Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
That is the ultimate reason, suggest the duo - Danish string theory pioneer Holger Bech Nielsen
I love Holger. He's hilarious to listen to, a real circus. A perfect example of the crazy genius and a great spokesman for science.
I remember studying at the Niels Bohr Institute in 2001 when he turned 60 and he was having a surprise party in the cafeteria. Never saw it directly, just heard his high, enthusiastic voice.
(I've nothing of value to contribute to this thread, sorry)
Considereing quantum probabilities, I won't hazard a guess on what is likely.
This is why I made the point about quantum wavefunctions having a finite spatial reach - yes, quantum uncertainty means we can't pin down its exact location without things going screwy. That doesn't mean we can just arbitrarily give it the power of omnipotence to appear wherever we want it to - wavefunctions are probability distributions, they have to normalise, which usually means that their spatial probabilities tail off over long distances. I suspect the same thing would have to happen if you tried to do an energy/time characterisation instead of a position/momentum distribution. You can't just say "ooh but this particle can time travel therefore IT MUST HAVE".
Not that you would disagree that time travel is widely acknowledged to be involved.
Widely acknowledged to be involved in what? The LHC misfiring, or quantum wavefunctions? I agree that particles are said to time travel - I'm not agreeing to any particular instances where they may have done so or not.
Right.
"There is no more mystery about the quantum mysteries at all -- provided you can live with waves that go backwards in time."
Same link
I have to say, while this isn't my area, I'm usually suspicious of claims that something is actually travelling back in time. Maybe it's just a mathematically simpler way of describing a complex situation. E.g. one can describe an oscillation in terms of a rotation in the complex plane, i.e.
exp(ix) = cos x + i sin x (where i=sqrt[-1] )
Now, i isn't a real number, the imaginary part of that mathematical description isn't a real quantity. However it greatly simplifies the mathematics involved by rewriting it in exponentials rather than oodles of trig terms. Does it actually mean that half of your description is imaginary? No. Same in quantum field theory, some equations make use of i times a time constant, dubbed "imaginary time." Does this mean time is imaginary in this setup? Surely it is just a useful coordinate transform more than anything else?
I see you are addressing the issue of the LHC again. But it seems that some feel that it isn't all that far removed from the particles and photons of this world.
Well....it makes use of photons and particles quite a lot, but that doesn't mean one can then automatically claim a time travelling Higgs destroyed the LHC.
"It is a fundamental feature of quantum mechanics that entities described by the quantum equations are not simply particles or waves, but exhibit a mixture of wave and particle properties. Light, for example, will behave as a wave in interference experiments, with two sets of waves interacting with one another to form a new pattern, just as ripples on a pond (or in your bath) interact with one another. On the other hand, in other experiments light will behave as a stream of tiny particles, called photons. "
same link
In this article it mentions that quantum effects were clocked 10,000 times faster than light.
" The photons were indeed entangled, the group reports in Nature. But in reality, no experiment is perfect, so what they end up with is a lower limit on how fast the entanglement could be traveling: 10,000 times the speed of light.
To appreciate the weirdness of entanglement, consider that the outcome of a single quantum measurement is random. By all tests, a photon *has* no definite polarization until it hits a detector capable of measuring it. So it's like the entangled particles share one big quantum state."
If the past and future states are different that is no surprise, if time travel is involved. After all, light got here from far stars at speeds nowhere near present light..!
I hate to break it to you, but entanglement travelling faster than light does not mean that light travels faster than light. The correlation is what is moving at high speed, not the correlated objects.
__________________ ____________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The way nature handles time is very different to what we experience.
Fast moving particles like photons travel at an 'observed' speed, but if you could sit on one, you would travel instantaneously from one side of the universe to the other.
Time-travel is impossible, primarily because there is no absolute time dimension to travel in. We all experience time slightly differently, because of varying speed and gravitation, etc.
And unlike space, time seems to be bound up with entropy - the one-way path to absolute zero throughout the universe, at which point 'time' would stop, because nothing can change.
The universe would have zero energy, either potential or kinetic. So, according to the formula E=MC[^2^], there would be zero mass also.
So the universe returns from where it came, ie nothing - lol.
I love Holger. He's hilarious to listen to, a real circus. A perfect example of the crazy genius and a great spokesman for science.
I remember studying at the Niels Bohr Institute in 2001 when he turned 60 and he was having a surprise party in the cafeteria. Never saw it directly, just heard his high, enthusiastic voice.
