KtownChemist

Thanks for your explanation, This seems logical and true, but now the question arises that if if particle A is in state s and particle B is in state p, If you add or take away energy from particle A will particle B continue to be entangled or will it suddenly sever its ties and become free? How do you untangle a particle

When you think about self-consciousness you think about your body. At any moment of time the parts of your body you have conscious control over. But since you can't consciously make your intestines absorb food, are your intestines part of your consciousness? We all agree that your hand can be considered part of your consciousness because you can move it at will, but if you cut it off then what? A ball on the ground is not considered part of your consciousness, but when you pick it up you have control over it so does it become part of your consciousness? Then if you throw the ball in a certain direction at a certain speed, is the ball under your consciousness the entire time its traveling from your hand to the spot you chose to throw it. Or is consciousness the total of all the information coming in to your person, the processing of the information inside your person and information leaving your person for any moment in time. To think about this make it a little bit simpler; Person A is stripped of all her senses except for touch. So she cant see, smell, hear, or taste. She person can only experience the world by what she touches and feels (vibrations). So she can only process(or think about) information she receives from these vibrations. Now Person B has the senses of touch and hearing, So he can feel a vibration and instantaneously hear the sound associated with that vibration. If both Person A and B were sitting next to each other next to a speaker listening to music; Person B would feel the vibration and hear the music associated with those vibrations, while Person A is only able to feel the vibrations. Does this mean Person A is not conscious of the sound? On the contrary, She is completely conscious of the sound she simply does not associate the vibration of the sound wave with a perceived hearing in her head. She could consciously control the perceived music experienced by Person B by changing the vibration of the sound wave without ever even being conscious of the perceived sound. Therefore anything we see or dont see, experience or dont experience, think about or dont think about , do or dont do, is consciousness, whether we realize it or not.

To my understanding Quantum Entanglement is when a single photon is split into two identical photons where a change in one photon produces an exact change in the other photon. Now, my question is that when the photon is split, one part travels horizontally on the earth while the other travels straight up into the sky. Will the particle moving horizontally redshift the same as the particle moving upward?

Since my last thread was specifically referring to gravity and the 5th dimension I decided to post this new one to explore some more vaguer ideas. It is my understanding that dimensions only come in sets of threes, our X,Y, and Z. But what of the zero dimension? How do you describe an indefinitely small point in a way that makes sense? One way to look at it is that a point represents a system of no change in the next higher dimension. The line y=0 is only one dimensional system with no change in the next higher dimension, so to the second dimension the line is a point; To imagine this picture our line y=0 in x,y coordinates. The line or system takes every value possible for x but only one specific value of y, so now take away the x coordinates and leave only the y axis. the one dimensional line becomes a single point in the second dimension. The same logic can also be applied to the third dimension. An area in three dimensional space only has a single value for Z and so by taking away the first two dimensions our area becomes a point of no change in the third dimension. Altogether we refer to the first three dimensions collectively as Space. While most people refer to the fourth dimension as time, I believe this is incorrect. Just as space defined as the relationship between three dimensions; Time is also a collection of three dimensions. Therefore a point in the fourth dimension is simply no change of a system (Space) in the fourth dimension. This is easy to visualize since every single still photograph is an example of a point in fourth dimension. Now in order to envision the higher dimensions we simply repeat the same logic but instead of space we are now dealing with time. The fourth dimension can be thought of as a point of no change in the fifth dimension. So unless the fourth dimension is changing we perceive the fifth dimension to not exist. If a line does not change but continues linearly forever; relative to the line the next higher dimension does not appear to exist. The only way we can perceive the Fifth dimension is by inducing a change in the fourth dimension. This change of the fourth dimension is what we commonly think of as gravity. As an object moves into a gravitational field from a constant velocity they begin to speed up in space and simultaneously slow down in the fourth dimension proportional to the rate of acceleration in space. (The slowdown of time is converted to acceleration of space) This also seems to explain why someone approaching an event horizon will in fact be accelerating quite rapidly but appear to stop completely to an outside observer. The sixth dimension is more difficult to relate too but it can be thought of as a change in Time area. Time area just all the possible configurations of a system as it moves along in the fourth dimension. Say you have two pieces of bread, one on top of the other. (each slice is so thin that it has no depth only area) Now each slice represents every possibility of what could happen from 10am to 11am. Since both slices represent every possible configuration of the universe from 10 to 11 they must both be exactly the same right? not necessarily. In order to understand how the two systems (bread) can differ we must think of time as a whole; The beginning of time till the end of time. The two slices are only identical if every moment of time is identical up till 11am. Even though at exactly 10am the two systems are in unison, they could have arrived at 10am in two completely different ways. All the different ways a system could arrive at the same exact moment in time with the same exact spatial arrangements is movement in the 6th dimension. In conclusion I believe all dimensions come in sets of three. Just like how you need three separate dimensions to identify something in space you also need 3 separate dimensions to completely identify something in time. Also every dimension can be thought of as the change of the previous dimension. taking this into account, I suppose there could be countless dimensions below us which we perceive as moving in our first dimension I could write more but ill stop for now anyone agree?

