Graviphoton

Well, Tegmark is a pioneer. He introduced the Existential Interpretation of Quantum mechanics. But he is quite loose. His interpretation has never really caught on, unlike the other interpretations. And, if this is what he claims, then consider this proposal i make, off the top of me head. The human brain is the most complicated computer in the world. It can devise answers that no Boolean automaton can ever hope to comprise. The human mind, capable of answering fast numerical calculations, can also comprehend the world of morality and emotions; factors which a normal computer cannot evaluate, including intelligent thought. This intelligent thought builds up the outside world, where a human can just mention a name and make something real! Yes... just by naming a thing (or mindless ponderings), that thing becomes real, with shape and defined description. The brain itself is made mostly of water, and this natural computer is just three pounds of gray and white matter, (gray matter is the most dominant). The human brain has thousands of millions of working components, and these little workers operate the entire body. In just one split second, the brain excites thousands of inter-connections, working our five senses of touch, smell, sight, taste and sound. Our brains are made up of many components; one of which we have all heard of is the nerve cell called the neuron. They are so comparatively small; you could fit over 200 hundred of these tiny neurons in the head of a pin. The job of the neuron is to send and receive electrical signals which rush around our head. In short, these electrical signals are very important signals, and these signals make up reality. For this reason, perception creates reality as we know it; thus reality is built up on nothing but conscious experience! The brain is therefore, the control system of the brain. It, without our conscious influences, keeps our pulse ticking and our heart pumping. The spinal cord itself is directly linked to our brains, and it is through our boney spine it is able to send a signal to the foot well under a second. Functions such as movement and sensations are determined by a soft dual part of the brain called the cerebrum. These two soft hemispheres are like mirror images of each other. The right hemisphere controls movement, and the left controls sensations. White matter covers under the cortex, and its primary job is to carry nerve impulses throughout the body. Gray matter covers the brain, bridging the hemispheres by a tissue called the corpus callosum. It turns out, after extensive neurophysiological studies, that the left hemisphere is most dominant, causing the usual production of right-handed individuals. Naturally, for those select few who are left-handed, the right hemisphere is most dominant, and for those who are ambidextrous, has certain equilibrium between both the right and left hemispheres, but usually even in ambidextrous individuals, the right side of the hemisphere is most dominant. The right and left hemispheres have been mapped out with their own particular functions. For instance, the left is associated with speech, reading, writing and calculations. The right operates visual perceptions, arts and abstract thought. It is thus a creative side. The really amazing thing is that when one side is in use, the other switches off. This on-off function must operate in this manor, for anything to process correctly. If the two sides did not fluctuate like this, it would be impossible for us to think of two things at once. Beneath the cerebral hemisphere, is the cerebellum. It is linked directly to the spinal cord. The cerebellum also has two hemispheres. It is associated with balance and muscular co-ordination. And going further beneath the brain, is the brain stem, which operates the heart, the lungs and the digestive system. We are aware of only so much. The brain operates mostly unconsciously, surprisingly enough. Of what we can subjectively control is only the edge of the blade. The brain controls so much without the force of consciousness. This subliminal operation might have profound influences in the world, and we are now going to have a look at a few them. If material, or corporeal damage is made to any of the Brains structure, such as the Pineal Gland, the Pre-frontal vortex ect ect, will cause a fluctuation in how the conscious operates, if it isn't made obsolete altogether. This is what the conversation is premised on.

and even chaos It is within my speculations, that the nature of the universe can never be known, due to the uncertainty principle exciting possibilities of sqrt-1, and even chaos theory... The theory which states that any quantum system cn undergo a drastic change at any time.

Not at all. Quite the opposite. Instead, it can mean that mind need to incorporate, or surround matter capable of sustaining it. In this case, a humans brain is made up of 10^27 particles, and they build up the statistical network of the mind. We know the particles are equal to the psyche, simply because if you damage the brains configuration, you will flaw the psyche, and its abillity to function. If particles do determine the quality of consciousness, then consciousness is bound by quantum rules, based upon the premise that particles have to follow quantum rules.

