PARALLEL WORLDS and QUANTUM INTERACTIONS:

[krash661]

And you make the emboldened comment because you cannot speak English correctly. Your career is as an actual scientist? What do 'actual' scientists actually do? Do they just post on forums and offer up head shakes and put downs, or do they impart information to people who aren't actually scientists?


Please show me where and when you have ever had anything useful, let alone actually scientific to say. In post fourteen (reprinted above) you offered some idiotic truisms as definitions, and told us through the clever device of misspelling how to pronounce 'world', and that a domain is a 'domain' (domain does not mean 'sphere') plus three other pointless and entirely useless definitions of words that were never part of this discussion. I won't say that you're lying about being an actual scientist, but I will say you are certainly a very sorry and low-grade one, who is very full of himself and has an unwarranted and insupportable view of his own brilliance.

However, you do make one excellent point. it is best that I just ignore you.

Because you ain't amusing at all.

I find the OP topic fascinating. I apologize for getting off topic, but I really think we needed to get rid of the troll before continuing. Sorry, Paddoboy. I'll sit quietly and follow the discussion, if you-know-who hasn't wrecked it entirely with his stupid and arrogant remarks.

the problem is your lack of comprehension skills[among the lack of any science knowledge and/or understanding you attempt to spew].
quite amusing
also, i'm not being amusing at all, i'm just pointing out the pathetic nonsense of the pathetic individuals.
it's that simple.
if you want to be a " want to be scientist", at least learn and understand some science.
both you and stranger in a strange land are massively obvious.
none of you have a clue about anything that comes out of your mouths.
then you turn around and say such things as this below,
" full of himself and has an unwarranted and insupportable view of his own brilliance. ",
what do you think your attempts are ?
again,
some of us are actual scientist.
this is my career. can you say the same ?
you made this comment only because you fall in the category of,
" nor any knowledge, understanding, or experience ",
and you know it.

" but I will say you are certainly a very sorry and low-grade one, "
except i work on tier one.
which i'm sure you have no clue what that even means.

" However, you do make one excellent point. it is best that I just ignore you. "
and yet here you are with a second response ranting and raving in jealousy.

 

[krash661]

You are not a scientist & you are not fooling anyone except yourself. It's best to just let your mommie wash your mouth out.

quite amusing
another example of continuous typical ignoramus nonsense.

 

[krash661]

IMO, it's individuals like both of you that make this place a cesspool.
all in all, there is no learning here at this site.
just a bunch of want to be intellects/physicist[without proper education(which is massively obvious)] spewing incorrect or inaccurate nonsense,
a handful of argumentative individuals, and then some of us that are sick and tiered of it.

edit-
i think i'm going back to PF.
they maybe strict to the fullest, but there is no pathetic nonsense there.
scivillage.com also seems to be ok at this moment in time.

 

[tashja]

Did anybody read the rest of the article?

The beauty of our approach is that if there is just one world our theory reduces to Newtonian mechanics, while if there is a gigantic number of worlds it reproduces quantum mechanics," he says.

In between it predicts something new that is neither Newton's theory nor quantum theory.

I did lol. And that phrase (in bold) really caught my attention, so I asked Prof. Hall if he could explain what he meant by ''something new that is neither Newton's nor quantum theory.'' Here's his reply:

Prof. Hall:

Hi Tashja,

Nice to know there is some discussion of our recent paper - and thanks for your question! I'll try and unpack what the phrase is about, and why I find this an exciting aspect of our approach.

First, recall that in our "many interacting worlds" (MIW) approach, all quantum-like effects are created purely by a force that acts between worlds. So, if there was only one world, there would be no quantum effects at all: everything in that world would behave according to classical dynamics - which is not good, since atomic matter would not be stable (in a classical world, a charged electron in orbit around an atom would emit radiation and spiral into the nucleus - no more atom!). So, in the MIW approach, we really need those other worlds for us to even exist!

