If your a person who does not have a clue about Quantum Mechnics then you should probably take 10 minutes and google it to just understand the basics of what we know to be able to participate in this topic. Now there are a few schools of thought as far as what allows Quantum Patricle/Wave Duality. I am thinking that....and let's just use for now how a Photon exists at every point of position along and within it's own wave form or Wave Packet. I believe it is because there are infinite Photons sharing the Space-Time within the Wave Packet from EVERY SINGLE DIVERGENT UNIVERSAL STATE OF REALITY FROM WITHI OUR SINGLE UNIVERSAL BASELINE GROUP. What does anyone else think....if hopefully anyone can think at this level? AboveAlpha
Well.....in every Hadron there exists a specific number of Quarks that exists between a numerical minimum and maximum and these quarks can exist numerically at these minimums and maximums and any quantity in between but never more or less. Thus the Quarks in Hadrons are BLINKING IN AND OUT OF UNIVERSAL EXISTENCE.....but only at or between the minimum and maximum. This leads us to think that there is Quark Transfer occurring between Hadrons existing exactly as they exist in this Universal State but as well in Alternate Divergent Universal States of Reality. Thus there are infinte numbers of you and me and everyone else. AboveAlpha
I'm not at all versed enough in this to say but, just on a hunch, could a Bose Einstein Condensate be useful here? Maybe you could freeze out just one set of hadrons and then have some sort of phenomena caused by their interacting with the other universes. Or maybe some sort of modification on that famous double slit experiment. I've read somewhere that one explanation of that is that the photons that aren't supposed to be there are actually from other universes
Well, if there are infinite many particles in infinite divergent realities, the mere fact that it's a probability wave seams to indicate that some divergent states, in the high peaks of the probability wave, have more of an affect than others on the lower peaks of the probability wave. How do you explain that? Well, it sounds like we're dealing with transfinite numbers. There is a concept that there are numbers that are higher than any finite value, but it's not quite plain old infinity because the cardinality (the total count) of some transfinite numbers are greater than others. Such as Aleph Null (the cardinality of all Natural numbers) is less than Continuum (the cardinality of Real numbers). I'm thinking that either some divergent states have more impact than others or there are greater numbers of infinities in towards the center and fewer out towards the edge. That's why I mentioned transfinite numbers.
I should also mention that I read an article in the past few weeks, and even posted a thread topic on such, where the future affects the past. We already know that the wave function collapses when it's observed. But in recent experiments it was demonstrated that 90-10 percent of the time in a future where an observation takes place the system evolves towards that future. Or in other words events in the future ripple backwards through time. I mention it because, in your scenario, I just thought that each of those infinite in number particles in that wave packet might be evolving towards a specific future. I don't know if that makes sense or is related to the topic but I thought I'd add that.
I am going to post some info and leave a LINK to a source for those interested so they can understand. LINK....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BoseEinstein_condensate A Bose–Einstein condensate (BEC) is a state of matter of a dilute gas of bosons cooled to temperatures very close to absolute zero (that is, very near 0 K or −273.15 °C[1]). Under such conditions, a large fraction of bosons occupy the lowest quantum state, at which point macroscopic quantum phenomena become apparent. This state was first predicted, generally, in 1924–25 by Satyendra Nath Bose and Albert Einstein. QUANTUM MECHANICS is most often used to describe matter on the scale of molecules, atoms, or elementary particles. However, some phenomena, particularly at low temperatures, show quantum behavior on a macroscopic scale. The best-known examples of macroscopic quantum phenomena are superfluidity and superconductivity; another example is the quantum Hall effect. Since 2000 there has been extensive experimental work on quantum gases, particularly Bose–Einstein Condensates. Between 1996 to 2003 four Nobel prizes were given for work related to macroscopic quantum phenomena.[1] Macroscopic quantum phenomena can be observed in superfluid helium and in superconductors,[2] but also in dilute quantum gases and in laser light. Although these media are very different, their behavior is very similar as they all show macroscopic quantum behavior. Quantum phenomena are generally classified as macroscopic when the quantum states are occupied by a large number of particles (typically Avogadro's number) or the quantum states involved are macroscopic in size (up to km size in superconducting wires). MUCH MORE DESCRIPTIVE DATA....LINK.....