Ok I will 1) On the fundamental level, quantum systems do not act according to cause and effect. This rule essentially breaks down. This means there is no directionality to their flow of existence. 2) Quantum mechanics is incomplete, and the laws being incomplete, cannot for one moment expect to explain all aspects of existence, including consciousness, which is certainly a quantum subject, dispite of any disagreement. 3) That consciousness is bound by quantum rules. ........... 1)The first is simple quantum physics. It is known that the uncertainty principle limits a particle. Hawking can mathematically calculaye a photons path through space and time, moving at superluminal speeds, by manipulating the UP. Apart from that, particles have no specific arrow of time, meaning that going backward in time, and then going forwards, is in fact an inherent aspect of the matter. For reference * Fred Alan Wolf ''Parallel Universe: 1985'' * Wheeler Delayed Choice Experiment ''1984 and 2001 in the ''Eraser Experiment'' 2) Quantum Mechaincs is certainly incomplete. We still don't know how to answer for the mind, gravity, or even the simple age of the universe. We base current age results on Hubble knowledge, but we also know that this age depends on how the universe began, and because we don't know this, we can only keep to the original equations. 3) In relativity, we learn that anything to us that ever exists, is contained within our spacetime. That means that the universe is ''self-contained''. Anything that matters to spacetime is contained witin spacetime, so there is always some kind of interaction. Consciousness certainly exists within reference to spacetime, so therefore, it is subject to the same laws. Simple deduction.

Time is so ethereal, and incorporeal, the only designs of time lie in the foundation of what we already know. Any extention (which doesn't involve the facts i have shown), cannot work without some extra kind of proof. The fact we have three spatial dimensions, and one time, we know the mathematical proof from Minkowski Spacetime. This alone is proof of what is being said If you are referring to the degrees of freedom, associated with consciousness, then you should view my thread concerning this in psuedoscience. Make it known though, i recently found that wiki states that spacetime theories with the mind are not psuedoscience, because they make testable predictions.

Well, i don't know what you guys are talking about, cuz i haven't read the thread , but i will answer the OP as i normally would Dark matter, has the same gravitational attributes as it would with different and variating magnitudes of gravitational mass, making them fluctuations. Only thing is though, some of these wil have a negative mass. But lets leave that for there. Depending upon the systems density and also based upon its environment, you will find environments that will suit gravitational collapse, and others that don't. This means that any outcome needs to be dual invariant. Therefore, there is a local density and non-local density determining its local state. Therego, there will be some superdense clouds of dark matter that won't collapse due to a certain value of gravity, whilst others do. These are natures of the universe.

Ok... thank you...

You know, people who try to use science against any godlike, incorporeal, impervious being, fitting any attribute like that of, any religious type, is in fact a flawful move. Any quantum statician, or any general physicist will tell you that at the very beginning of time, there was quantum rules. If this istrue, it means something rather extraordinary. This means, the the universe, dispite the fact the universe began at the size of a proton *, it began in a unique state, even though it had no unique radius, or energy. It had to choose from an infinite amount of possible states. * This is simply to keep distance from the Anthropic Principle, and using hard quantum facts This means, even the most improbable case of anything, can and quite possibly collapse into existence, due to the infinite distribution of all possible cases of existence, popped by the wave function. This means that something as unique as a cosmological superintelligence to exist. Alone, we can now speculate the things i tried to ignore. The Anthropic Principle. Something which i have personally ignored for many years, until the turn of the most recent. It turns out for me, that reality can be based upon a gravitational equation, as stated by the Einstinean Unified Theory of Everythings' conclusions, but instead, there is something unique about the observer. I cannot stress enough how many scientists know this fact, but it harder for the public to recognize these facts, with so little publishing these facts, and also due to the very little devoted attention by physicists. * This is simply to keep distance from the Anthropic Principle, and using hard quantum facts

No, no... i wanted to keep it more simple than that for the reader Maybe as an extension, perhaps. Things instead like, Exponential Rules, the Quadratic Formula and plugging it into used variables, Distribution Rules, Polynomials, ect ect. Would that be allowed friend? Just a basic guide for those who wantb to learn.

