|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: An Ether-Based Creation Model | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Son Goku Inactive Member
|
There's no need to "model" entanglement as if it were some unexplained phenomena.
It's explained and predicted by Quantum Theory and confirmed by experiment. I think these kind of expectations of entanglement being some mysterious phenomena to be explained come from popular books that explain it as "spooky action at a distance". In reality there is no "action at a distance" because in entanglement the particles aren't remotely affecting each other faster than light. They're simply correlated with each other. Now the strange thing is it's a correlation incompatible with the notion of there being an objective value for physical quantities that pre-exists measurement. When you drop the requirement of physical quantities having values outside of measurement you're allowed a broader class of correlations and the new correlations that become possible are called "entanglement".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
vimesey Member (Idle past 101 days) Posts: 1398 From: Birmingham, England Joined:
|
Son Goku, I would dearly love to have an evening over a few drinks with you, learning about the universe. Something tells me that you would be very gifted at leading people to a level of understanding they would so truly appreciate and be grateful for.
(And yes, I've had a few :-) Edited by vimesey, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9513 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
Oh if only this was true! I spent two years at Uni living with a guy that was studying astro physics and really, really tried over years to understand his shit. But just couldn't get near it. It really pisses me off.
Had to stick to beetles.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8563 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.7
|
Allo Son Goku.
Michael MD, our OP, cannot seem to understand his own level of thinking. I don't think he can recognize this deeper level. Still it will be interesting to see how he responds.Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8563 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
If we share rounds can the rest of us come?
Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
vimesey Member (Idle past 101 days) Posts: 1398 From: Birmingham, England Joined: |
Absolutely ! :-)
(Bit more sober this morning, but always up for a drink and a chat - Covid permitting).Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Michael MD Member (Idle past 551 days) Posts: 108 Joined: |
How can I "respond" to counter-arguments from consensus quantists citing the various opinions on quantum entanglement of "authorities" whose fundamental assumption about ether is that it does not exist?
My model of entanglement should get serious consideration. To the quantists, I would cite Occam's Razor.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Occam’s Razor says that your ideas should be rejected. We don’t need to assume your not-ether so we shouldn’t.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
(Bit more sober this morning, but always up for a drink and a chat - Covid permitting). Well, we are still in the ZOOMbie Apocalypse.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
vimesey Member (Idle past 101 days) Posts: 1398 From: Birmingham, England Joined: |
Now there's a thought - I think that would be a lot of fun. Raising a glass with people on here would be something I'm pretty sure I would enjoy a great deal
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8563 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.7
|
How can I "respond" to counter-arguments from consensus quantists citing the various opinions on quantum entanglement of "authorities" whose fundamental assumption about ether is that it does not exist? You respond by showing us, fully, completely, with copious amounts of math, how present theory is in error. You do that by showing us, fully, completely, with copious amounts of math, how your musings have viability.
My model of entanglement should get serious consideration. You don't get to decide that. The discipline does. Just because you mumble doesn't mean we have to listen. And right now there is no consideration of your mathless non-model of a concept that died over a century past. You have shown us nothing and we have nothing to seriously consider.Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Michael MD Member (Idle past 551 days) Posts: 108 Joined: |
By saying that the ether "died over a century past," you appear to refer to the Michelson-Morley Experiment of 1887 (MMX), which was accepted by physics as a"null" result, meaning it did not show evidence of an ether acting together with the light beams being measured, by using optical refraction instruments. The original MMX did measurements under different gravity settings (settings were judged according to the rotational motion of Earth, and measured at different angles.) Subsequent versions of MMX through the years have used different modifications of this (other than differing gravity settings), and physics continues to accept MMX as the chief reason for rejecting ether.
I claim that the type of ether I propose in my Model is not disproven by these MMXs, due to one simple, logical, reason. -All versions of MMX used measurements of light beams and they all assumed that any kind of ether would act in concert with the light beams, as a kind of "medium" for the light to pass through. In my Ether Model, the ether is composed of individual units derived from first-causally-related processes, and as such would probably consist of ultimately-rarified ("elemental" units. I propose that units on that kind of size-scale would be vanishingly-smaller than the subquantal photons that transmit visible light beams. With my model, the ether would not be able to interact with the light beams, because no inertial interface would exist. An example that would illustrate my point would be where a car is travelling through a stationary cloud of dust. The car ("photon") would not be affected by the individual dust particles ("ether units"), and would pass through without interacting with them at all (no inertial interface; the dust is simply brushed aside.) I still claim physics is in error in dismissing the Ether, and in accepting the MMX as evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 4.5
|
I still claim physics is in error in dismissing the Ether, and in accepting the MMX as evidence.
I saw Michelson-Morley as posing a problem for ether theories. But I never saw it as a knockout blow. The real problem for ether theories, was Maxwell's equations. They showed that the apparent wave properties of light can be explained without any appeal to an ether.Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Michael MD Member (Idle past 551 days) Posts: 108 Joined: |
I do not accept wave theories grounded in quantum theory as evidence against the ether, either. -I won't try to go into great detail on it, but my ether model would have it that quantum waveforms are primarily generated by etheric processes. -According to my ether model, what we observe at the quantum level as the peak of a wave represents a cascade of near-quantum ("etheroidal") units, passing into the quantum realm, after being activated, vibrationally, by some outside energy source. The nadir of the wave represents local exhaustion of these energy units, which have passed from the etheroidal state into a quantum state, while the ether in the vicinity of the wave reverts to a quieter vibrational state, that it had before the energy-stimulus.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
vimesey Member (Idle past 101 days) Posts: 1398 From: Birmingham, England Joined:
|
Would it surprise you to learn that the language of physics is mathematics and formulae ? E=mc squared and all that.
We have a number of members here who are pretty fluent in that language. Give it a go. If you don't, you're gonna end up like a native English speaker insisting that a French waiter must converse with him in English - your food is gonna get spat on.Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024