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroscopic_quantum_phenomena Consequences of the macroscopic occupation[edit] Fig.1 Left: only one particle; usually the small box is empty. However, there is a certain chance of that the particle is in the box. This chance is given by Eq.(15). Middle: a few particles. There are usually some particles in the box. We can define an average, but the actual number of particles in the box has large fluctuations around this average. Right: large number of particles. The fluctuations around the average are small.The concept of macroscopically-occupied quantum states is introduced by Fritz London.[3][4] In this section it will be explained what it means if the ground state is occupied by a very large number of particles. Figure 15 (15) depends on the number of particles. Fig.1 represents a container with a certain number of particles with a small control volume ΔV inside. We check from time to time how many particles are in the control box. We distinguish three cases: 1. There is only one particle. In this case the control volume is empty most of the time. However, there is a certain chance to find the particle in it given by Eq.(15). The chance is proportional to ΔV. The factor ΨΨ∗ is called the chance density. 2. If the number of particles is a bit larger there are usually some particles inside the box. We can define an average, but the actual number of particles in the box has relatively large fluctuations around this average. 3. In the case of a very large number of particles there will always be a lot of particles in the small box. The number will fluctuate but the fluctuations around the average are relatively small. The average number is proportional to ΔV and ΨΨ∗ is now interpreted as the particle density. In quantum mechanics the particle probability flow density Jp (unit: particles per second per m²) can be derived from the Schrödinger equation SUPERFLUIDITY. Fig.2 Lower part: vertical cross section of a column of superfluid helium rotating around a vertical axis. Upper part: Top view of the surface showing the pattern of vortex cores. From left to right the rotation speed is increased resulting in an increasing vortex-line density.Below the lambda-temperature helium shows the unique property of superfluidity. The fraction of the liquid that forms the superfluid component is a macroscopic quantum fluid. The helium atom is a neutral particle so q=0. Furthermore the particle mass m=m₄ Superconductivity Superconductivity Fluxoid quantization[edit]For superconductors the bosons involved are the so-called Cooper pairs which are quasiparticles formed by two electrons.[6] Hence m = 2me and q = -2e where me and e are the mass of an electron and the elementary charge. DC SQUID Fig. 5. Two superconductors connected by two weak links. A current and a magnetic field are applied. Fig. 6. Dependence of the critical current of a DC-SQUID on the applied magnetic fieldFigure 5 shows a so-called DC SQUID. It consists of two superconductors connected by two weak links. The fluxoid quantization of a loop through the two bulk superconductors and the two weak links demands Type II superconductivity[ Fig. 7. Magnetic flux lines penetrating a type-II superconductor. The currents in the superconducting material generate a magnetic field which, together with the applied field, result in bundles of quantized flux.Type-II superconductivity is characterized by two critical fields called Bc1 and Bc2. At a magnetic field Bc1 the applied magnetic field starts to penetrate the sample, but the sample is still superconducting. Only at a field of Bc2 the sample is completely normal. For fields in between Bc1 and Bc2 magnetic flux penetrates the superconductor in well-organized patterns, the so-called Abrikosov vortex lattice similar to the pattern shown in Fig. 2.[10] A cross section of the superconducting plate is given in Fig. 7. Far away from the plate the field is homogeneous, but in the material superconducting currents flow which squeeze the field in bundles of exactly one flux quantum. The typical field in the core is as big as 1 tesla. The currents around the vortex core flow in a layer of about 50 nm with current densities on the order of 15×1012 A/m². That corresponds with 15 million ampère in a wire of one mm². million ampère in a wire of one mm². Dilute quantum gases The classical types of quantum systems, superconductors and superfluid helium, were discovered in the beginning of the 20th century. Near the end of the 20th century, scientists discovered how to create very dilute atomic or molecular gases, cooled first by laser cooling and then by evaporative cooling.[11] They are trapped using magnetic fields or optical dipole potentials in ultrahigh vacuum chambers. Isotopes which have been used include rubidium (Rb-87 and Rb-85), strontium (Sr-87, Sr-86, and Sr-84) potassium (K-39 and K-40), sodium (Na-23), lithium (Li-7 and Li-6), and hydrogen (H-1). The temperatures to which they can be cooled are as low as a few nanokelvin. The developments have been very fast in the past few years. A team of NIST and the University of Colorado has succeeded in creating and observing vortex quantization in these systems.