There is an infinite avatar of predictions of the psyche, and there is no renormalization process... so there is mutually an infinite amount of outcomes to a model of the brain, as there is predictions. But because we don't know yet many of them, we resolve this by speculation from a quantum physical viewpoint. This is the way anything starts out. So much for the notion of psuedoscience. No one can debunk my claims other than ''show proof its true.''' And even at that, i kinda have by saying... ''We observe everyday our own vectors that cannot be external in any sense according to science.... so we do experience our own unique vectors.'' ... I rest my case. mmmm... It seems that, from a web pages titled ''Consciousness and the new physics,'' the notion of consciousness tied to spacetime in a mathematical sense, has already been lightly touched on with the added notion of dimensions... ''Sirag's model of consciousness, as presented in the Appendix, could be called a Pythagorean approach to consciousness, since Sirag's strategy is to look to mathematics for an appropriate structure to describe the relationship between consciousness and the physical world. He finds that unified field theories of the physical forces depend fundamentally on mathematical structures called reflection spaces, which are heierarchically organized in such a way that an infinite spectrum of realities is naturally suggested. This situation is natural because mathematicians have discovered that the hierarchical organization of reflection spaces also corresponds to the organization of many other mathematical objects -- e.g. catastrophies, singularities, wave fronts, and contact structures, error correcting codes, sphere packing lattices, and, perhaps most surprisingly, certain regular geometric figures including the Platonic solids. It is generally believed by physicists working on unified field theory that space-time is hyperdimensional, with all but four of the dimensions being invisible. The reason for this invisibility is a major subject of reseach. Beside space-time dimensions, there are also other internal (or invisible) dimensions called gauge dimensions. The reality of these gauge dimensions is also a topic of controversy and research. In Sirag's view both the extra space-time dimensions and the gauge dimensions are real. This provides scope for considering ordinary reality a substructure within a hyperdimensional reality. This idea has, of course, been suggested before -- e.g. it is implicit in the Cave Parable of Plato. The difference in Sirag's approach is that the structure of the hyperspace is defined directly by the properties of physical forces. A further innovation in Sirag's approach is that his version of unified field theory embeds both spacetime and guage space in an algebra whose basis is a finite group. This group, which directly models certain symmetries of particle physics, is a symmetry group of one of the Platonic solids -- the octehedron. Thus it is a mathematical entity contained in the reflection space hierarchy. In fact the reflection space corresponding to the octehedron is seven-dimensional and is also a superstring-type reflection space, so that a link with the most popular version of unified field theory is provided. The central postulate of Sirag's paper is that this seven-dimensional reflection space is a universal consciousness, and that invidivual consciousnesses tap into this universal consciousness. This implies that the high level of consciousness enjoyed by humans is due to the complex network of connections to the underlying reflection space afforded by a highly evolved brain. Moreover, the hierarchy of reflection spaces suggests a hierarchy of realms (or states) of consciousness. Each realm would correspond to a different unified field theory with different sets of forces. In fact, the seven-dimensional reflection space is contained in an eight-dimensional reflection space, and contains a six-dimensional reflection space, so that there would be a realm of consciousness directly "above" ordinary reality, and a realm of consciousness directly "below" ordinary reality. In principle the relationship between the different forces in these different realms could be worked out in detail, so that precise predictions could be made. Sirag believes that this hierarchy of realms of consciousness is analagous to the spectrum of light discovered in 1864 by James Clerk Maxwell in his electromagnetic theory of light, which unified the forces of electricity and magnetism. Maxwell had no way of directly testing his theory, which proposed the reality of frequencies of light both higher and lower than that of ordinary light. He boldly proposed the existence of invisible light, simply because his equations contained the higher and lower frequencies. Similarly, in the unification of all the forces, we can expect something new to be described, which could be the analog of light. Sirag proposes that this new thing be consciousness, and that since the mathematics of the unification gives reflection space a central role, the hierarchy of reflection spaces suggests a hierarchy of realms of consciousness.'' And there was this i found from wiki ''Space-time theories of consciousness have been advanced by Arthur Eddington, John Smythies among others. The concept was also mentioned by Hermann Weyl who wrote that reality