Differences of the Micro or Quantum Level and Macro Level.

Your doing fairy well actually comaped with some members here who are convinced that the Universe is a HOLOGRAPHIC PROJECTION and that the Earth is at the CENTER of such a Universe.

I can't tell you how many times I have tried to explain to them that a HOLOGRAPHIC IMAGE needs to be REFLECTED OFF MATTER...but hey....I only have degrees in Particle Physics, Cosmology and Astronomy among others so what doI know right? LOL!!!

You are CORRECT....there is no oss of information as it exists within a larger system known as a MULTIVERSE.

However the Information of each Universal Reality is stored within the Quanta and such information of a specific Universe can only be read in that Universe not in another.

Good Job!

AboveAlpha

- - - Updated - - -

Oh....and that's why I said our Universal Reality exists in AN AT MINIMUM 10 or 11-D Space-Time....it is most likely 26-D or more.

AboveAlpha

 

Rev.....most of the terms I use are going to be difficult to find as the only way you would find them is to use specific search Key Words.

Now to get you going start with.....

Many-worlds interpretation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The quantum-mechanical "Schrödinger's cat" paradox according to the many-worlds interpretation. In this interpretation, every event is a branch point; the cat is both alive and dead, even before the box is opened, but the "alive" and "dead" cats are in different branches of the universe, both of which are equally real, but which do not interact with each other.[1]The many-worlds interpretation is an interpretation of quantum mechanics that asserts the objective reality of the universal wavefunction and denies the actuality of wavefunction collapse. Many-worlds implies that all possible alternate histories and futures are real, each representing an actual "world" (or "universe"). In lay terms, the hypothesis states there is a very large—perhaps infinite[2]—number of universes, and everything that could possibly have happened in our past, but did not, has occurred in the past of some other universe or universes. The theory is also referred to as MWI, the relative state formulation, the Everett interpretation, the theory of the universal wavefunction, many-universes interpretation, or just many-worlds.

The original relative state formulation is due to Hugh Everett in 1957.[3][4] Later, this formulation was popularized and renamed many-worlds by Bryce Seligman DeWitt in the 1960s and 1970s.[1][5][6][7] The decoherence approaches to interpreting quantum theory have been further explored and developed,[8][9][10] becoming quite popular. MWI is one of many multiverse hypotheses in physics and philosophy. It is currently considered a mainstream interpretation along with the other decoherence interpretations, collapse theories (including the historical Copenhagen interpretation),[11] and hidden variable theories such as the Bohmian mechanics.

Before many-worlds, reality had always been viewed as a single unfolding history. Many-worlds, however, views reality as a many-branched tree, wherein every possible quantum outcome is realised.[12] Many-worlds reconciles the observation of non-deterministic events, such as the random radioactive decay, with the fully deterministic equations of quantum physics.

In many-worlds, the subjective appearance of wavefunction collapse is explained by the mechanism of quantum decoherence, and this is supposed to resolve all of the correlation paradoxes of quantum theory, such as the EPR paradox[13][14] and Schrödinger's cat,[1] since every possible outcome of every event defines or exists in its own "history" or "world".

LINK....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation

But Many Worlds is an Older Theory and Model where as MULTIVERSAL THEORY....is much more comprehensive and complex.

di·ver·gent (dĭ-vûr′jənt, d&#299
adj.
1. Drawing apart from a common point; diverging.2. Departing from convention.3. Differing from another: a divergent opinion.4. Mathematics Failing to approach a limit; not convergent.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
di•ver•gent(dɪˈvɜr dʒənt, da&#618

adj.
1. diverging; differing; deviating. 2. pertaining to or causing divergence. 3. (of a mathematical expression) having no finite limits.

