Jump to content

Falling Through the Cracks


khan2012
 Share

Recommended Posts

Another possible method of multiversal jumping and time travel would be to alter the quantum signature of matter to that of a neighboring universe so that travel becomes a means of moving sideways through time - deliberately altering the non-local quantum resonance to that of a different universe, thereby creating a window of opportunity, where one phase shifts into the alternate reality.

 

If a person suspects that they have somehow "fallen through the cracks" into a parallel reality ...one is a very close approximation of the their twin reality ...but it is one that has ever so slight deviations from their memories of the old reality, then it most likely will be shrugged off, and, life goes on. Knocking on wood reassures them, and us, of their and our faith in the concrete aspects of perception, or so we hope.

 

"Cracks" are a metaphor for the resonant bridges between parallel realities, whereby a person can exchange places with their identical twin in a neighboring universe, one that is approximately 99.999... percent identical with THIS universe Slight memory discrepancies would be one way to verify the exchange took place.

 

Due to a time displacement in the exchange process, a couple of seconds of "missing time" could be perceived. Quantum shifting of non-local resonances precipitates the jump into a nearby universe.

 

Theorization doesn't always exclude the necesitation of imaginative postulation. Some would call it "bullshitting" I suspect that many of the so called neural blips are associated with jumps into parallel realities. It could be a dangerous experience while driving an automobile, yes.

 

Indeed, experience must be weighted by the logical ramifications of the scientific method. Probability must be more than just an abstract modeling method. It accurately describes the real world ...and a continuum of all possible worlds form a coherent unity of mind AKA the metaverse.

 

Any advanced being with the technology to step outside their evolving branch universe into the infinite dimensional metaversal landscape, would need to have the mental ability to perceive such a multidimensional existence.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There are so many problems with this post... :confused:

 

would be to alter the quantum signature of matter

What is a "quantum signature"? Do you mean quantum numbers?

 

a means of moving sideways through time

You haven't proven that time exists in any direction, much less sideways.

 

deliberately altering the non-local quantum resonance to that of a different universe

Um, what? Do you know what resonance is? And you haven't proven that another universe even exists. Too many assumptions, no math.

 

Slight memory discrepancies would be one way to verify the exchange took place.

Or it could indicate you're old or crazy or just forgetful. Poor Mr. Occam has grown quite a large beard and needs to shave. :oops:

 

Quantum shifting of non-local resonances precipitates the jump into a nearby universe.

What is "quantum shifting"??? And there's that "non-local resonances" again. Wtf? Come on, you should know better.

 

I'm going to stop there, because I really can see that you don't know what you're talking about. :P I just didn't want to leave this post alone and have some naive person come along and believe it without question.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

khan,

 

Aerohead makes some good points with his post. In any industry, whether it is physics, biology or restaurant work we have industry specific jargon. Under most cirsumstance it isn't necessary to fully define the jargon if it is the normal accepted language of the industry. That doesn't mean that we can't make up new jargon. It's perfectly OK to make up new jargon if, and only if, we fully define what we mean when we first use it. New jargon pops all the time. Jargon, after all, is just a short-hand way of putting into as few words as possible some idea - so long as everyone is on the same page as to the specific meaning. If it is once explained and accepted then thereafter there's no requirement to fully explain it every time.

 

In your post you used some very odd undefined terms that are not part of the accepted lexicon of quantum physics. So why don't you explain the meaning of the jargon pointed out by aerohead in terms of QM?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
What is a "quantum signature"? Do you mean quantum numbers?

A quantum signature is determined by the fundamental identity of each quantum world, AKA parallel universe, where all matter and energy resonates on a quantum level with a unique and constant signature. There are an infinite number of parallel universes and all of them have branching asymmetric quantum signatures. Under normal circumstances these universes are separated from the others by perceptual barriers.

 

You haven't proven that time exists in any direction, much less sideways.

We can intuitively assume that time has a direction in that we remember the past but not the future. The thermodynamic arrow of time.

 

Um, what? Do you know what resonance is? And you haven't proven that another universe even exists. Too many assumptions, no math.

I suggest you read up on multiverse theory.