is a "...four-dimensional continuum which is neither 'time' nor 'space'. Only the consciousness that passes on in one portion of this world experiences the detached piece which comes to meet it and passes behind it, as history, that is, as a process that is going forward in time and takes place in space". In 1953, C. D. Broad, in common with most authors in this field, proposed that there are two types of time, imaginary time measured in imaginary units (i) and real time measured on the real plane. Different types of time are introduced in these hypotheses because they can interact mathematically in the equation of spacetime to produce no separation between two points. The equation of spacetime gives the spacetime separation (Δs) between two points as: Δs2 = Δx2 + Δy2 + Δz2 − c2Δt2 In recent years this has been interpreted as a dynamical equation but when it was first formulated it was interpreted as a geometrical equation, specifying actual separations. The geometrical interpretation arose because it was proposed that the minus sign was the result of multiplying ciΔt by ciΔt where i is the square root of minus one (See Einstein (1920)). It can be seen that for any separation in 3D space there is a time at which the separation in 4D spacetime is zero. Similarly, if another coordinate axis is introduced called 'real time' that changes with imaginary time then historical events can also be no distance from a point. The combination of these result in the possibility of brain activity being at a point as well as being distributed in 3D space and time. This might allow the conscious individual to observe things, including whole movements, as if viewing them from a point. It should be stressed that, although not impossible, the simple geometrical interpretation of spacetime using imaginary numbers is no longer widely accepted in physics. It is however often used to simplify calculations and is implicit in the Wick rotation. John Smythies proposes that there are extra dimensions for arranging things that form a separate "phenomenal space of consciousness". The phenomenal space would be a physical instantiation of Descartes' Res Cogitans, the point from which he proposed things in the brain were seen.'' I find it encouraging now to continue mathematical work the way i have. It seems i might have been on the right track afterall. And maybe the mod who sent my work here, will consider the following by wiki ''Proponents of the "Space-time theories of consciousness" assert that they make predictions, and are thus to be distinguished from pseudoscience. These predictions are not known to have been tested specifically.'' EXTENDED MATHEMATICAL RESEARCH "If consciousness is in fact defined (and different) at every moment of time, it should also be related to points in space: the truly subjective observer system should be related to space-time points." from "Quantum Theory and Time Asymmetry", Zeh (1979). An Attempt to Prove the Model I now speculate on the math that links the vectors of spacetime (0,0,0,1) with the vectors we know about through the psyche which I have shown can be described as having its own row vector of (0,0,0,1) or by linking the one time dimension as somehow the same thing… So, we can relate the function of both vector rows into some mathematical notation now, linking the two together. This can be done a number of ways… I would presume. A) a^2= i^2=(√(a_1^2+a_2^2 + a_3^2 ))^2= √-a_1^2+ -a_2^2 + -a_3^2 Where the right hand side refers to an equality with the left, and the negative signs resemble which vector we are talking about. In this case, the negative signs resemble the vectors of the mind. Which can be reduced to: a=|a|= √i – a The mind is a subreality, a subdimension that in this interpretation is inextricably linked to space and time. It really is the extra dimension string theorists missed out. Now even though equation A) explains that the vectors of one side are equal to the other, how are they connected? First we establish that the time dimension internal and external are in fact one thing only: As explained as a possible model before. So we first say that: tdi^2=Tdi^2 Then we can unite the fabric of spacetime with consciousness through the expression: a^2 + b^2 + c^2 + (tdi^2- Tdi^2) *where (tdi^2- Tdi^2) just means proportional to… But space and time on the relativistic map, is invariant, so that they play the same roles. For instance, a change in time Δt must also indicate a change in space. If time is a human aspect, and there is a change in our vector, then this would instantly determine a change in all the other variables: Δa^2 + Δb^2 + Δc^2 + (Δtdi^2- ΔTdi^2) So instantly can we assume that this model is flawed, because in no way have we ever had any experience that a change in how we perceive time, alters the external world of clocks. This immediately renders the equation tdi^2=Tdi^2 flawed one might think. But, with some careful thought and deduction, relativity does say that a conscious observer will experience time change in for instance, time dilation. This experience alone can excite tdi^2=Tdi^2, and allow it to work. So simply put into math, Δa^2 + Δb^2 + Δc^2 + (Δtdi^2- ΔTdi^2) The change in ΔTdi^2, is the experienced change in time dilation. We have now linked the two together, with logic and math, and a little understanding from relativity. If there is any change in the