Pages

Thursday, May 29, 2008

The Plane of Simultaneity

This blog entry was constructed to reply to the conversation that is going on in the issue of the "Block Universe."


See:

  • Penrose and Quanglement

  • Entanglement and the New Physics




  • In the past, teleportation has only been possible with particles of light Image: Rainer Blatt



    It's useless sometimes to just lay there while these thoughts accumulate in one's mind, as one weaves together the picture that is forming, and whence it come from this unification process, and after a time, one then thinks about the abilities of mind to gather and consolidate.


    By taking advantage of quantum phenomena such as entanglement, teleportation and superposition, a quantum computer could, in principle, outperform a classical computer in certain computational tasks. Entanglement allows particles to have a much closer relationship than is possible in classical physics. For example, two photons can be entangled such that if one is horizontally polarized, the other is always vertically polarized, and vice versa, no matter how far apart they are. In quantum teleportation, complete information about the quantum state of a particle is instantaneously transferred by the sender, who is usually called Alice, to a receiver called Bob. Quantum superposition, meanwhile, allows a particle to be in two or more quantum states at the same time


    So let me begin first by saying that given this process we can connect this world line across the expanse of space, is, more or less the understanding that this is to be the means in which these new forms of communication in science are leading as we expound the future, and what it shall become in our present moments.



    See: Central theme is the Sun You can "click" on picture as well, or, use mouse to hover over image, for additional reading

    So you look at the sun, and what new ways can we can perceive and accumulating the data of what connects this "distance and time," one will be all the smarter when they realize that the results of experimental verifications are at present being given, and as such, what shall these examples serve, but to remind one that new experiences continue to bring new innovations to the forefront.

    Lightcone Projection- see mathematical basis here for the introduction of what will become the basis of determinations, the "decomposable definition" of these new forms of communication.

    The basis for these thoughts are the developing views based on the light cone. It was not my reasons alone in which such an idea was used to support an conjecture about, so, by these very reasons I thought it best to explain what such simultaneity can do as we hold these views about "distance and time" as we follow this world line across the expanse of the universe.

    The grey ellipse is moving relativistic sphere, its oblate shape due to Lorentz contraction. Colored ellipse is visual image of the sphere. Background curves are a xy-coordinates grid which is rigidly linked to the sphere. It is shown only at one moment in time.See here for reference and animations.

    Okay, so we have this event that happens in time. How are we to measure what the sun is suppose to be, if we did not have some information about the depth of perception that is needed in order to create this image for consumption?

    Such comparative views are needed that are current, and, "in experimental stages" to help us discern what it means for "Galactic Communication" which we will employ as we measure the distance of this world line.:)

    Such distances "can be elevated in my view," and such instantaneous recognitions are to be the associative values I place on how we can now see the "bulk perspective" and the graviton's condensation we can now assign to the cosmos?

    As we know from Einstein’s theory of special relativity, nothing can travel faster than c, the velocity of light in a vacuum. The speed of the light that we see generally travels with a slower velocity c/n where n is the refractive index of the medium through which we view the light (in air at sea level, n is approximately 1.00029 whereas in water n is 1.33). Highly energetic, charged particles (which are only constrained to travel slower than c) tend to radiate photons when they pass through a medium and, consequently, can suddenly find themselves in the embarrassing position of actually travelling faster than the light they produce!

    The result of this can be illustrated by considering a moving particle which emits pulses of light that expand like ripples on a pond, as shown in the Figure (right). By the time the particle is at the position indicated by the purple spot, the spherical shell of light emitted when the particle was in the blue position will have expanded to the radius indicated by the open blue circle. Likewise, the light emitted when the particle was in the green position will have expanded to the radius indicated by the open green circle, and so on. Notice that these ripples overlap with each other to form an enhanced cone of light indicated by the dotted lines. This is analogous to the idea that leads to a sonic boom when planes such as Concorde travel faster than the speed of sound in air
    See:What is Cerenkov Radiation?

    It is thusly, that such events in time produce information for us, that help us to look at the universe in new ways, and as such, information can be used to build new devices that penetrate beyond the confines we finds photons experience in their limitations.( please Phil take note of, in bold)

    7 comments:

    Phil Warnell said...