 

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2007/09/n--one-of-the-m.html

 

Dr Andy Albrecht, a physicist at the University of California at Davis commented, "This work will go down as one of the most important developments in the history of science."

 

According to quantum mechanics, nothing at the subatomic scale can really be said to exist until it is observed. Until then, particles occupy uncertain "superposition" states, in which they can have simultaneous "up" and "down" spins, or appear to be in different places at the same time. The mere act of observing somehow appears to "nail down" a particular state of reality. Scientists don't yet have a perfect explanation for how it works, but that hasn't changed the fact that the phenomenon appears to be real.

 

According to quantum mechanics, unobserved particles are described by "wave functions" representing a set of multiple "probable" states. When an observer makes a measurement, the particle then settles down into one of these multiple options, which is somewhat how the multiple universe theory can be explained.

 

The Oxford team, led by Dr David Deutsch, showed mathematically that the bush-like branching structure created by the universe splitting into parallel versions of itself can explain the probabilistic nature of quantum outcomes.

 

What is "quantum shifting"??? And there's that "non-local resonances"

I recall that Schrodinger referred to it as "that damn quantum jumping" Resonant wave functions act in a time independent manner.

 

:D

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parallel Worlds

 

http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=/articles/art0585.html

 

quote:

 

"And then Erwin Schrödinger, the founder of quantum mechanics, asked the question: let's say we put a cat in a box, and the cat is connected to a jar of poison gas, which is connected to a hammer, which is connected to a Geiger counter, which is connected to uranium. Everyone believes that uranium has to be described by the quantum theory. That's why we have atomic bombs, in fact. No one disputes this.

 

But if the uranium decays, triggering the Geiger counter, setting off the hammer, destroying the jar of poison gas, then I might kill the cat. And so, is the cat dead or alive? Believe it or not, we physicists have to superimpose, or add together, the wave function of a dead cat with the wave function of a live cat. So the cat is neither dead nor alive.

 

This is perhaps one of the deepest questions in all the quantum theory, with Nobel laureates arguing with other Nobel laureates about the meaning of reality itself.

 

[...]

 

There's another theory, however, called decoherence, or many worlds, which believes that the Universe simply splits each time, so that we live in a world where the cat is alive, but there's an equal world where the cat is dead. In that world, they have people, they react normally, they think that their world is the only world, but in that world, the cat is dead. And, in fact, we exist simultaneously with that world.

 

This means that there's probably a Universe where you were never born, but everything else is the same. Or perhaps your mother had extra brothers and sisters for you, in which case your family is much larger. Now, this can be compared to sitting in a room, listening to radio. When you listen to radio, you hear many frequencies. They exist simultaneously all around you in the room. However, your radio is only tuned to one frequency. In the same way, in your living room, there is the wave function of dinosaurs. There is the wave function of aliens from outer space. There is the wave function of the Roman Empire, because it never fell, 1500 years ago.

 

All of this coexists inside your living room. However, just like you can only tune into one radio channel, you can only tune into one reality channel, and that is the channel that you exist in. So, in some sense it is true that we coexist with all possible universes. The catch is, we cannot communicate with them, we cannot enter these universes."

 

Sometimes we can enter these other universes.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.astralvoyage.com/projection/parallel.html

 

I remember living a portion of a different life as another person in one night! For those that have written they were someone else or knew people very intimately that they forgot upon waking, this also explains that. I have reoccurring dreams of people and places that I know like the back of my hand, but as soon as I wake, the memory vanishes. I even go to these places over and over and "remember" my life there. Parallel universes would have their own people, things, laws of physics, etc. Robert Monroe and other travelers also spoke of their own "soul gathering". They said our souls were sometimes split and we co-existed here and other places. We capture fleeting bits of this when we sleep or travel. The person who posted that he's from somewhere else very well may have a soul fragment in another universe. Going "home" may have more meaning than we realize! I projected once and traveled off into what I thought was this universe and hovered over a planet that caused a great yearning in me. What the heck was that!?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.intuitive-connections.net/2007/book-monroe.htm

 

 

 

quote:

 

 

 

* All humans move into the out-of-body state during sleep.