Multiverse
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search For other uses, see Multiverse (disambiguation).
See also: Many-worlds interpretation
Part of a series on
Physical cosmology

Big Bang · Universe
Age of the universe
Chronology of the universe

Early universe[show]Inflation · Nucleosynthesis
Backgrounds
Gravitational wave (GWB)Microwave (CMB) · Neutrino (CNB)

Expansion · Future[show]Hubble's law · RedshiftMetric expansion of spaceFLRW metric · Friedmann equationsFuture of an expanding universeUltimate fate of the universe
Components · Structure[show]Components
Lambda-CDM modelDark energy · Dark matter
Structure
Shape of the universeGalaxy filament · Galaxy formationLarge quasar groupLarge-scale structureReionization · Structure formation

Experiments[show]BOOMERanGCosmic Background Explorer (COBE)Illustris projectPlanck space observatorySloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS)2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey ("2dF")Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy
Probe (WMAP)
Scientists[show]Aaronson · Alfvén · Alpher · Bharadwaj · Copernicus · de Sitter · Dicke · Ehlers · Einstein · Ellis · Friedman · Galileo · Gamow · Guth · Hawking · Hubble · Lemaître · Mather · Newton · Penrose · Penzias · Rubin · Schmidt · Smoot · Suntzeff · Sunyaev · Tolman · Wilson · Zel'dovichList of cosmologists
Subject history[show]Discovery of cosmic microwave
background radiationHistory of the Big Bang theoryReligious interpretations of
the Big Bang theoryTimeline of cosmological theories
Category
Cosmology portal
Astronomy portal

v · t · e

The multiverse (or meta-universe) is the hypothetical set of infinite or finite possible universes (including the Universe we consistently experience) that together comprise everything that exists: the entirety of space, time, matter, and energy as well as the physical laws and constants that describe them. The various universes within the multiverse are sometimes called parallel universes or "alternate universes".

The structure of the multiverse, the nature of each universe within it and the relationships among the various constituent universes, depend on the specific multiverse hypothesis considered. Multiple universes have been hypothesized in cosmology, physics, astronomy, religion, philosophy, transpersonal psychology, and fiction, particularly in science fiction and fantasy. In these contexts, parallel universes are also called "alternate universes", "quantum universes", "interpenetrating dimensions", "parallel dimensions", "parallel worlds", "alternate realities", "alternate timelines", and "dimensional planes," among others. The term 'multiverse' was coined in 1895 by the American philosopher and psychologist William James in a different context.[1]

The multiverse hypothesis is a source of debate within the physics community. Physicists disagree about whether the multiverse exists, and whether the multiverse is a proper subject of scientific inquiry.[2] Supporters of one of the multiverse hypotheses include Stephen Hawking,[3] Steven Weinberg,[4] Brian Greene,[5][6] Max Tegmark,[7] Alan Guth,[8] Andrei Linde,[9] Michio Kaku,[10] David Deutsch,[11] Leonard Susskind,[12] Raj Pathria,[13] Sean Carroll, Alex Vilenkin,[14] Laura Mersini-Houghton,[15][16] and Neil deGrasse Tyson.

LINK....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse

Universal Estimation of Divergence for Continuous
Distributions via Data-Dependent Partitions
Qing Wang, Sanjeev R. Kulkarni, Sergio Verd´u
Department of Electrical Engineering
Princeton University
Princeton, NJ 08544 USA
Email: {qingwang, kulkarni, verdu}@princeton.edu

LINK...http://www.princeton.edu/~verdu/reprints/Universal Estimation of Divergence for.pdf

If you have questions for me about this I would be more than happy to take some time to exlain this as it is a complex topic in the extreme.

AbobeAlpha

 

AA, in my first reply already indicated that the key words in your phrase exist; ie here>>>>>>>>>> "The phrase does not exist, of course words in the phrase exist and are common words<<<<<<<< (edited for grammar).

However, your phrase ; "Divergent Universal State of Realiy" is just what I call 'word salad'. Even your long reply did not define what you meant by it. Worse it does not even exist in the world of science at all! I just want you to use real terms, because I am sure PF will be the laughing stock of the internet world if we do not begin applying some standards, at least in the science etc subjects.

Really AA, wuith all due respect If you had been lecturing at my old school or on any professional debate circuit, you would not be allowed to continue using such terms. Even when using abbreviations its common practice to ID the abbr. even if its a common phrase etc/. As I have said before I changed the the theme of study for my masters degree from hard science to the field of philosophy (due to my conversion to Christianity and ordination). So I am well versed in science, especially the basics of quantum physics.

That said, much of your writing seems if not semi-plagiarized fabricated out of thin air. (I am not saying you are intentionally deceptive). Perhaps you should enroll at an accredited university as an under grad and learn the basics of your interests. Again I am not attempting to insult you or your ideas. I just want to bring the standard of debate up a few notches.

reva

 

You seem to have missed this...