We propose there is a very large but finite number of worlds. However, this means that the MIW approach actually gives slightly different predictions to those of standard quantum mechanics. As the number of worlds becomes sufficiently huge, the predictions become closer and closer to the quantum predictions, and become exactly the same as quantum mechanics in the limit of an infinite number of worlds. But in general, we have something slightly different from quantum mechanics.

This gives us an infinite number of stepping stones, leading from standard classical physics to standard quantum physics as the number of worlds is increased.

This is interesting for several reasons:

1. We may perhaps be able to predict evidence for a finite number of interacting worlds, since predictions can be different. However, it may be that the differences are too small (if the number of worlds is large enough).

2. It is actually very hard to "tweak" quantum mechanics, without breaking it - usually something goes wrong, such as explicit instantaneous communication being made possible. But people are interested in finding physically consistent "tweaks", since it may help solve problems such integrating quantum phenomena with general relativity.

3. Whether or not our approach is "really" the case, it appears that our approach gives a natural means of approximating quantum mechanics (using a limited number of worlds) that may allow faster numerical calculations in quantum chemistry than are currently possible.

Hope the above helps,

Michael Hall.

 

[paddoboy]

Another relevant article.........

String field theory could be the foundation of quantum mechanics
31 minutes ago by Robert Perkins


Two USC researchers have proposed a link between string field theory and quantum mechanics that could open the door to using string field theory—or a broader version of it, called M-theory—as the basis of all physics.

"This could solve the mystery of where quantum mechanics comes from," said Itzhak Bars, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences professor and lead author of the paper.

Bars collaborated with Dmitry Rychkov, his Ph.D. student at USC. The paper was published online on Oct. 27 by the journal Physics Letters.

Rather than use quantum mechanics to validate string field theory, the researchers worked backwards and used string field theory to try to validate quantum mechanics.



Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2014-11-field-theory-foundation-quantum-mechanics.html#jCp

 

[paddoboy]

I did lol. And that phrase (in bold) really caught my attention, so I asked Prof. Hall if he could explain what he meant by ''something new that is neither Newton's nor quantum theory.'' Here's his reply:

Thanks again tashja.......
Quite Interesting.

 

[krash661]

Krash, I have asked you -politely I think- twice now in the parallel worlds thread and in the time travel thread last week to explain your views on these topics because yo never have. Your only response has been that I and others are just too ignorant to understand what you are saying, but that is not so. Other than your comment that a clock merely measures time rather than creating it you have been completely non-forthcoming. It will not do to offer insult rather than explanation. You are condescending but never the least bit helpful. So, no. Given your poor English fluency and your defensive attitude I do not believe you are an actual tier one scientist for a moment. At best you are a pharmacist's assistant somewhere n Germany and have gleaned your purported knowledge of science as you sweep the floors.

I write to you here so as not to interfere with the topic at hand. Moreover, I must tell you I am reporting your last posts to the moderators for abusive language and hostility. I really can't understand why you 'contribute' to these forums at all. You do nothing but turn up your nose and go on about how educated you are and how ignorant everyone else is while you never offer anything informative. I think it is because you don't know.

Regards,
LR

do not message me about your whiny nonsense.

 

[Bells]

Mod Note

some of us are actual scientist.
this is my career. can you say the same ?
you made this comment only because you fall in the category of,
" nor any knowledge, understanding, or experience ",
and you know it.
it's best to just ignore me than to show your jealousy.

It might be best that as the scientist you claim to be, that you stop insulting and abusing people and try to educate them. Instead of showing your supposed expertise in this field, you have spent more time humiliating others while telling them how great you are.

In other words, if you disagree with what they are posting or believe it to be incorrect, a true scientist would provide them with the necessary answers and tools to allow them to correct their mistakes. Instead, you have just been abusive and insulting. Please stop.

 

[James R]

This thread has had a number of reported posts.

The initial issue which seemed to spark off the personal bullshit was Strangerinastrangela's claim that a parallel "world" is not the same as a parallel "universe". In the context of the OP they are the same thing, and krash661 pointed that it correctly.