 

 

 

* A form of dynamic energy, so far unidentified, is present in all carbon-based organic life. It enters the body before birth and leaves it at death.

 

 

 

* The dominant waking consciousness is only a part of the various forms of consciousness available to man.

 

 

 

* Human consciousness is a manifestation of the dynamic energy already referred to. As a highly complex vibrational pattern it responds to and acts upon similar patterns from external sources.

 

 

 

* All patterns of consciousness are nonphysical and hence not dependent on time-space. 'In short, like it or not, you're going to continue to do and be after you can no longer hang in there physically.'

 

 

 

* From the work of the Explorers and their contacts has emanated an underlying mosaic of action that on examination becomes an astounding potential. It is the display and application of a science—or technology— that is totally absent from human culture. To this Monroe adds, 'the application of this technology seems totally benevolent.'

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stupid vs. stupid == still stupid.

 

Putting a cat in a box, the cat would probably not stay there in the first place if it were alive in the first place. And talk is just talk as any hype of any observer who can not make a "tool" to use to define what the heck that math is talkking about in the real world and not the abstract world of math in the first place.

 

Then all the other questions come up, like why was the cat put into the box in the first place, or why did the cat want to go into the box, was there litter there or something?

 

Then, to know the quantum state of anything and probabilities you probably have to go back all the way to the beginning of time to understand why it is like that quantum probability state as it is today.

 

It still ends up being the equation:

 

stupid vs. stupid == still stupid.

 

:)

 

Not ignorance, but still stupid as not defining what kind of tool to observe with which is going to make that quantum determination. And humans can not be defined as a tool because of emotional garbage that may be inherent in any human quantum state.

 

Thus, the human observer can not get to a state that is better then the quantum state of the Universet that exist nowadays without something else - which has been defined as religion.

 

But who wants to be poor and have visions of the future like perhaps a Saint did.

 

Then you can read up on all of that and claim this or that also.

 

In the end, it still is just another quantum state perhaps.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------

 

http://dimensionalcitizen.tripod.com/astronomicalpage.html

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stupid vs. stupid == still stupid.

 

Putting a cat in a box, the cat would probably not stay there in the first place if it were alive in the first place. And talk is just talk as any hype of any observer who can not make a "tool" to use to define what the heck that math is talkking about in the real world and not the abstract world of math in the first place.

 

Then all the other questions come up, like why was the cat put into the box in the first place, or why did the cat want to go into the box, was there litter there or something?

http://higgo.com/quantum/laymans.htm

 

quote:

 

What is Quantum Physics?

 

 

 

That's an easy one: it's the science of things so small that the quantum nature of reality has an effect. Quantum means 'discrete amount' or 'portion'. Max Planck discovered in 1900 that you couldn't get smaller than a certain minimum amount of anything. This minimum amount is now called the Planck unit.

 

 

 

Why is it weird?

 

 

 

Niels Bohr, the father of the orthodox 'Copenhagen Interpretation' of quantum physics once said, "Anyone who is not shocked by quantum theory has not understood it".

 

 

 

To understand the weirdness completely, you just need to know about three experiments: Light Bulb, Two Slits, Schroedinger's Cat.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Two Slits

 

 

 

The simplest experiment to demonstrate quantum weirdness involves shining a light through two parallel slits and looking at the screen. It can be shown that a single photon (particle of light) can interfere with itself, as if it travelled through both slits at once.

 

 

 

Light Bulb

 

 

 

Imagine a light bulb filament gives out a photon, seemingly in a random direction. Erwin Schroedinger came up with a nine-letter-long equation that correctly predicts the chances of finding that photon at any given point. He envisaged a kind of wave, like a ripple from a pebble dropped into a pond, spreading out from the filament. Once you look at the photon, this 'wavefunction' collapses into the single point at which the photon really is.