[12] The concentration of vortices increases with the angular velocity of the rotation, similar to the case of superfluid helium and superconductivity. ALL FIGURES AND MODELS ON....LINK....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroscopic_quantum_phenomena From reference LINK....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BoseEinstein_condensate History Velocity-distribution data (3 views) for a gas of rubidium atoms, confirming the discovery of a new phase of matter, the Bose–Einstein condensate. Left: just before the appearance of a Bose–Einstein condensate. Center: just after the appearance of the condensate. Right: after further evaporation, leaving a sample of nearly pure condensate.Bose first sent a paper to Einstein on the quantum statistics of light quanta (now called photons). Einstein was impressed, translated the paper himself from English to German and submitted it for Bose to the Zeitschrift für Physik, which published it. (The Einstein manuscript, once believed to be lost, was found in a library at Leiden University in 2005.[2]). Einstein then extended Bose's ideas to matter in two other papers.[3] The result of their efforts is the concept of a Bose gas, governed by Bose–Einstein statistics, which describes the statistical distribution of identical particles with integer spin, now called bosons. Bosons, which include the photon as well as atoms such as helium-4 (4He), are allowed to share a quantum state. Einstein proposed that cooling bosonic atoms to a very low temperature would cause them to fall (or "condense") into the lowest accessible quantum state, resulting in a new form of matter. In 1938 Fritz London proposed BEC as a mechanism for superfluidity in 4He and superconductivity.[4][5] In 1995 the first gaseous condensate was produced by Eric Cornell and Carl Wieman at the University of Colorado at Boulder NIST–JILA lab, in a gas of rubidium atoms cooled to 170 nanokelvin (nK).[6] Wolfgang Ketterle at MIT shortly demonstrated important BEC properties. For their achievements Cornell, Wieman, and Ketterle received the 2001 Nobel Prize in Physics.[7] Many isotopes were soon condensed, then molecules, quasi-particles, and photons in 2010.[8 LINK....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BoseEinstein_condensate Models Einstein's non-interacting gas[edit]Consider a collection of N noninteracting particles, which can each be in one of two quantum states, and . If the two states are equal in energy, each different configuration is equally likely. If we can tell which particle is which, there are different configurations, since each particle can be in or independently. In almost all of the configurations, about half the particles are in and the other half in . The balance is a statistical effect: the number of configurations is largest when the particles are divided equally. If the particles are indistinguishable, however, there are only N+1 different configurations. If there are K particles in state , there are N − K particles in state . Whether any particular particle is in state or in state cannot be determined, so each value of K determines a unique quantum state for the whole system. Suppose now that the energy of state is slightly greater than the energy of state by an amount E. At temperature T, a particle will have a lesser probability to be in state by . In the distinguishable case, the particle distribution will be biased slightly towards state . But in the indistinguishable case, since there is no statistical pressure toward equal numbers, the most-likely outcome is that most of the particles will collapse into state . In the distinguishable case, for large N, the fraction in state can be computed. It is the same as flipping a coin with probability proportional to p = exp(−E/T) to land tails. In the indistinguishable case, each value of K is a single state, which has its own separate Boltzmann probability. So the probability distribution is exponential: For large N, the normalization constant C is (1 − p). The expected total number of particles not in the lowest energy state, in the limit that , is equal to . It does not grow when N is large; it just approaches a constant. This will be a negligible fraction of the total number of particles. So a collection of enough Bose particles in thermal equilibrium will mostly be in the ground state, with only a few in any excited state, no matter how small the energy difference. Consider now a gas of particles, which can be in different momentum states labeled . If the number of particles is less than the number of thermally accessible states, for high temperatures and low densities, the particles will all be in different states. In this limit, the gas is classical. As the density increases or the temperature decreases, the number of accessible states per particle becomes smaller, and at some point, more particles will be forced into a single state than the maximum allowed for that state by statistical weighting. From this point on, any extra particle added will go into the ground state. To calculate the transition temperature at any density, integrate, over all momentum states, the expression for maximum number of excited particles, p/(1 − p): LINK....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BoseEinstein_condensate AboveAlpha....continued.
