? If these things are caused by some invisible "thing" that is part of nature, part of reality, then it begs the question: do we completely understand how they behave? Or are there additional laws of nature, additional rules that we don't know about because we haven't had a chance to observe them directly?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Both you and the general public have a very unexamined and naive idea of what reality is. I guess I should include myself in that category too since I have not investigated all the ideas of what reality is. But reality is not a simple or well understood subject. Ask two experts and you will likely get differing explanations. Many have written long and complicated books on the subject. The subject of reality is another of those esoteric subjects (as are plumbing and bookkeeping). So the discovery that wave-functions are real, that two nebulous ideas suddenly moved closer to one another, does not seem to mean what you seem to think it means. There are many physicists that never thought that the wave function was just 'playing dice'.

Most (perhaps all) physicists think that there are additional laws of nature that are yet undiscovered. Are you that uninformed that you thought otherwise?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

By "playing dice" you mean that the quantum state that is measured occurs at random (as if by dice). It is random as near as anyone can tell. I think there probably is some hidden mysterious way to force a particular quantum state to appear.

As for reality, yes it is getting complicated. It cannot be relied upon to be classical at the limits.

Of course they are always looking at the mathematics, trying to figure out some new law of physics. Your criticism is silly.

What is new is that the quantum wave-function, if it exists in reality (in spite of it's lack of detectability), then it sets a new precedent. That's what's new. It means that nature can display mechanisms using things that are invisible, impossible to detect. Nobody ever discusses this possibility. There are more scientists who think that the space-time continuum is real; although nobody has any real idea what it's made of. But 50 years down the road, even that could change.

 

Your ignorance is showing again. Randomness is not the same as non-deterministism. When Einstein referred to 'God not playing dice' he meant that he didn't like the non-determinism of QM. Randomness is something completely different. The digits of pi are random, and yet they are completely deterministic. Also being conflated are statistics and determinism. Remember that correlation is not the same as causation. Einstein certainly knew the difference between randomness and non-determinism. He wrote the physics on brownian motion.

Hmmm, you say that 'nature can display mechanisms using things that are invisible, impossible to detect.' I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just did not think that through or expressed your meaning badly. If you really meant that then ... huh?

I see, so wave functions that are "undetectable" are real, but space-time is not? That is an odd statement. Space-time would seem to be at least as real as wave functions. And your question about what space-time is made of betrays a bias toward reductionism. There are some big problems with physics and reductionism. It really does not seem to be turtles all the way down. Space-time is very physical. You are living in it. Here is a good question, what is energy made of? If you look at the units, it is made of units of space and time. So how can energy be real but space and time unreal. And if space and time are real, then isn't space-time real? I would say that space and time are the basis for reality.

But we all know where you are going with all this. You are just touting your crazy theory of wave function as aether, gravity beams, faster than light travel, hyperspace alien satellites, and travel to other universes with your telepathic space alien friends. No one here is ever going to buy that crap so you should just drop it.

 

Cheezle,
I've got 5 minutes to clear up your confusion.

Answer: quantum entanglement! Jesus! Here is a quote from wiki

WTF is that? Dude! Lay off the drugs. Wave-functions are part of reality (at least they are suspected to be part of reality).

http://www.nature.com/news/quantum-theorem-shakes-foundations-1.9392

I never said that space-time was not real. I was raising the issue for discussion that space-time might be real and made of something we cannot see or detect. That was my whole point, that nature seems to use things that are undetectable, to implement nature's mechanisms. There is precedent for this. This is big news.

Gotta go!

 

I said I didn't know. I said that I should include myself in the category of people who do not know what reality is. But I have studied philosophy at the university level to a small extent and was exposed to some of the different philosophical viewpoints on the subject. Perhaps it is you that should enlighten me. You seem to have something to say here about the subject.

 

Quantum entanglement does not display its mechanism. If it did there would be no mystery about it would there? Entanglement only displays its behavior as a whole, not the inner workings, aka mechanism. I was just questioning your idea that something displayed could at the same time be invisible.

I was referring to, or at least recalling what you had said a few posts up.

You asked about whether the space-time continuum was part of reality, as if that might be still be undetermined. You should be more clear.

 

Consider two electrons whose spins are quantumly entangled. Separate the electrons. The spin(s) are indeterminate until a measurement is. When the spin of one electron is measured, then the spin of the other electron is automatically determined. It's not information traveling at the speed of light. The spin of the second electron is determined instantaneously, as if there was some invisible link between them. I think that the invisible link is the wave-function. I think that the wave-function has an existence unto itself even though it's invisible.

http://science.slashdot.org/story/1...uantum-wavefunction-is-a-real-physical-object

According to wiki, the space-time continuum is any mathematical model that combines space and time into a single continuum. I was asking the question that if the wave-function is a real object (although invisible and mysterious), what about geodesics? What about the space-time continuum?

 

Pretty close. The spin of an electron is a direction in space and the 2 entangled electrons have spins exactly 180 degrees from each other. To detect the spin of one electron, you put it in a machine that will produce a magnetic field in some direction. When the detector is turned on the electron either emits a photon or it doesn't. If the detector is oriented at 90 degrees from the orientation of the electron's spin then it has a 50% chance of emitting an electron. If it is exactly aligned with the spin it has a 0% chance, and anti-aligned it is 100% chance.