 

 

 

Schroedinger's Cat

 

 

 

In this experiment, we take your pet cat and put it in a box with a bottle of cyanide. We rig it up so that a detector looks at an isolated electron and determines whether it is 'spin up' or 'spin down' (it can have either characteristic, seemingly at random). If it is 'spin up', then the bottle is opened and the cat gets it. Ten minutes later we open the box and see if the cat is alive or dead. The question is: what state is the cat in between the detector being activated and you opening the box. Nobody has actually done this experiment (to my knowledge) but it does show up a paradox that arises in certain interpretations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you dare to think about it (you're not really supposed to), you have to believe one of the following things:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MENU

 

 

 

Your consciousness affects the behaviour of subatomic particles

 

 

 

- or -

 

 

 

Particles move backwards as well as forwards in time and appear in all possible places at once

 

 

 

- or -

 

 

 

The universe is splitting, every Planck-time (10 E-43 seconds) into billions of parallel universes

 

 

 

- or -

 

 

 

The universe is interconnected with faster-than-light transfers of information

 

 

 

----

 

 

 

Full English Breakfast

 

 

 

Coffee or Tea

 

 

 

[...]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI)

 

 

 

The various paradoxes that the Copenhagen Interpretation gave rise to (famously Schroedinger's cat, and Einstein's dislike of "spooky action at a distance") led others to keep on trying to find a better interpretation.

 

 

 

The simplest was put forward by a student, Hugh Everett, in 1957. He simply said that the Schroedinger equation does not collapse. Of course, everyone laughed at him, because they could see that the photon, for example, was in just one place when they looked, not in all possible places. But after a couple of decades, this issue was resolved with the concept of decoherence - the idea that different universes can very quickly branch apart, so that there is very little relationship between them after a tiny fraction of a second.

 

 

 

This has led to what should strictly be called the 'post-Everett' Interpretation, but is still usually called MWI. It is now one of the most popular interpretations and has won some impromptu beauty contests at physics conferences. Unfortunately it means that billions of you are splitting off every fraction of a second into discrete universes and it implies that everything possible exists in one universe or another. This comes up with its own set of hard-to-digest concepts, such as the fact that a 500-year-old you exists in some universes, whereas in others you died at birth.

 

 

 

In 1997, Max Tegmark at Princeton University proposed an experiment to prove that MWI was correct. It involved pointing a loaded gun at your head and pulling the trigger. Of course, you will only survive in those universes where the gun, for whatever reason, fails to go off. If you get a misfire every time, you can satisfy yourself -- with an arbitrarily high level of confidence -- that MWI is true. Of course, in most universes your family will be weeping at your funeral (or possibly just shaking their heads and muttering).

 

 

 

What happens to the cat? It's dead in half the subsequent universes and alive in the other half.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A quantum signature is determined by the fundamental identity of each quantum world, AKA parallel universe, where all matter and energy resonates on a quantum level with a unique and constant signature.

 

There exists not a single scrap of evidence of multiple words, or parallel universes. It's all just conjecture, and it's conjecture that runs into many insurmountable difficulties. It strikes me as being somewhat absurd to suppose that an entire new universe is created every time a single atom makes some probablistic change. One would have over 10^40 new universes being created every billionth of a second !!

 

And it's really not necessary, if one grasps what quantum superposition is all about. It is a state in which a thing is not object A or object B....but a hybrid of both. In the large scale world, one might roll a 1 or a 6 on a dice. With quantum superposition, the dice roll leads to a result that is still a single unitary number, but is somehow a little of 1 and a little of 6. In many ways this is the REVERSE of many worlds......there remains one reality, but is a sumperimposing of multiple probabilities.

 

The best analogy is to imagine one of those baths with a hot and cold tap that lead to a single outlet. The total flow of water must remain the same.....but as you turn up the hot water, the flow of cold automatically reduces, and vice versa. That is the essence of superposition.

 

It is not the same as both outcomes of a probability 'existing' independently. Instead it is a curious hybrid reality in which how much of any element exists depends on the method of observation.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parallel universes are also predicted by string theory, which is presently the number 1 candidate for a theory of everything, which is more than just conjecture :D

 

http://discovermagazine.com/twominutesorless?bcpid=716091875&bclid=686943766&bctid=687029421%20-%20a%20simplified%20explanation%20of%20string%20theory

 

Resonance creates form:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sonpvUxGL8

 

Branes and parallel universes:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsRWWLH1q7U&feature=related

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parallel universes are also predicted by string theory, which is presently the number 1 candidate for a theory of everything, which is more than just conjecture

 

Hmm, not really. I'm with Professor Paul Davies on this one. The 'multiverse' may well be untestable as a theory....and anything that is untestable just isn't science. Davies wonders what the difference is between believing in parallel universes and believing in God. Neither has even the remotest scientific evidence, and parallel universes are just as much a matter of 'faith' and make just as little sense.