The rest of the thread then consists of personal sniping and qualification wars ("My qualifications are bigger that yours, so nyah!"). That is seldom very helpful on a discussion forum where none of us are in a position to verify claimed qualifications (in the absence of real names).

All the reports here amount to a drain on moderator time and energy for no particularly useful purpose. Personal snipes have been going both ways. I suggest you all grow up and try to conduct your disputes civilly. If you cannot, we may have to start closing threads and/or banning you.

One other thing: if you're going to complain about somebody insulting you, please make sure you haven't insulted them as well, unless you want us to moderate both of you. Think carefully before you hit that "report" button.

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

I did lol. And that phrase (in bold) really caught my attention, so I asked Prof. Hall if he could explain what he meant by ''something new that is neither Newton's nor quantum theory.'' Here's his reply:

Thanks, Tashja.

When speaking of the atom, he seems to assume the proposition is correct but maybe there is some detail missing. I wouldn't expect a 12 page response. It was good of him to give what he did.
IF parallel universes do exist, hopefully it can be proven. IF they don't, we will probably never know. IF we prove they exist, we will never know whether there is a finite number of them.

 

[paddoboy]

IF parallel universes do exist, hopefully it can be proven. IF they don't, we will probably never know. IF we prove they exist, we will never know whether there is a finite number of them.

Wouldn't they necessarily be causally disconnected from us, and so be forever non contactable and "unprovable" one way or the other?

 

[Landau Roof]

Wouldn't they necessarily be causally disconnected from us, and so be forever non contactable and "unprovable" one way or the other?

Perhaps they would be/are causally unconnected. However in your own OP quote it says:

The team proposes that parallel universes really exist, and that they interact. That is, rather than evolving independently, nearby worlds influence one another by a subtle force of repulsion. They show that such an interaction could explain everything that is bizarre about quantum mechanics.

So you seem to be in disagreement with your own original post. Please explain.

 

[StrangerInAStrangeLand]

Wouldn't they necessarily be causally disconnected from us, and so be forever non contactable and "unprovable" one way or the other?

Their proposal which you quote says they interact & affect each other. If you're asking what I think regardless of that : I see no reason to think they are necessarily completely disconnected & no reason to think they are necessarily connected. My best guess is they would affect each other but that is a guess & I do not know.
IF we do find they exist & affect each other in some ways, we will have a very long way to go figuring all the ways they do & do not affect each other.

 

[paddoboy]

So you seem to be in disagreement with your own original post. Please explain.

Ummm, If you take the time to read the OP properly, you will obviously see that my original OP, was an article that I duly referenced, from "Physorg"
I found the article Interesting. I humbly hope that satisfies whatever misgivings you were thinking.

Their proposal which you quote says they interact & affect each other. If you're asking what I think regardless of that : I see no reason to think they are necessarily completely disconnected & no reason to think they are necessarily connected. My best guess is they would affect each other but that is a guess & I do not know.
IF we do find they exist & affect each other in some ways, we will have a very long way to go figuring all the ways they do & do not affect each other.

Logically speaking, I would presume that parallel Universes would normally be "causally disconnected" from our own Universe or world. This would normally apply to any multi Universe speculative scenario, either parallel or bubble Universes that arose from the same quantum foam that our own Universe is speculated to have arose from.
Also the same way that whatever form spacetime existed in before the BB, is disconnected from us, or whatever lies at the Singularity regions of BH's is causally disconnected from us.
In fact any BH is probably "causally disconnected" from anything in the outside Universe.
Nothing inside the BH will effect anything outside...no transfer of information or heading outwards.
And remembering also that the article I posted out of Interest, specifically relies on quantum effects which as we know have not yet been shown to prove anything.
This was the same argument raised in the provocatively inspired "QM+GR= BH's do not exist" rubbish.


So yes, certainly, I would expect under classical physics and Relativity, there are certain scenarios like parallel Universes that would be causally disconnected from us..

Under normal conditions, even our own Universe, beyond the observable horizon is sometimes referred to as "causally disconnected" from us.