Holographic Paradigm
-
Peace Neo,
what you're referring to is the Quantum Entanglement phenomenon
Are you referring to Aspect's findings?
Einstein predicted it long before 1982
I was always under the impression that Einstein theorized nothing could move faster than the speed of light. In any case, if he predicted it, then that's just another reason to admire the guy.
it doesn't in any shape or form imply that the universe is 'subjective'.
As I mentioned to enquirer, the universe viewed in a reality perspective is certainly objective, ie, the effects of gravity and such. But what these theories imply is in relation to the fabric of the universe. If one can see that subatomic particles remain in instantaneous harmony despite tremendous distance, this implies an interconnection. If the universe is interconnected, then seperation is an illusion, and thus, so is objectivity.
It's my understanding that objectivity is the realm of the mind, of tangible things and happenings. The deeper we delve into the "self", the closer we get to the Source, which is one. There isn't more than one "God's way".
Peace,
Tay -
Peace enquirer,
Peace Tay. FANTASTIC thread...Yourself and lote-tree at your very best...
yay
I think we should keep this thread going...
It's aliiiiive!
One criticism i have of humanism/secularism is that it is sometimes too quick to discount/not give due weight to life after death,nde,esp etc,etc...
I really can't blame science for not giving much thought to what it can't measure. Some of this stuff has been out of the realm of science for so long, it's difficult open the doors back up. What's fascinating to me is that these doors are opening, and what they're finding is the same stuff the spiritual people have been saying all along.
I myself am still researching these topics...NDEs','previous lives',reincarnation,time travel etc.. are fascinating topics...
I think we can take knowledge of the past (especially hinduism and buddhism.) along with science (especially 'unorthodox' science.) our personal experiences,and our imagination/intuition to try to unravel these 'mysteries'....Absolutely. I really recommend picking up this book. It will blow you away bro.
I cannot currently believe that we just 'finish' at death...I believe life is all about evolving to higher levels of conciousness,or going to lower levels of conciousness.( no bad thing,we could be an amoeba in the next life... .)
Yeah, that's where that inner compass comes in. Many or most of us have this innate feeling of something bigger, something more than what our 5 senses reveal.
...maybe we can even just stay reasonably constant with this current 'level' of conciousness of ours...?
Well, as I see it, the soul remains a constant. The mind is what evolves or regresses.
Remeber when we were children?.....That same conciousness has now evolved to an adult(hopefully .), with different experiences,and outlooks,but still i can remember and feel the similiarity of my conciousness to what it was when i was a child....Hope you understand that last sentence....Sometimes hard to write down what you actually mean...
I understand completely. Your soul has not changed, only your mind has. When you trigger the same feelings that you did when you were a child, you will feel the same way. In a sense, we were closer to God when we had less stuff in our minds. The trick is to keep in touch with the soul so that the mind can grow in harmony with God. This way, the mind builds with wisdom and not just knowledge.
Take care,and peace... ps;bring back lote-tree and peaceful-muslim...
If I had that kind of power I would. Unfortunately, all I can do is hope that the changing climate of the forum will call them back.
Peace,
tay -
Peace,
I have read the book, i will give more titles when i get home, plus if you want, i can send some articles and professional scriptures i have on my pc. PM your mail if you want them...
-
Einstein said no information can be sent through space faster than the speed of light in a vacuum, so Quantum Entanglement does not violate any of Einstein's laws since you can't send or receive information using the QE phenomneon.
But what these theories imply is in relation to the fabric of the universe. If one can see that subatomic particles remain in instantaneous harmony despite tremendous distance, this implies an interconnection. If the universe is interconnected, then seperation is an illusion, and thus, so is objectivity.
Seperation still exists; the 'interconnection' of subatomic particles only exist until decoherence takes place.
-
Peace Neo,
Forgive me, as this stuff is fairly new to me. My understanding of Aspect's research is that subatomic particle A and subatomic particle B reacted simulataneously no matter how far apart they were. Doesn't this imply communication faster than the speed of light?
Seperation still exists; the 'interconnection' of subatomic particles only exist until decoherence takes place.
When does "decoherence" take place?
Peace,
Tay -
Paticles A and B are entangled, therefore any change made to A will appear in B as well. This may seem 'faster-than-light' communication but it's not because when we measure B we unwittingly change its value, so no information is gained by the aforementioned entangled process.
Decoherence basically takes place everytime a subatomic particle has to react with another subatomic particle. This is what turns the bizzare world of the quantum into the more recognizable classical physics.
-
Paticles A and B are entangled, therefore any change made to A will appear in B as well. This may seem 'faster-than-light' communication but it's not because when we measure B we unwittingly change its value, so no information is gained by the aforementioned entangled process.
Decoherence basically takes place everytime a subatomic particle has to react with another subatomic particle. This is what turns the bizzare world of the quantum into the more recognizable classical physics.
Peace,
I don't agree totaly with that is not faster then the speed of light as i have a lot records that do show it is faster then the speed of light. This is because in the Quantum Vacuum there are no 'empty' spaces, everything is directly connected, so it doesn't have to travel. Because of this it can go faster then the speed of light..
Peace
-
-
Just cause it's 'connected' it doesn't have to travel? So if city A and city B were connected by a train track, one would not need to travel between the two?
And no, there are PLENTY of empty spaces, even in the quantum world. The universe is mostly empty.
Peace neo,
If the universe is mostly empty, then how are the gravitational or the magnetic fields supported, or propagated in "empty" space? There should be none in "empty space".
Do the "ether" or "dark matter" tell you something?