Universal Estimation of Divergence for Continuous
Distributions via Data-Dependent Partitions
Qing Wang, Sanjeev R. Kulkarni, Sergio Verd´u
Department of Electrical Engineering
Princeton University


Now I use the words differently but the meanings are the same.

By the way....my usage is documented before these guy's from Princeton worked on it.

AboveAlpha

 

I will try to give you the quick explaination.

When I state.....Divergent Universal States of Reality within a Multiversal System.....what do YOU think I am meaning by using the word DIVERGENT in that statement?

Oh...and Rev....do yourself a favor.....you might want to ask me what I mean before placing yourself on the line up there for a nasty fall.

I know more about this than you could possibly imagine.

AboveAlpha

 

The way that I understand the Holographic Principle to work is like this.

Everything in the universe can be broken down into information. Bits are 2-dimensional and voxels are 3-dimensional. Quantum Mechanics states that information can't be destroyed.

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2008/may/20/information-not-lost-in-black-holes

That concept is what started a so called "Black Hole War." This was about two different ideas on what happened to information that was sucked into a black hole. At the time, Hawking believed that the information was lost. Leonard Susskind and Gerard t'Hooft vehemently disagreed at the time, although they couldn't figure out how he was wrong, as this would violate one of physics most established laws, the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

"Entropy is heat or energy change per degree Kelvin temperature." http://www.brighthubengineering.com/thermodynamics/4534-what-is-entropy/

Such as in Boltzmann's equation S=k logw, with S being entropy. Or the more common definition being that it represents change in a system.

So I guess my point so far is that information can't be destroyed and heat change is entropy.

Stephen Hawking later discovered that black holes dissipate due to Hawking radiation, but that it was new particles being leaked out. If true this is saying that information can be lost.

http://functionspace.org/articles/122/Black-Hole-Information-Paradox

Also Claude E. Shannon stated that entropy measures the lack of information in a system. http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LE...py03.ppt/RK=0/RS=k8OogYmPxN5FHw9S4k7ukYjkIuQ- this is on slide 12

A quote from Jacob Bekenstein. "A black hole is very simple, but it's hiding a complicated history," explains Bekenstein. In an ordinary system like my cup of tea, entropy is a measure of our uncertainty about what's going on at a molecular level. If its entropy is high then that's because there are many possible microstates corresponding to a macrostate. I can observe a macrostate, for example the tea's temperature and mass, but that doesn't give me a clue about what the exact microstate is because there are so many possibilities. "For the simplest black hole all I can figure out is its mass, but it has been formed in one of many possible ways," says Bekenstein. "There are many alternative histories and they all count towards the entropy."

https://plus.maths.org/content/bekenstein

Or basically a black hole is full of hidden information.

Using Planck Units, the bits of information in a black hole don't equal the volume, they equal the area.

My computer's about to die. I'll try and finish the rest of this tomorrow. I'll try and go into more detail then. I didn't do a very good job explaining it so far. And I'm not even necessarily saying that it's right, but I find it interesting. Once again I'm no scientist, so I more than welcome others to show me if I posted anything not factual. I would hate to spread false information inadvertently.

The premise of it isn't that we are just holograms. It's point is that the universe has all the information stored in 2-d that could reproduce 3-d.

 

Thing is Energy in the form of Quantum Particle/Wave Forms needs at minimum 10 or 11-D......and most likely 26-D or greater.

In a Multiversal System there is no entropy as it is just exchanging from one Divergent Universal State to another.

Things like Dark Matter and Dark Energy are most likely BLEED OVER from other Divergent Universal States.

Hawking....as brilliant as he is...was wrong...very wrong....mostly because his calculations took on too small a system.

AboveAlpha

 

Susskind is one of the founders of string theory and the Holographic Principle fits into the model. I have even briefly glanced over some people using it in M-Theory but I didn't really take the time to look it over, so I don't know much about it.

One last question before I log off. I was under the impression that more than 11 dimensions would be unstable. Have you heard anything about that?

Also I thought Hawking believed in the Many Worlds Theory and that white holes resolved the information paradox for black holes, although he was looked down upon because he produced very little evidence to support his theory.