external time dimension Δtdi^2 then there is a change in the internal dimension ΔTdi^2 since we can experience the change itself. Whether this makes our time dimension the same as the external time dimension, is up for debate. The great thing about all this, is that relativity, most importantly special relativity is observer-dependant. Physicists have known this for a while. The equations that describe SR require the presence of an observer, and thus make’s distance also observer-dependant from a relative view. So… can we use relativity to integrate a mathematical model of consciousness? I think we can. ‘’ The general theory of relativity brought with it a decisive change in this point of view [the 3D world]. Space-time and matter were found to be interdependent, and there was no longer any question which one of the two is more fundamental. Space-time was also found to have its own inherent degrees of freedom, associated with perturbations of the metric-gravitational waves. …Is it possible that consciousness, like space-time, has its own intrinsic degrees of freedom, and that neglecting these will lead to a description of the universe that is fundamentally incomplete?’’ The Square Root Integrates a Relationship A part of me wants to investigate a relationship using √-1, but we already use that kind of math describing imaginary time which is real space. Perhaps though, we can switch the coordinates around from complex to ordinary, depending on the systems environment? We already do something similar for particles. We can create a path for a photon that moves through real time or imaginary space, then make it move through real space or imaginary time, depending on the conditions. Perhaps we can create a model to link the vectors using √-1, and then, when imaginary time is being used in the equations, take away the complex nature to make √1. Weird? Perhaps. Perhaps also totally un-needed. Perhaps too weird for now. For the moment, let’s just keep on track by saying the square root of minus one can integrate some kind of mathematical design that can explain consciousness. It turns out that the idea has been given some special thought already by Zhenming Zhia, who writes under ‘Square Root of √-1 as a Consciousness factor’, July14 1996, that “In Einstein's special theory of relativity there is a Lorentz transformation that leads to Minkowski's four-dimensional space. But the fourth dimension is obtained by replacing time, t, with the imaginary [square root of √-1 multiplied by the speed of light, c, and by t itself]. After this, the temporal dimension becomes totally symmetrical with all other three dimensions of space…” Zhia continues: “That means that time is itself one more dimension of space but is perceived by our consciousness as different and uniquely temporal. The modification with the imaginary square root of √-1 therefore corresponds to the unique involvement of consciousness in the process.” He adds that, “Surprisingly, in Quantum Mechanics, the Schrodinger's wave function also involves the same square root of 1 when the spatial locality breaks down and a conscious observer gets involved in the process of measurement.” He goes on to speculate that consciousness be some kind of sub-dimension – the same argument I have made for years. I must admit myself a bit disappointed that someone else have the same idea, and mine to be not original, but I am also glad that the conceptual construct of the theory is certainly attainable. Either way, I have integrated a negative quality already to describe the superdimension of the mind: a^2= i^2=(√(a_1^2+a_2^2 + a_3^2 ))^2= √-a_1^2+ -a_2^2 + -a_3^2 So if there are any qualities to be assumed from √-1, this model I am designing can be applied to it. So lets move on. Is Consciousness Just an Extended Time Dimension? The best way to begin a set of equations that describe a system, is by attempting to find relevant links to simple equations. Einstein did this, from equating values like G_ab=T_ab… the idea is simple, and can lead one into all sorts of new thoughts. Consciousness seems to be a dimension that is very timelike in nature. Why, we can only assume is because we are helpless to the timelike nature of the psyche. If this is true, then perhaps a simple deduction, using the original variables can describe the passing of time relative to our passing of time: Δtdi^2=ΔTdi^2 tdi ~ is external time Tdi ~ is internal time Its very probable that the idea of treating some kind of passing of time in seconds or nano-seconds with spacetime has already been proposed. If the conscious realm is a negative subdimension, then something keeps arising to my postulations. Funny thing is, is that for some reason, the idea of some negative sub-dimension added onto the vectors of spacetime would give a zero total, much like how we equate a positive particle in the vacuum with a negative particle (E=Mc2 + E=-Mc2=0), or even considering adding up spin (x,y=½+x,y=-½=0)… Is the following equation true? Δtdi^2 + ΔTdi^2 = 0 If it is, then the following would also be correct: a^2= i^2=(√(a_1^2+a_2^2 + a_3^2 ))^2= √-a_1^2+ -a_2^2 + -a_3^2=0 I speculate carefully, that perhaps there might be a renormalization process in this kind of vector addition? I'm surprised no one has asked why the expression: a^2 + b^2 + c^2 + tdi^2 - Tdi^2 isn't represented as a^2 + b^2 + c^2 - tdi^2 - Tdi^2 Intead