Wgabrie. Imagine....as I have asked you to imagine before but in a slightly different way.....that OUR UNIVERSE....and all the Particle/Wave Forms in it....which comprise a total of about 5% of the Universe.....as well as Dark Energy and Dark Matter.....which comprise the other 95% of the Universe.....are percentages that ARE TOTALLY MISCALCULATED AND UNREALISTIC!!! Why? Because those who are calculating these Percentages do not yet have either the DATA OR KNOWLEDGE to understand that for a PROPER PERCENTAGE CALCULATION to be achieved....we have to understand that OUR UNIVERSE....IS NOT JUST ONE UNIVERSE....as INFINITE IN NUMBER OTHER DIVERGENT UNIVERSAL STATES OF REALITY ARE BLEEDING INTO TO EACH OTHER AND BLEEDING INTO OUR UNIVERSAL REALITY AS WELL AS OUR UNIVERSAL REALITY PARTIALLY BLEEDING INTO ALL THE OTHERS AS WELL!!! This is the ONLY current REALITY MODEL that can explain our UNIVERSAL REALITY being a part of a MULTIVERSAL SYSTEM....as well it explains all aspects of QUANTUM MECHNANICS......as well....it explains PARTICLE/WAVE DUALITY.....as well...it expalains.....GRAVITY, DARK MATTER AND DARK ENERGY....as well...it explains.....ACTUAL PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN AND ARE EMPLOTED BY THE FBI, CIA AND NSA as PSYCHICS AND REMOTE VIEWERS!!! Such a MODEL....explains why DARK ENERGY IS CAUSING AN EVER INCLEASING AND EXPANDING ACCELERATION CURVE AS ALL GALAXIES IN OUR UNIVERSE ARE SPEEDING AWAY FROM EACH OTHER AT AN EVER INCREASING VELOCITY. AboveAlpha
I don't know about this model, outside of your talking about it. The closest I have come is the theory of Many interacting worlds. Note: not Many Worlds, but Many Interacting Worlds. I suppose this is as good a time as any to ask you what you think about it?
Oh, and there's still the matter if all Universes take up the same space or not. Whether they have the same affects on us or not (and vise versa). And, whether there's some form of distance between each universe.
Well, I killed the discussion by not expressing the right thing that AboveAlpha was trying to teach me.
I don't know if this would have an effect on what you just stated but I saw a recent article where photons were photographed acting as both a wave and a particle at the same time. The article is here
I think what they studied the photons by letting them create electrons. I have heard about this before. I just don't know what to make of it.
The Many Worlds or Many Interacting Worlds Theory is using an analogy....like making a 1969 Pontiac Firebird Model that iside the ModelBx ou he no glue....no pant....and only 1/100th of 1%......001% of the necesssary parts to put it together as well as not having THE DIRECTIONS OF ASSEMBLY!! This is why we use MULTIVERSAL THEORY MODELS INSTEAD!!!! AboveAlpha - - - Updated - - - No big deal. AboveAlpha
Unless....... one of the implications of all that is that perhaps we....... are in the middle of some type of experiment?! http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/water-great-mystery/
This is heavy! But I have ran into some anecdotal evidence for this. http://nhneneardeath.ning.com/profiles/blogs/meet-me-on-the-other-side
Well an infinite multiverse made of infinite universal baselines and infinite universal states certainly solves a lot of problems. Like some theories being too small in scope. Some people say that multiversal theory is not falsifiable. But maybe it's one of those things that we haven't learned to properly express yet. That maybe there could be something so absolutely 100% true that all of the signs point to yes and still be valid science? But there is one big problem with an infinite multiverse theory and that's that it's overly large. We won't be able to study it all because we don't have the storage capacity for that. Well, perhaps there's a way to treat the multiverse itself as the storage device. Since it's all already there. But doing so requires the means of performing searches on the actual physical medium. First it needs to be possible, and second it requires top-level knowledge of such a thing. I don't know. I just generally assume there's going to be a way. At least once we understand more. Or should that be if it's possible to understand everything!