(I've nothing of value to contribute to this thread, sorry)
Peter
It goes to establishing that the guy is not a complete quack, and that time travel is a mainstream concept, for things quantum. Laconic...take notes..
__________________ Pr 21:30 -There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.
This is why I made the point about quantum wavefunctions having a finite spatial reach - yes, quantum uncertainty means we can't pin down its exact location without things going screwy. That doesn't mean we can just arbitrarily give it the power of omnipotence to appear wherever we want it to - wavefunctions are probability distributions, they have to normalise, which usually means that their spatial probabilities tail off over long distances. I suspect the same thing would have to happen if you tried to do an energy/time characterisation instead of a position/momentum distribution. You can't just say "ooh but this particle can time travel therefore IT MUST HAVE".
If you think about it, you aren't saying much. 'we can't give it the power of..' well, unless you know what it is you can't do anything but see a bit how it works here in this state universe no less.
Widely acknowledged to be involved in what? The LHC misfiring, or quantum wavefunctions? I agree that particles are said to time travel - I'm not agreeing to any particular instances where they may have done so or not.
Thank you, that's all I meant. If the LHC is having problems getting it up, to find the god particle, maybe it is God that is playing with em..
I have to say, while this isn't my area, I'm usually suspicious of claims that something is actually travelling back in time. Maybe it's just a mathematically simpler way of describing a complex situation. E.g. one can describe an oscillation in terms of a rotation in the complex plane, i.e.
exp(ix) = cos x + i sin x (where i=sqrt[-1] )
Now, i isn't a real number, the imaginary part of that mathematical description isn't a real quantity. However it greatly simplifies the mathematics involved by rewriting it in exponentials rather than oodles of trig terms. Does it actually mean that half of your description is imaginary? No. Same in quantum field theory, some equations make use of i times a time constant, dubbed "imaginary time." Does this mean time is imaginary in this setup? Surely it is just a useful coordinate transform more than anything else?
Well, you already agreed that time travel is involved. That is pretty useful a coordinate, I would think! What a present state observer thinks is imaginary, apparently just refers to things out of this state, that all they can do is try to slap a number on!! The end result is not imaginary, such as in entagled particles, from what I can gather, but quite real.
Well....it makes use of photons and particles quite a lot, but that doesn't mean one can then automatically claim a time travelling Higgs destroyed the LHC.
No, I agree. I think that they were grasping, with that interpretation. But remember God made time, and is a time traveler. His wheel flying vehicle that hovered over Ezekiel was a time machine among other things. The spirit of God hovered over the earth, or sea at creation, so if He was in His flying wheels at the time, that means the ship is older than anything in this universe.
I hate to break it to you, but entanglement travelling faster than light does not mean that light travels faster than light. The correlation is what is moving at high speed, not the correlated objects.
Well, maybe explain that a bit more simply for those in the audience that may be somewhat unfamiliar with the concepts..? If it was clocked at 10,000 times the speed of light, something moved a lot faster than light! I would NOT expect present light to be able to move faster than present light. But I would expect light in the future or former universe to move a lot faster than present light. So, whe quantum effects we see are barely at pace with the other time of universe. Let me know if I need to slow this down a bit for ya..
__________________ Pr 21:30 -There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.
I never said it wasn't. I noted that your article wasn't peer-reviewed. Before you claim that something is a "mainstream concept", you might try checking to see if it has research backing it up..... Because otherwise, you know, no one is going to take your suggestions seriously.
I never said it wasn't. I noted that your article wasn't peer-reviewed. Before you claim that something is a "mainstream concept", you might try checking to see if it has research backing it up..... Because otherwise, you know, no one is going to take your suggestions seriously.
If time travel in the quantum field is accepted, why would anyone want to do the peer review thingie? Maybe if this was 1939 we may need to go there. All we need to do now is deal with it.
Besides I have more than one article. Maybe you would do well to focus on a point, do you have one? You have heard of the word quantum before have you??
__________________ Pr 21:30 -There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.
So is everything to do with the weirdness of the quantum world.
Time is relative to the speed of light. If light moved slower, time would pass more slowly with it.
No, it is not! Not true time, only temporal state time, interwoven in the fabric of this temporal state universe.
Speed and mass shape time and space.
No! Only space and time in the fabric of the temporary universe. Any time travel in the quantum field beyond that temporal state would involve the eternal state! That is the amazing thing.
__________________ Pr 21:30 -There is no wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the LORD.
Linear Mode