 

The trouble with string theory is that the hidden dimensions are of such a small scale that by definition they cannot be observed. And string theorists are having a hard job coming up with even indirect methods of observing.

 

Personally I find the whole 'theory of everything' notion rather presumptuous. As is often the case with science, any major development leads to an even wider vista of things unknown.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parallel universes are also predicted by string theory, which is presently the number 1 candidate for a theory of everything, which is more than just conjecture

Bull-oney! It actually IS conjecture as long as it cannot be tested and falsified. Any theory that wants to possess the "number 1 candidate for a theory of everything" in this day and age has to be able to explain dark matter and dark energy.

 

Have you read, or heard about, Peter Woit and his book?

 

Not Even Wrong – The Failure of String Theory and the Continuing Challenge to Unify the Laws of Physics

 

Peter Woit

 

RMT

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, many-worlds theory is hard to get a grip on but it is the only theory that resolves the grandfather paradox, the paradox of time travel where you travel back in time, kill your grandfather, thereby preventing yourself from being born so how could you travel back in time in the first place?

 

By traveling backwards in time we create an alternate time-line, or parallel universe and the paradox is resolved.

 

Since general relativity has solutions where time travel to the past is allowed, grandfather paradox must be dealt with.

 

Many-worlds theory resolves it but with the other theories, time travel to the past must be forbidden.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, many-worlds theory is hard to get a grip on but it is the only theory that resolves the grandfather paradox, the paradox of time travel where you travel back in time, kill your grandfather, thereby preventing yourself from being born so how could you travel back in time in the first place?

Er..no....there is a better theory for resolving the grandfather paradox. Don't have a paradox in the first place.....by ruling out such time travel.

 

By traveling backwards in time we create an alternate time-line, or parallel universe and the paradox is resolved.

 

No it isn't. Indeed that is half the problem.....many worlds DOESN'T resolve the grandfather paradox. That is because it actually creates a further paradox. And here is why :-

 

If I go back to 1920 and kill grandad....then you would suppose that a new timeline gets created. Fine. But hold on. That timeline then has a future. That future may be 'ahead' in 1920, BUT..that future will also have an October 25th 2009. So..that timeline must therefore have a current October 25th 2009..that exists before I even time travel.

 

In other words, I'm sitting there at 23.00 on October 25th, with my time machine, and am about to travel to 1920, in half an hour, and shoot grandad. By definition, the new timeline that I create in 1920 MUST have it's own 23.00 on October 25th. In other words...it must exist NOW...before I even time travel.

 

No problem, you say. Clearly I go back to 1920 and create the new timeline and the loop is closed. But...er....hold on a mo. WHAT IF....at that very moment before I time travel, my grandson from 2066 dedcides to travel back into the past and shoot me in 2009 ? He arrives..he shoots me..and I never make the trip to 1920.

 

Oh dear !! We now have an even worse paradox. The 1920 timeline MUST have a corresponding October 25th and exist NOW. Yet...how can it..when I get shot and never make the trip !

 

I'm calling this the 'double grandfather paradox'.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, many-worlds theory is hard to get a grip on but it is the only theory that resolves the grandfather paradox, the paradox of time travel where you travel back in time, kill your grandfather, thereby preventing yourself from being born so how could you travel back in time in the first place?

Before you go any further, I would like you to address something important: Could you please show me anywhere that anyone can validate that the "Grandfather Paradox" (GP) is a situation that could actually happen? What I mean by this is address the Godel Incompleteness Theorem, which tells us that we can make untrue propositions in any form of closed symbolic code (which language is).

 

The GP need not be real. Just like "everything I tell you is false" also cannot be real.