I notice there are a few subthread which take a reader through basic elementary subjects. Is it possible i can create a basic guide to algebra?

Thank you sir

Yes... i've heard of motion blur theory before. it seems very substantial to the OP. Thank you for your contribution.

You will see i posted here already, showing the math, and misunderstanding of it. If you continue to misunderstand,then nothing i will say will help you develop.

Well, i somewhat disagree. By the term associative, i mean set numerical based numbers that result in some configurated pattern. The numbers 37, 7 and 39 are not very obvious at all. But maybe this is what you mean, techinically?

Yes... but you neglect the fact i am not using what i call ''associated, or commutive numbers.'' Instead, i use 'what seems,' randomized numbers... 37, 7 and 39. No offense, but you seem to be missing the point of the math which was involved.

Oh, yeh. Quite right.

Numbers are a secondary language. It is perfect as an abstract language. As Aj pointed out, there is really no other way about it... conceptually.

Zeph You are fudging the truth. Relativistic mass is a measure of energy. The word mass is misunderstood in this context, as i have already explained.

Google the following ''Vernon Jenkins 2701'' I was mobbed the day i posted this, then after much debate, i post my results. Now i hardly get a reply... what is the audasity like?

I will do this in parts. First i want to investigate the theory of Transaction, by Dr. Cramer. I want it known, that i am serious about science, and any theory i use will be based upon quantum physical assessment. A few things we need to know. 1) On the fundamental level, quantum systems do not act according to cause and effect. This rule essentially breaks down. This means there is no directionality to their flow of existence. 2) Quantum mechanics is incomplete, and the laws being incomplete, cannot for one moment expect to explain all aspects of existence, including consciousness, which is certainly a quantum subject, dispite of any disagreement. 3) That consciousness is bound by quantum rules. .................................................................................. Right... Dr. Cramers interpretation says that before a collapse (or transaction as he calls it) is ever accomplished, a few processes are involved. Part One - The Observer Disturbs and Creates The observer effect directly relates to the ability to collapse the wave function through observation. Upon measurement of an electron, let’s say, it would quantum leap into a particle form. However, because observation is not the only way for the wave function to collapse, as decoherence is when superpositioned materials in wave-like probability states settle down into a single state through their environments with other particles. For this reason, it is now said the observer effect isn’t all that special. It doesn’t end there for it though! Physicist Fred Alan Wolf PhD, says that we can even alter the past with our observations. Taking into account the Wheeler-Delayed Choice Experiment showed that a measurement on a photon that traveled through spacetime in more than one path, a measurement on the photon as it arrives earth would create a real past for it. This is because the observation deflates all the possibilities into a value of 1 Part Two - Faster Than What? So the observations we make in everyday life might even be creating the world around us. Many take the idea seriously, such as Dr Cramer in his Transactional Interpretation. Dr Wolf has also promoted the use of the Delayed-Choice Experiment as evidence of backwards-through-time traveling waves creating the past, and even Fred Hoyle, Astorphysicist and mathematician made use of the idea in many of his thoughts. Using the TI, he explains that reality could be built up on superluminal waves traveling through time in a sinusoidal manner, and have restrocausal properties. First, we would need to integrate the TI theory of a complex-valued retarded wave of a quantum state vector | S > that moves forward through time, as Cramer calls it, an ‘’offer wave’’ in the present state: | O (t, 1) > Which then moves to the future: t >1 When it does so, it will activate an echo wave state vector which Cramer calls ( a complex-conjugated advanced wave) <E(2)|, toward the present time <E(t, 2)| The field of probability distribution allows the ‘’transaction’’ to be complete through probability amplitude: <E(t, 1)|O(t, 2)> The field requires on exact values of the initial state, and if the original wave does not contain the correct information, then the waves simply cancels out. But each time a successful transaction transpires, a collapse