No I think you misunderstood what I am saying... On a two dimensional grid point A is (2,0) and point B is (3,0); now a straight line connecting A to B is the least energetic way to travel from A to B and just so happens to be in a single spatial dimension (like our understanding of time), but there also exist countless other possibilities of functions that also pass through A,B which require an extra spatial dimension for them to make sense. Some functions even require a third spatial dimension to make sense, but all spatial functions can be expressed in three spatial dimensions

Quantum superposition says that we can never be certain as to which path a discrete particle travels from A to B, instead there is a probability assigned to each path the particle could take in order to get from A to B. We cannot 100% predict which path will be taken by the particle. Another interpretation says that the particle will take all paths possible simultaneously from A to B. The only way this can make sense is to construct a time area consisting of the 4th and 5th dimensions where movement along the x axis (4th dimension) from A to B is linear (y=0); this is what we observe. Yet Quantum superposition demands that there exist curves through x and y axis for all possible paths from A to B. (imagine an electric field in 2 spatial dimensions) The line connecting the positive and negative ends of the field is where the force is the strongest or in our time situation, the most probable path of time; which we observe. as the curve gets farther away from the line the probability of that path through time goes down. Having only one time dimension seems to go against what Quantum physics is all about Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged Thats almost what I am saying; gravity in not a dimension but rather an effect of the fifth dimension. Think of a star so big that on the surface time moves 1/2 as fast as time in the atmosphere. Now someone in the atmosphere would be able to work twice as much as someone on the surface for the same time interval. So someone up in the atmosphere has a higher time potential because of faster time. Since we know that all systems tend toward lower energy states; gravity can be thought of as an object moving from higher potential time to lower potential time.

well can you explain to me why it is only one dimesional? would like to hear your reasoning

the future is only on the same line if you believe there is only one unchangeable future, which the Heisenberg principle seems to counter predict. Instead the future is a probability of different possibilities.

To explain a little bit I was just thinking about how dimensions come in sets of three in order to describe a system at a particular state. The length, width, and height are necessary to locate something in what we define as space. Then there are the 3 time dimensions, much like length, width and height. These three dimensions are necessary to pinpoint a specific moment in time of a particular set of timelines. Just like you cant describe the location of an object without its three coordinates, you cannot describe the time of something without knowing its three coordinates. Imagine an object with constant positional coordinates X,Y, and Z; Their rate of time is linear, the 4th dimension. But if suddenly the object were to be subjected to an enormous gravitational field, the rate of time would increase and the object would no longer be on the same linear timeline from before the gravity field. In fact the object has moved along the 5th dimension. (The Future). only by allowing alternative timelines with their own unique positional coordinates can this be possible. Yet this only address two of the time coordinates, In order to understand why we need three time dimensions to completely identify a specific moment in time, imagine that same object on two seperate timelines. Yet, the two timelines happen to cross at specific moment T. The Object on both timelines maintains the same X,Y, Z and rate of time at T. From here on both timelines could merge into a single line as their futures stay the exact same. so from this moment T onward all X,Y,Z and rate of time stay the exact same in both systems. The only difference in the two timelines is how they arrived at T. (The Past). Does this make sense to anyone? I also have explainations of the 7,8, and 9th dimensions as well. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedAlso the Strong Force can be viewed as changes of 1st dimension since these forces hold quarks together; since quarks can be viewed as the 0 dimension points holding two together would be a change in the first dimension, while the weak force acts in the second dimension and the EM forces work in a three dimensional space. gravity is then the fourth force working in the fourth dimension

So can gravity be explained as movement through the fifth dimension or as a change in the rate of time?

So I was just wondering what yall think of gravity being the repulsion of matter and non matter (dark matter). Like how hydrophobic interactions pull nonpolar molecules closer together and minimize interaction with water. would this account for the relatively small effect of gravity? let me know what yall think

if you use the same strain of bacteria on one type of agar they should all be same and express the same genes because there is nothing biochemically different on any part of the agar to make them produce different proteins

just regular tsa

Can someone tell me the relative size, shape, and arrangement of both these organisms

The problem with virus therapy is that when the virus incorporates its own dna into the cell there is the chance that the virus dna can be placed inbetween a working gene rendering it useless. if this happens in a very important gene bad things can happen. A solution to this is to make the virus dna float around the cytoplasm without integrating into the host dna. this also stops the cell from passing on the virus gene when it divides

huh? how is that changing the problem, we know how to feed bacteria glucose or say you use photosynthetic bacteria then they would create their own food so there wouldnt be a problem. in fact they would be like little solar panels in that case

i read if you add water to an alloy of gallium and aluminum it produces aluminum oxide and hydrogen

well batteries run out bacteria can keep living and producing power as long as it has adequate amounts of glucose

I was just thinking that some strands of Pseudomonas stutzeri contain large amounts of copper and silver in their membranes so would it be possible to turn them into like tiny voltaic batteries?

I know that it is possible to engineer bacteria in order to create biofuels but it is possible to say turn bacterias chemical energy and transform it into useful electrical energy?