 

The bottom line is that the understanding of time that yields the GP can be, and likely is, an incorrect understanding of time. There can certainly be other understandings of time that do not allow the grandfather paradox. Right?

 

Chew on that a bit. Then please, if you can, show me why the GP must be necessarily true.

 

RMT

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it isn't. Indeed that is half the problem.....many worlds DOESN'T resolve the grandfather paradox. That is because it actually creates a further paradox. And here is why :-

 

If I go back to 1920 and kill grandad....then you would suppose that a new timeline gets created. Fine. But hold on. That timeline then has a future. That future may be 'ahead' in 1920, BUT..that future will also have an October 25th 2009. So..that timeline must therefore have a current October 25th 2009..that exists before I even time travel.

 

In other words, I'm sitting there at 23.00 on October 25th, with my time machine, and am about to travel to 1920, in half an hour, and shoot grandad. By definition, the new timeline that I create in 1920 MUST have it's own 23.00 on October 25th. In other words...it must exist NOW...before I even time travel.

 

No problem, you say. Clearly I go back to 1920 and create the new timeline and the loop is closed. But...er....hold on a mo. WHAT IF....at that very moment before I time travel, my grandson from 2066 dedcides to travel back into the past and shoot me in 2009 ? He arrives..he shoots me..and I never make the trip to 1920.

 

Oh dear !! We now have an even worse paradox. The 1920 timeline MUST have a corresponding October 25th and exist NOW. Yet...how can it..when I get shot and never make the trip !

The same rules still apply and there is no paradox. Branch worlds are created and there exists worlds where your grandson fails to kill you.

 

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/time_travel/esp_ciencia_timetravel21.htm

 

quote:

 

"

 

Every time there is an event at the quantum level - a radioactive atom decaying, for example, or a particle of light impinging on your retina - the universe is supposed to "split" into different universes.

 

A motorist who has a near miss, for instance, might feel relieved at his lucky escape. But in a parallel universe, another version of the same driver will have been killed. Yet another universe will see the motorist recover after treatment in hospital. The number of alternative scenarios is endless.

 

In this way, the "many worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics allows a time traveler to alter the past without producing problems such as the notorious grandfather paradox. But the "many worlds" idea has been attacked, with one theoretician joking that it is "cheap on assumptions but expensive on universes" and others that it is "repugnant to common sense." Now new research confirms Prof Deutsch's ideas and suggests that Dr Everett, who was a Phd student at Princeton University when he came up with the theory, was on the right track.

 

Commenting in New Scientist magazine, Prof Andy Albrecht, a physicist at the University of California, Davis, said of the link between probability and many worlds:

 

"This work will go down as one of the most important developments in the history of science."

 

Quantum mechanics describes the strange things that happen in the subatomic world - such as the way photons and electrons behave both as particles and waves. By one interpretation, nothing at the subatomic scale can really be said to exist until it is observed.

 

Until then, particles occupy nebulous "superposition" states, in which they can have simultaneous "up" and "down" spins, or appear to be in different places at the same time.

 

According to quantum mechanics, unobserved particles are described by "wave functions" representing a set of multiple "probable" states. When an observer makes a measurement, the particle then settles down into one of these multiple options.

 

But the many worlds idea offers an alternative view. Dr Deutsch showed mathematically that the bush-like branching structure created by the universe splitting into parallel versions of itself can explain the probabilistic nature of quantum outcomes. This work was attacked but it has now had rigorous confirmation by David Wallace and Simon Saunders, also at Oxford.

 

Dr Saunders, who presented the work with Wallace at the Many Worlds at 50 conference at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada, told New Scientist:

 

"We've cleared up the obscurities and come up with a pretty clear verdict that Everett works. It's a dramatic turnaround and it means that people now have to discuss Everett seriously."

 

Dr Deutsch added that the work addresses a three-century-old problem with the idea of probability itself, described by one philosopher, Prof David Papineau, as a scandal.

 

"We didn't really know what probability means," said Dr Deutsch.

 

There's a convention that it's rational to treat it for most purposes as if we knew it was going to happen even though we actually know it need not.

 

But this does not capture the reality, not least the 0.1 per cent chance something will not happen.