So when you detect the first electron, you only know whether the electron gives off a photon or does not. It does tell you the orientation of the spin. The two states are called up and down. This is called the spin quantum number. It is different than the spin vector. Now if you do the same thing to the entangled electron, the result will be the opposite. That is all the info you get out of the experiment. Unless you can get a lot of electrons all prepared with the same spin, and detect them in bulk. In which case you can statistically determine the actually direction of spin with some degree of accuracy.

The mystery is why the two electrons anti-correlate their spin quantum number exactly across great distance. Until the first electron is detected, they are both considered to be in a superposition state. For one entangled electron pair, you can never determine the actual spin.

You can experiment with entangled photons on your kitchen table.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...-quantum-entanglement-experiment-part-1-of-2/

Well, you are probably asking the wrong person. While I have an opinion on the subject, it does not amount to doodley squat.

 

I've heard of this experiment before. Thank you for describing it in such detail. Only I though it either emitted a photon or absorbed a photon. Are you sure it's emit a photon or does nothing?

It sounds like a case of: hide the photon. Where is the photon hiding? In electron A, electron B? Or in the superposition of both spin states? Is the wave function a hiding place for photons?

Really good article.

 

This is a general philosophy thread, so opinions, thoughts and ideas are encouraged.

 

This was how it was explained in the class I watched. I am pretty sure it is correct. I believe this is what is called a qubit. The QM equivalent of a logic state.

No the photon can not be hiding. You can convince yourself of this by rotating the detection device. If you flip the magnetic field 180 degrees then what was a 100% chance of emitting a photon is now 0%. Other detection angles change their chances also. The science says that the two entangled electrons are exactly the same except for the spin until they are detected. And I may have left out a piece of info, when you detect the electron, its spin is changed to the direction of the detector's magnetic field. And the detector can also be used to prepare the electrons in some angle for the experiment. The experiment using entangled photons is similar except I believe the detector and preparer are polarizing filters. Results are similar.

But for me the interesting part is that if you have an electron with unknown spin, when you detect it at some specific angle, the emission or lack of emission of a photon really does not tell you anything. Or almost nothing.

I am a little surprised that you were unaware of the specifics of the experiment. You talk about it all the time as if it was proof of some principle you are pushing. Of course understanding is not the same as being exposed to a subject. Richard Feynman once said, "I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics."

There is a free Coursera.org class, "Exploring Quantum Physics" that starts in about a month.
https://www.coursera.org/course/eqp

Or watch any of a number of really good classes on youtube. Google is your friend (at least that is what they tell me). Just search for "quantum entanglement class".

 

Well, I believe that the inhabitants of General Philosophy are getting tired of all this novice physics in their high brow anthropic discussion. Fraggle Rocker seemed to be a little miffed at me for lowering the IQ in the thread with my presence. LOL. So I guess I will leave the philosophizing to them thar smarty pants guys.

 

Not at all. Now is the time to expand upon your favorite pet theory, like squirting lighter fluid into a camp fire. Philosophy just means: your personal opinion. Go ahead, enrich us with your thoughts.

 

Philosophy is not just personal thoughts. While a person can have a personal viewpoint on the subject at hand, like science the truth it is not up to the opinions of average Joe types. A personal philosophy has to obey logic in order to even be accepted as a possibility. Humans in general are very bad at logic. I am not informed enough to have logical opinions on matters of philosophical importance. I completely accept that my opinions are probably wrong. Just recently I had what I thought was a very profound and earthshaking discovery. With it a week I coincidentally saw an explanation of my idea and why it was not as I thought. A subtle but important fact. While I consider my opinions personally important, I don't consider them generally important. It is all relative.

 

You don't have to worship the gods of logic in a philosophy thread. According to logic, we only live once. Have a little fun. 99% of the fun and pleasurable activities in life are illogical (sex, romantic love, love of God, computer games, being geeky, silliness, believing in stuff that's not true, practicing magic, expressing your opinion, expressing creativity, telling jokes, belief, faith, pursuing wisdom, seeking the meaning of life,etc...). None of these things are illegal, unethical, immoral, hurtful, financially ruinous, fattening, or self destructive.

Logic tells us that we only have one life. Why should we spend it enslaved to the intellectual tyrants on a philosophy thread?

 

Mazulu

There is much that is within the classification "philosophy" that is illogical, but the point is that when you talk about reality there is just no room for illogical things. Much of what science does is reduce the illogical within our views of reality, we do this by constantly testing everything we think we know. And what we have found, over time, is that those things which are illogical cannot be considered real unless and until evidence for their existence(efficacy, validity, etc.)is found. Even logic, alone, is not valid evidence of reality, as many philosophers fail to realize(IE logical "proofs" of god, even if perfectly logical in execution, are not evidence of god's existence, or his "necessity" as they like to call it).

You've mixed some sciency words and concepts into your illogical philosophical argument, those concepts and words don't mean what you think they mean in reality. But when you mention some undefined "spirit" in the same sentence you have stumbled into woo woo land. Believe whatever you like about spirits, but avoid speaking on science in the same context, you don't get to believe what you like in that domain. You have the right to your own opinion, you do not have a right to your own facts.

Grumpy

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!