 

11-D would be unstable unless there existed Universal Bleed Over...ie...Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

But I am fairly certain we are looking at 26-D or Greater.

Fact is it really looks like all Divergent Universal States are interconnective.

In Hadrons there exists a Minimum and Maximum number of Quarks.

They blink in and out of our Universal Existence but either return or leave either at or between Quark Numericam Minimum or Maximum in all Hadrons.

Where are they going?

Where are they coming from?

Most likely answer.....alternate versions of other Hadrons in other Divergent Universal States of Reality in a Multiversal System.

AboveAlpha

 

Such are the challenges of modeling an analog four dimensional reality with a digital two dimensional representation such as language. So, "if God is all powerful, can he create a rock so big that he himself cannot lift it."- George Carlin
And, for the audience, if gravity is not a "force" then what term would you use? A "state of being"? That, is the problem with nominalizations. They turn a verb or process into a noun, distorting the context.

 

4-D in our Universal Space-Time is impossible.

AboveAlpha

 

AboveAlpha&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. in all the many posts that I have read by you&#8230;&#8230;.. you really only made about two statements on matters of science, that I can think of where I am convinced that you are probably incorrect.

One of them was to seemingly rule out the writings of Dr. Chaim Henry Tejman rather quickly, I personally love how Dr. Tejman compares patterns of behaviour of waves and particles at the quantum level with&#8230;&#8230; the behaviour patterns of massive star clusters&#8230;&#8230; which seemed really quite plausible?!

http://www.grandunifiedtheory.org.il/Book4/Html/Tejmanphysics2.htm

Theory of Everything

United nature theory

By Tejman Chaim Henry

&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.
The other seeming error was to state that scientists had disproven the Dr. Masaru Emoto research&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. you are correct that scientists have proven that Dr. Emoto did not behave in a strictly scientific manner in all of his research which has probably given somewhat biased results but&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; this does not rule out some of his findings&#8230;&#8230; it merely means that his website may have given a somewhat exaggerated impression of how direct the correlation may have been between&#8230;.. certain types of words or music with the results that he got..

http://is-masaru-emoto-for-real.com

.&#8230;&#8230;..

&#8230;&#8230;..(But you know what AboveAlpha&#8230;&#8230;. I forgave you very quickly for these errors&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; because frankly&#8230;&#8230; I felt that they made you more&#8230;&#8230;electable&#8230;&#8230;.. just in case you ever change your mind and wish to enter that arena as well. As you know&#8230;&#8230;. doing so would set up what will probably eventually turn into more than one possible time line)?!

 

Reva&#8230;&#8230; do you believe that a force, or intelligence exists&#8230;&#8230;.. that is so great&#8230;&#8230; that if this force or intelligence&#8230;&#8230;.. .wished to remember a moment in what we think of as the past&#8230;&#8230;(for example 1939)&#8230;&#8230; then this force or intelligence could remember that moment in time&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230; and recreate that moment in time&#8230;&#8230; and then&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. add more of what could be termed the Ruach ha Kodesh/ Holy Spirit/ light - love of G-d&#8230;&#8230;. into this new time line&#8230;&#8230;.. and create another 1940&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. that is very different from the 1940 that we read about in our history books?

Basically, I am talking about YHWH doing a different type of Ezekiel 37 event?

This basic idea actually may have artistic value that could result in saving many lives and helping to transform the world economy in some positive ways?

http://www.politicalforum.com/canad...ts-take-937-those-syrian-refugees-canada.html
Mr. Justin Trudeau, let's take 937 of those Syrian refugees to Canada?

 

I will be surprised if it is not eventually proven that Dr. Chaim TEjman is really onto something important when he compares gravity, with the behaviour patterns of waves rather than strings………. and to a basically "feminine" behaviour pattern rather than masculine???!

http://www.grandunifiedtheory.org.il/gender/g1.htm

http://www.grandunifiedtheory.org.il/gender/response.htm

 

Am I correct to conclude that your variation of Multiverse Theory
implies non-linear time?

Can.... the earth.... as well as all of us on it..... as we existed......
for example on September 1, 1979.....
be recreated.........
and could some of us......
go into that recreated time line.....
with a somewhat different attitude.....
due to the subconscious memories of 2017... and on and on and on???