-
What do you mean how are the "gravitational fields supported"? Gravitaiton is caused by the distortion of the spacetime geometry due to mass and is a very long-range force; I don't see how that has any bearing on the universe being mostly empty (as in, mostly devoid of mass). All it implies is that the gravitational force is 'weak'.
Neither Dark energy/matter nor Ether implies that everything is 'connected' and there's no spatial seperation. Spatial seperation is inherent in having a geometric shape, so anything that has mass exhibits 'spatial seperation'. Even if there was an Ether (which I think there is) it wouldn't mean that I am you and you are me and I'm both in London and New Zealand at the same time.
-
Peace Neo,
You stated
Paticles A and B are entangled, therefore any change made to A will appear in B as well. This may seem 'faster-than-light' communication but it's not because when we measure B we unwittingly change its value, so no information is gained by the aforementioned entangled process.
I don't understand. When you measure "b", is this after "a", and what value is it changing? An analogy would be wonderful!
Decoherence basically takes place everytime a subatomic particle has to react with another subatomic particle. This is what turns the bizzare world of the quantum into the more recognizable classical physics.
When you say "has to react to...", what does this mean in layman's terms?
Thanks for your patience.
Peace,
Tay -
Particles A and B are only entangled (i.e. exhibit 'faster-than-light' communication) up until they are measured/observed. In the quantum world, measuring/observing a subatomic particle irrevocably changes its state, thus making it impossible to discern its previous state. This is basically the Quantum Uncertainty Principle. So no information can be passed using QE.
As an example, think of an entangled pair A and B. A and B thus have identical states (for example "up", but we don't know for sure). By chance A and B get seperated but they both still retain their initial entangled state (thanks to QE). However, when we try to measure B to see if A changed its state (since their states mirror each other) from "up" to "down", we would set the Quantum Uncertainty Principle to motion and so B's previous A-entangled state could have been either "up", or "down", or a mix of both - therefore making it impossible to discern the state of A. No information is passed, Special Relativity prevails.
Hope that makes things clearer. Quantum Mechanics is very counter-intuitive so it's very hard to give analogies, so sorry if all that was a bit WTFish.
About decoherence "react" was a poor choice of word. I should have said "interact". Basically, subatomic particles are only in wave form until they interact with other subatomic particle(s), after which they take on the more familiar particle form.
Edited for clarity.
-
Actually, here's a better 'analogy'.
Peter and John are brothers. When they are alone and only when they are alone Peter does whatever John does no matter where in town they are; they just happen to know what each other are doing and therefore mimic the other. One day John gets kidnapped. Their parents, knowing their strange mimicking habits, comes up with a clever idea to try and figure out what's happening with John by making Peter do something (like call home for help). Only problem is, they could never find out what John was doing because Peter and John only mimic each other in isolation.
Their plan fails and John dies.
-
LOL rotfl
Thanks for the analogies Neo. I do have a better understanding now. What I don't get is why there was such excitement about Aspect's research, if the subatomic particles have to be isolated in order to maintain their harmony. Was it overblown or am I missing something?
Also, this may be a stupid question, but how the hell does someone "observe" sub-atomic particles? In watching "What the Bleep Do We Know", all the quantum physicists said that electrons only appear when we "observe" them, and in that, we don't really observe the electron, but where the electron should be. They said the electrons sort of pop in and out of existence.
Can you explain that?
Thanks again.
Peace,
Tay -
Peace neo,
What I meant in my previous post is on what medium (if it need any)does the gravitational force propagate? Same for the magnetic force?
Like when you take a permanent magnet and a piece of iron, the iron is submitted to a magnetic force exerced by the magnet, but what is the medium to propagate that force? This force exists even if the magnet is in "vaccum".
--
-
Peace,
It is based on the Quantum vacuum. The lowest form of energy-level. There is no real vacuum. a nothingness. I will post something later to explain this.
-
Tay,
No worries about the analogy - they weren't that good anyway. The reason that experiment was exciting was because it verified Einstein's prediction of Quantum Entanglement. The flip-side of that is that Einstein actually tried to use the idea of entanglement to disprove quantum mechanics (playing the 'absurdity' card), because he hated the idea of the universe being based on probabilities.
We observe subatomic particles through electron microscopes/microscopes/x-ray microscopes. No matter which instrument we use, what it basically entails is probing the subatomic particle in question with our observant particle (electron, photon, xray, et al) so we can 'tell what's going on' from the rebounding observant particle. Basically, it's like trying to figure out that the 8 ball is round by hitting it with the white ball. This is pretty much the same way our eyes work - photons emitted from an object travels towards our retina, after which we can 'see' the object and discern the properties of the object from the resulting reaction in the retina. Except on a much smaller scale.
"What The Bleep Do We Know" is a very misleading movie; the part of it which is scientific is composed of out-of-context interviews and the rest is just cultish/mystic extreme interpretation of Quantum Theory with no bearing on reality. The electrons always 'exist'; before observation it exists as a wave-form, after observation it exists as a particle.
Someone,
Arnoldyasin's answer is right I think, although it's a conundrum because quantum vacuum is very jittery and light just seems to travel straight past it. The existence of the Ether right now is a very real possibility though; especially the Higg's field, which may finally explain why particles have mass.
-
Peace Neo,
I hope you didn't take offense, because that wasn't my intention with the laughing emoticon ---> rotfl
Actually, your delivery of the analogy was excellent. I just thought it was funny that "John" died in the end.The electrons always 'exist'; before observation it exists as a wave-form, after observation it exists as a particle.
So, the mere act of observation changes the substance of the electron? You're right, man, this quantum stuff is counter-intuitive.
Peace,
Tay