One possible limiting factor in the equation may be hinted at in religion - philosophy. Revelation 20:5 "But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. " If Ezekiel chapter 37 is fulfilled again and again and again and again as new branches of time are created from a moment in the past.......... perhaps each new time line must be taken one thousand year before a new branch is allowed to be formed?! The Helen Wambach Ph. D. and Dr. Chet Snow research did seem to access visions of the future stored with the human subconscious mind that seemed to go on for more than a thousand years into the future from their research in 1980 - 1983?! http://dwij.org/forum/future_link/future7.htm
Well, I've always wondered why humans and even other animals (like elephants for instance, or ants) attend to their dead, putting them in graveyards. Whether there was some basic ritual instinct that maybe there's more to it, or otherwise maybe they just have a natural instinct to get rid of decaying corpses for sanitary reasons??
Ninety percent of Helen Wambach Ph. D.'s volunteers could be hypnotized and taken back in time until they could view a past life somehow?! For some reason a lower percentage could be taken into future lives..... but she and Dr. Chet Snow did find at least 750 who viewed these. One of the most unusual ways for ninety percent of us to have something like a near death experience... is to be hypnotized and taken back to a past life.... then taken to the day of our deaths in that lifetime. The volunteers in the Wambach study reported something much like the typical NDE. They floated outside their bodies... met deceased relatives and friends and reviewed their lives with a being of light. I was impressed that Helen Wambach got results like this over two decades before Oprah and Dr. Raymond Moody turned NDE's into a well know part of our culture. Perhaps elephants..... like us humans have subconscious memories of past lives?! Wild elephants gather inexplicably, mourn death of "Elephant Whisperer" Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/Inspiratio...d-Elephant-Whisperer.aspx#C375pOy0w508vj88.99
Sources? Or just show your math as to how about you came those um' claims? Maybe we can talk specific definitions after I entertain a equation or two of yours. reva
I believe quantum observations to be tied directly to humankinds ability to define and create "Reality" as we know it.
Several months ago I had a chat online with a near death experiencer. She wrote about what she had been shown about life on earth about five centuries in the future. One aspect of what she reported as a common technology of that time period..... actually seems to have already been invented?! http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...rencies-finance-films-address-problems-6.html (post #55)...... Those hexagonal bricks.... sure sounds like.....??????? http://www.solarroadways.com/intro.shtml
Yes, I can understand that, your reply is based on one of the quantum interpretations isn't it? (I think there are five major interpretations). That is If I understand your reply correctly. I am sure you are aware that many scientists or physicists reject the interpretation we accept as true. However, I am with you, and tend to deem the 'measurement problem' is real and not just an mathematical entity. In other words I believe superposition is real! In the famous Schrödingers cat thought experiment I feel the cat (if it could be reduced to subatomic size) is really in another dimension, and silly and non-intuitive as it sounds the kitty is both dead and alive! In one way I detest the infinite universe theory (usally called the many worlds theory or MWT), but more and more evidence is supporting it. Of course in the MWT there are infinite universes, or dimensions where every conceivable occurrence can and does happen. The good news is that these universes can not, according to current theory, interact with our universe in order to protect causality etc. That said maybe the other universes do briefly interact with ours in quantum events of superposition (where we can not see every occurrence anyway because as soon as we look or measure it it instantaneously causes the wave function to collapse making the cat either dead or alive. So maybe when the cat is in superposition ie being neither dead or alive or both, the cat may be existing in the other dimensions experiencing every conceivable situation possible. Until we look at the kitty its superposition protects our universe interacting with the infinite universes which would result in chaos (in our universe). That type of Chaos would be a disaster and end our existence as well as our universes stability, where logic and causality makes sense of the world. existence. So when we lift up the box and have a look at the cat our sentience forces the wave function to collapse and pulls the cat out of a nether world of neither being dead or alive and or existing in all the infinite universes etc. I believe this is why the physics of quantum world and the macro world may never be unified. That resistance of uniting the macro and micro is the gate keeper protecting our universe. Its just a hunch. I am not a math person, I know the basics but my head explodes if I attempt too much especially, where advanced calculus etc is concerned. So there is no math to support my guess but its just educated guess lol. And it does make sense if one thinks about it. I would be happy to clarify any point. reva