in the wave function follows. This cannot be applied to a multiverse interpretation of quantum mechanics, such as the Everett Interpretation and the Existential Interpretation, because there is no collapse of the wave function. There is still an observer effect, but one that is very different to a collapse of a system. Working with Everett’s Interpretation here, if an observer flips a coin ad observes a heads, she creates a massive split in reality, one that cannot be detected and beyond the threshold of experiment, shoots off our universe; this is a newly created universe. In the other universe, I would be observing a tails. Part Three - Enter The Transactional Interpretation A collapse of the wave function occurs, only when two quantum waves travel through time, one travels forward in time, and the other wave travel backwards through time; then the waves meet in the present and they multiply. This multiplication is called the collapse. The original wave can only multiply with it’s complex conjugate. Multiplying two answers to obtain a single answer is common in everyday life. You might remember the mathematical formulae from school. Here are a few to example; 1. Force = mass x acceleration 2. Velocity = frequency x wavelength 3. Volume = area of base x height 4. Area = half the length of base x perpendicular height Once they square, the 'transaction', as Cramer terms it, is complete. He feels that using these quantum waves helps in teaching how they work. It is after all, understandable. It is quite an elementary way of looking at it all. Part Three - A Wave Passes Copenhagen In the Copenhagen Interpretation, there is no answer for why macroscopic systems did not exhibit wavelike properties. It simply said, ‘’They are just too big.’’ Decoherence solved this problem for the existing matter around us, but can’t explain galaxy formation or star formation, and it stole much of the mysticism out of the observer. It wasn’t until developments in the turn of this century proposed models showing that the mind might be required for the long-sought after theory of everything. But even if this is true, that’s another slash in the Copenhagen Interpretation, because it states that everything there is about the universe can never be explained, and there is a limit to what we can know, so it doesn’t exactly promote any a theory of everything. One thing it did manage to survive was the EPR-Paradox, originally designed to make quantum mechanics a flawed theory showed that quantum entanglement was possible. Neil’s Bohr the founder of the Copenhagen Interpretation in 1926 said that the instantaneous effects simply happened. They are observed to happen, and this is all that mattered. But this didn’t satisfy why the effects of two entangled photons over great distances are resolved instantaneously. Why and how does this information travel so far and fast? This was one theory that was answerable with the Transactional Interpretation. One could say that the superluminal echo and offer waves move through time create the instantaneous effects – defined spins for example. The Copenhagen Interpretation is built up on five premises which have worked well with experiment: (1) Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, the idea that pairs of "conjugate" variables (like position and momentum or energy and time) cannot simultaneously be measured to "perfect" accuracy, nor can they have well-defined values at the same time; (2) Born's Probability Law, the rule that the absolute square of the wave function gives the probability (P=|psi|2=psi×psi*) of finding the system in the state described by the wave function; (3) Bohr's Complementarity Principle, the idea that the uncertainty principle is an intrinsic property of nature (not a just a measurement problem) and that the observer, his measuring apparatus, and the measured system form a "whole" which cannot be divided; (4) Heisenberg's Knowledge Interpretation, the notion that the wave function is neither a physical wave travelling through space nor a direct description of a physical system, but rather is a mathematically encoded description of the knowledge of an observer who is making a measurement on the system; and (5) Heisenberg's Positivism, the principle that it isn't proper to discuss any aspect of the reality which lies behind the formalism unless the quantities or entities discussed can be measured experimentally. But The TI gives answers which don't lead to multiversal idea's, which works well with the public and fellow physicists, because the theory of extra universes seems far too strange. I shall leave it there for now...

Or even better, they can be mixed up with proton and electron influences.