 

"So," said Dr Deutsch, "the problems of probability, which were until recently considered the principal objection to the otherwise extremely elegant theory of Everett (which removes every element of mysticism and double-talk that have crept into quantum theory over the decades) have now turned into its principal selling point."

 

"

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...please, if you can, show me why the GP must be necessarily true.

 

RMT

The grandfather paradox violates causality and cannot exist, so why would you want me to say that it is true?

 

quote:

 

"

 

Now for the physics: The grandfather paradox is impossible. In fact, all paradox is impossible. The Everett-Wheeler-Graham or multiple world theory is correct. All possible quantum states, events, possibilities and outcomes are real, eventual and occurring. The chances of everything happening someplace at sometime in the superverse is 100%. (For all you scientists out there, if Schrodinger's cat had a time machine, he might not be in the box at all.)

 

Therefore, there is a worldline where you are alive and another worldline where you have gone back in time to kill your relative and the you on the new worldline won't be born but 'you' the killer is still running around there. Differences between worldlines are measured from the perspective of the time traveler in terms of divergence percentage. The higher the divergence, the more 'un-like' your destination worldline looks like compared to your worldline of origin.

 

"

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Falling into spinning black holes allows the inbound matter to quantum teleport to alternate realities as the inbound material retunes its quantum signature to that of the next reality. Rematerialization and requantization takes place at the exit mouth of the wormhole.

 

http://www.geocities.com/sunjara/rotablack.html

 

quote:

 

"

 

No one knows what's on the other side of black holes, but modern theories imply that they may bridge different areas of our universe, or even--as Stephen Hawking postulates--different universes. As John Gribbin puts it, if you had a spinning black hole at your finger-tips, "in principle it would be possible for you to travel from where you are sitting now to any place in the Universe and any time past, present, or future that you wish, if only you could find the right route to follow."

 

"

 

Artifically created spinning microsingularities could be generated and maintained, thus creating stable quantum teleportation portals to preselected alternate timelines.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The grandfather paradox violates causality and cannot exist, so why would you want me to say that it is true?

Maybe because you were using the GP in your argument above for string theory? You held up the GP as being somehow important enough to define a solution. So if it cannot exist due to causality violation, then it matters not whether string theory can "solve" the GP. It is a problem that does not exist, so it does not require a faux solution, yes?

 

RMT

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

 

"

 

Now for the physics

 

In my experience, people whose posts are invariably little more than quotes.....generally do so because they fundamentally do not themselves understand the subject matter to a level where they can argue 'off their own bat' so to speak - but instead feel the need to qualify their lack of knowledge with ' Professor XXX supports everything I say '.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and I support everything I say!!!

 

Ah ! Now would be a great time for me to post the 'Homer Simpson Theory Of Donut/Teacup Equivalence'. A topological PROOF that eating tea cups is no different to eating donuts. Then I'll start my class action lawsuit against the Simpsons makers for discrimination against tea cups. I'm sure I'll have your full support... ;)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

spacer.png

Portals are continually being created via mental nexus points in space-time. It becomes possible to fall through the cracks into alternate realities and future/past scenarios.

 

The grandfathers paradox is not ..."true", it simply cannot exist.

 

http://mkaku.org/home/?page_id=252

 

quote:

 

"

 

Interestingly enough, Stephen Hawking once opposed the idea of time travel. He even claimed he had 'empirical' evidence against it. If time travel existed, he said, then we would have been visited by tourists from the future. Since we see no tourists from the future, ergo: time travel is not possible. Because of the enormous amount of work done by theoretical physicists within the last 5 years or so, Hawking has since changed his mind, and now believes that time travel is possible (although not necessarily practical). (Furthermore, perhaps we are simply not very interesting to these tourists from the future. Anyone who can harness the power of a star would consider us to be very primitive. Imagine your friends coming across an ant hill. Would they bend down to the ants and give them trinkets, books, medicine, and power? Or would some of your friends have the strange urge to step on a few of them?)

 

In conclusion, don't turn someone away who knocks at your door one day and claims to be your future great-great-great grandchild. They may be right

 

"

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...