    Hi Plato,

    “Highly energetic, charged particles (which are only constrained to travel slower than c) tend to radiate photons when they pass through a medium and, consequently, can suddenly find themselves in the embarrassing position of actually travelling faster than the light they produce!”

    It cannot be that they are truly considered faster when they have not taken the same journey. Their time-like journeys cannot be compared for their space-like ones were not the same. It’s like saying that if someone who drives at 100 mph between stoplights travels slower then someone who traveled at 90 mph who encountered no lights.

    If all space was filled with water neutrinos would be considered to be faster then photons and yet it would be as a fault of observation not of truth.

    Best,

    Plato said...

    Phil:If all space was filled with water neutrinos would be considered to be faster then photons and yet it would be as a fault of observation not of truth.

    Your absolutely correct of course. IN consideration of the medium for sure.

    I bring the Plane of Simultaneity into consideration, while using the light cone, considering the nature of the neutrinos, "above" the nature of the photons.

    "Data collections of information" and using tscan is a "compiling feature" and a tedious one in regards to how we see the immediate effect of the actions of our sun. Our view of the sun. Yet, we know the process now, do we not, thanks to John Bachall.

    The photons are held into a consideration "by restraint," and wondered of course about the viability of distance and time when it comes to the same principals of what Penrose consideration into terms of the new Quanglement view.

    Certain viabilities of geometrical suppositions can be confusing when introduced, but when it comes to Sir Roger Penrose and his artistic endeavours. I am always in wonderment in the context of quanglement as well.

    I would consider the world line and Glast to be placed at such a point on that "world line." Which of course brought all kinds of strange ideas about science fiction "communication towers," placed within the universe, for the advancement of these kinds of communications.

    Phil Warnell said...
    This comment has been removed by the author.
    Phil Warnell said...

    Hi Plato,

    I see you draw reference to Penrose, one who as Bohm I have grown to respect. He more then Bohm has always formed to be more of an enigma for me and yet strangely like myself is one guided strongly by Plato, while Bohm more by the philosophy of the east. I think the difference is while Penrose feels that mathematics describes our world, its existence is on a plane separate (yet unexplainably connected) from the one it forms. On the other hand, Bohm attempts to demonstrate that mathematics as defined by configuration space is manifest of wholeness and therefore part of what we call reality. I have always thought that if circumstance and time had ever permitted the two to meet in consult and reflectance long enough, that much could have been gained.

    Best,

    Phil

    Plato said...

    aww! Another post in respnse gone.....:(

    I wanted to reference the picture of Penrose. I correlated it to Bee's Informational triangle although she has done a revision to it, I still think the cyclical interpretation of Penrose still stands.

    Maybe you could expand more on your thoughts about Bohm and Penrose from the explanation you have given?

    Plato said...

    Oh Phil,

    Here is Bee's posting called Information Triangle and subsequent links, I have attached for further reference to my position about "environmental scanning" and "the cyclical nature" of our push into understanding the nature of the universe.

    Phil Warnell said...

    Hi Plato,

    “Maybe you could expand more on your thoughts about Bohm and Penrose from the explanation you have given?”

    There is not much to say beyond that I perceive that they are both describing the same truth of reality from different perspectives. That in some ways can be analogous to the old tale of the blind men describing the elephant and how it was what was presented to them which formed to be their reality.

    With Penrose you have the unaltered Platonian view that mathematics while forming the bases for all, is not part of the world or rather on a separate plane.

    With Bohm you have the action of particles, dictated by the nature and subsequent action of an unseen and undetected substance that forms to be what is called the wave. This substance while invisible to direct detection, still can be insisted to be real as revealed by the action of the particles which it impart such. Also, this combination of action of substance and potential which appear to be separate are essentially whole in the sum total of consideration (configuration space).


    From my way of looking at it they both describe the same truth from simply different perspectives, resultant of different experience and knowledge. What they still hold in common however is science and that if they ever had met to share and considers the others experience and knowledge, this might have formed the bridge that could have expanded it further.

    Best,

    Phil