Thank you

In physics, when we consider a particle and its past, present and future path throughout the universe, we call its definite path a ‘’worldline.’’ A particle will always try to move in straight lines throughout spacetime, but because space and time are curved into each other, most of the time, they follow curved paths through space. This is what we mean by a warped space, or distorted spacetime. We find that these distortions are in fact just gravity, or curved spacetime. And gravity is the presence of matter itself. Even light cannot escape the wrath of gravity at very strong levels, but usually, a tiny photon traveling in empty space will almost definitely travel in straight lines. But there really isn’t just one straight line, or worldline for any particle. We find that according to Feynman’s Sum Over Histories, a particle actually has every possible path to its disposal – these path’s are of both times past and times to come. We find that these paths have themselves a statistical element about them and will variably shape how a particle will end up in any state given upon measurement. Take a photon traveling from the past: It will take every known possible path, even those improbable paths through a black hole (but as you can imagine, the statistics for this are so vanishingly small, we can nearly neglect them, but Hawking shows that it is possible for allowing a particle to travel at superluminal speeds using the uncertainty principle), and upon arrival at Earth, we can measure the photon, and all the paths its could have taken, according to the wave function, suddenly collapses into a single probability! For Feynman’s Sum Over History to apply to physics, one must use imaginary time, rather than the concept of real time. Imaginary time is the same thing as real space, whereas real time is the same thing as imaginary space. The two concepts are pivotal to understanding how we contemplate different ways to look at our universe at large, and even at small scales. Granted, the concepts themselves are purely mathematical, but they play an enormous part in relativity and quantum mechanics. You need to first gather up all the possible path a particle can take, bundle them together so-to-say, and then we need to measure those statistics against real time, and the result is the real conditions of the particles history; but even those results have a slight statistical aura about them. In the case of the universe at large and gravity, Feynman would need to have analyzed all possible histories of a curved spacetime, and this at large affects everything that has a worldline in this universe. There would indeed be a finite number of possible outcomes, but one would need to chose which outcome best fits this universe today. Hawking reminds us, that if this is indeed the case, the class of curved spacetime that determines the universe today (including those spaces and times which are blown into unimaginable proportions, or singularities), the probabilities of such spaces cannot be determined by the theory. However, he says it is possible if we calculate them in some arbitrary way. Dr. Hawking is very cryptic this way, but what he means is that science cannot predict any history for the universe if there is a singular past. So any attempt to learn how a universe with a singularity would result, is really a disaster for science. Now, since this study is about time and space at large, let’s consider CTC’s or ‘’Closed-Timelike-Curves.’’ This is a worldline describing a physical system which is ‘’closed’’. This means something physical in fact returns to original starting point. We call such movements ‘’sinusoidal’’. The idea of CTC’s was in fact developed by Willem Jacob van Stockum in 1937 and later by the infamous Kurt Godel in 1949. There is indeed a lot of controversy over their existence, but if they do exist, it could revolutionize relativity including our ability to create machines capable of a global causal violation; in other words, a path that twists in space and moves through time. Worldlines and of course Feynman’s Sum Over Histories is best described in terms of ‘’light cones’’, which is really a more specified term that is timelike in nature. It will probably be more recognized than the last two concepts. Light cones describe every possible future of a physical object in spacetime, given a current measurement during the present time. This can seem a bit strange, because not only does one deflate all possibilities of the past events to a single value upon measurement (the collapse of the wave function), but one can now calculate all possible path’s in the future in real time. Because particles don’t have a specific arrow of directionality following cause and effect, one can have in special conditions, a particle which experiences a timespace and spacetime that is so heavily curved, it can return to the place it began – in other words, things at very small levels are able to move back through time… From effect to the cause instead of cause to the effect. These are simply basic rotations through space and through time, which are conveniently called, ‘’closed-timelike-curves’’, so just think of a loop that twists in space and moves through time back into its original starting point. Frank J. Tipler, Prof. of mathematics and physics at Tulane University in New Orleans, developed an ingenious idea involving such closed-timelike-curves. He explains that classical relativity does in fact predict pathological behavior. The exact nature of the pathology, or, CTC’s, are however very debatable, since the predictive nature of relativity has itself many outcomes. His design is quite old now, but it is still a probability in physics creation of time machines today. His design is to create a huge rapidly rotating cylinder (possibly in space – I assume), and the spacetime around the cylinder will be warped to such an extent, that even time itself becomes sinusoidally warped so that instead of flowing in the correct direction… that is forwards, it in fact varies in an oscillating manner. Of course, one might think that such a spacetime would rip a spacetime traveler apart, but we aren’t talking about black holes here. If one entered this machine carefully, one could avoid being turned into spaghetti and experience a dilated time frame. Perhaps this is the time machine of the future? CTC's are intimately related to laws of retrocausality and violation of cause and effect where the law is changed into effect and cause in this directionality.

And who is that exactly? Are you a mod?