scifimath Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 oh, you are right, I should hang my head in shame from coming up with a Theory of Everything ..I'm such a jerk. -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 (edited) Roflmao a theory of everything talk about dillusions of grandeur. A theory requires testability. That requires being able to make predictions of how A affects B by some value of change. You can't do that without math. A formula such as f= ma makes predictions of the amount of force required to move a mass x distance. Those predictions can be tested with experiment. Edited August 11, 2019 by Mordred 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scifimath Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 I predict what happens when spacetime gets involved from observation. You are all blinded by your own clout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 Really post your Formula then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scifimath Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 I don't think observation has a symbol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 (edited) If observation affects something there must be some form of interaction. Start with light. Things don't change by magic. (Though your eyes don't emit signals). Edited August 11, 2019 by Mordred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scifimath Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 The interaction is someone placing a detector wanting a particle to be physical. Observation is magical ..deal with it. -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moth Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 14 minutes ago, scifimath said: I don't think observation has a symbol Maybe you can create one. Words are bastards. Once they leave your mind they feel no obligation to represent your thoughts to others. The best language we know now when talking about the universe is math. If you want to share your ideas with more clarity use mathematics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 36 minutes ago, scifimath said: The interaction is someone placing a detector wanting a particle to be physical. Observation is magical ..deal with it. OK deal with my magic wand filled with pixie dust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scifimath Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 It's the bridge between the two dimensions. Observation is the reason spacetime exits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghideon Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 On 8/9/2019 at 11:40 PM, scifimath said: The reason for spacetime to exist is for living things to be able to observe Before there were any living observers in the universe, there was no spacetime, or just no "reason" for spacetime to exist? 5 hours ago, scifimath said: The interaction is someone placing a detector wanting a particle to be physical. So particles are not "physical" until observed. 6 hours ago, scifimath said: I predict what happens when spacetime gets involved from observation. 17 minutes ago, scifimath said: It's the bridge between the two dimensions. Observation is the reason spacetime exits. How come yet unobserved photons were affected by spacetime even before there were observers? Light from distant objects travelling through space were affected by gravitational lensing long before anyone decided to create a telescope able to see those photons. The photons were not in some separate unobservable dimension, the photons were affected by curved spacetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 11 hours ago, scifimath said: Wouldn't you like to know! ha. Being glib isn’t the path to keeping this thread open. 11 hours ago, scifimath said: My theory already fits to what double slit type experiments demonstrate. Then how can you test it to see if it’s correct? 11 hours ago, scifimath said: The state of the particle is decided before it leaves the gun. So what if you shoot a particle at the slits, and place (or remove) the detector after you shoot the particle? The slits are far enough away that it takes longer for the particle to get there than it does to make the change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scifimath Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 (edited) 6 hours ago, Ghideon said: Before there were any living observers in the universe, there was no spacetime, or just no "reason" for spacetime to exist? So particles are not "physical" until observed. How come yet unobserved photons were affected by spacetime even before there were observers? Light from distant objects travelling through space were affected by gravitational lensing long before anyone decided to create a telescope able to see those photons. The photons were not in some separate unobservable dimension, the photons were affected by curved spacetime. The dimension of unobserved quantum waves has always been and always will be. Spacetime has a beginning. They are not physical until we request them to be physical Unobserved quantum waves don't need anything from spacetime to function. Photons don't use our version of time. The distance the photon travels doesn't matter. If we request it, its state has been decided. 2 hours ago, swansont said: Then how can you test it to see if it’s correct? So what if you shoot a particle at the slits, and place (or remove) the detector after you shoot the particle? The slits are far enough away that it takes longer for the particle to get there than it does to make the change. Gravitons won't exist. Particles won't be a duality at the same time. The delayed choice quantum eraser shows us that the entire life of the particle is known. It will know if it will pass through a detector in its path. Edited August 11, 2019 by scifimath Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 1 hour ago, scifimath said: The dimension of unobserved quantum waves has always been and always will be. Spacetime has a beginning. This statement shows you're using a different definition of "dimension" than everyone else in the thread. Can you tell us how you're using it, please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scifimath Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 (edited) Dimension might not be the best word, how about realm? Two realms in this domain. Observed vs Unobserved Edited August 11, 2019 by scifimath 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 1 hour ago, scifimath said: Dimension might not be the best word, how about realm? Two realms in this domain. Observed vs Unobserved Agreed dimension is not the best word. Yes realm if you like: that is unused. Since you are now listening +1 for encouragement. To carry on the discussion can you tell me what you understand by 'detection' or 'observation' please? These terms do have a specific meaning which roughly corresponds to 'any interaction' with the rest of the universe'. Also you need to discuss boundary conditions when using a wave function. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scifimath Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 Quantum waves are not going to turn physical unless a human wants it to be real/physical during its path/life. Or if it becomes part of an object that is already large enough to be anchored to spacetime. A detector can be anything that lets a human know it passed by. Placing a detector is the ritual required to summon a physical particle. Why do I need to discuss the wave function? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 7 minutes ago, scifimath said: Or if it becomes part of an object that is already large enough to be anchored to spacetime. Spacetime isn't a "thing" one can "anchor" anything to. You can't borrow a cup of spacetime. It's the coordinate geometry we use to visualize and measure relativistic effects. Are you saying that if an object is small enough, it's not considered part of the geometry of the universe?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scifimath Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 Unobserved Quantum waves are not part of spacetime. They get to be part of the universe when they are observed (swapped to being physical). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 3 hours ago, scifimath said: The delayed choice quantum eraser shows us that the entire life of the particle is known. It will know if it will pass through a detector in its path. It doesn’t show the opposite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scifimath Posted August 11, 2019 Author Share Posted August 11, 2019 No, it's the entire life of both particles. The first particle knows if the partner will ever be observed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted August 11, 2019 Share Posted August 11, 2019 14 minutes ago, scifimath said: Quantum waves are not going to turn physical unless a human wants it to be real/physical during its path/life. Or if it becomes part of an object that is already large enough to be anchored to spacetime. A detector can be anything that lets a human know it passed by. Placing a detector is the ritual required to summon a physical particle. I understand what you have been saying about this and it is clear that you mean something quite different from the rest of us. 16 minutes ago, scifimath said: Why do I need to discuss the wave function? Quote 6 minutes ago, scifimath said: Quantum waves Quantum waves is not a well defined scientific term. The correct term is the wavefunction plus the maths that goes with it. I am trying to help you communicate here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scifimath Posted August 12, 2019 Author Share Posted August 12, 2019 I want to add that I think there is a good chance a black hole is a spherical gap in spacetime with the unobservable quantum realm exposed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted August 12, 2019 Share Posted August 12, 2019 No there isn't a good chance of that at all. Inside the EH we will never be able to measure but outside the EH the mass density is incredibly high. Easily described by the macro realm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scifimath Posted August 12, 2019 Author Share Posted August 12, 2019 The EH is still spacetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts