But two galaxies can interact by colliding and they don't collapse, they effectively merge! — universeness

Haha, yes! Of course. I meant their wavefunctions. The wavefunctions of both galaxies interact with other galaxies and will result in two collapsing wavefunctions of galaxies that merge. If the two galaxies were the only ones in an infinite flat space then in a very long time both galaxies would diffuse in space, like the wavefunction of a single non-interacting particle spreads.

I think the 'event' label is a perfectly reasonable/logical one from the standpoint of natural human perception. — universeness

I think so to. That's why in physics it's a bit strange. An event is something that happens, a happening. A glass can't break at a point in time or space.

get that an interaction between two electrons involves the exchange of a virtual photon from one to the other — universeness

Photons are not exchanged. An electron doesn't emit or absorb photons. It couples to a virtual photon. On their own (so without charged particles) such photons are present through all of space (quantum bubbles). Charged Dirac fields couple to them, in accordance with the Hamiltonian (or Lagrangian) and charges. So it depends which energies and momenta of the virtual photons are needed (they have them all and independently, and give what the asymptotic conditions require).

What do you mean by 'Point'? a dimensionless point which has coordinates only or a tiny 'packet' or 'concentration of mass or energy?
So the charge/spin direction causes a disturbance in the 'virtual field' (why is the field virtual rather than real?) and the result is that the particle gets accelerated away? Am I understanding this correctly, so far? — universeness

A 0d point. Which causes misery. The field is virtual as opposed to real. Virtual fields have independent p and E. In a sense, a real particle is a virtual particle with p and E depending on each other and with a direction in time.

Are you saying that in your opinion, the structure and workings of the Universe are knowable, even though we are trying to discover such, as component parts, inside the universe we are trying to understand? Do we have to open all the Schrodinger style boxes and do all the measurements? — universeness

Everything in the universe that interacts collapses, if we measure or not. All structural identities stem from interactions. When we measure or when we don't.

Nope, sorry I don't think I understand this. Are you simply saying the cat is alive (spin up state) or dead (spin down state) Does spin up mean spin faster and spin down means spin slower? or — universeness

No. I mean the direction of spin. It can be up and down. If they are in superposition there is no connection with a dead or alive cat. As long as the cat is in the cage it doesn't care about us or the superposition. Only when a spin up or down is measured (projected on an eigenstate) the cat will notice

He invented the cloudbuster and orgone accumulator. He was regarded seen as dangerous communist in the McCarthy witchhunting. He talked openly about sex and though a life energy pervades space (orgone derived from organism and orgasm). He accumulated this energy and put it to use in cancer treatment and a rainmachine. What about that? Great! He wasn't acknowledged by fellow scientists who made up everything to thwart him. He was called to justice for trespassing his instruments. Didn't show up and got 2 years for contempt of court. His books were burnt and his equipment destroyed.



In the basic fundamental taxonomy of Rovelli time does not exist. But the clock ticks even at the fundamental level. The Dirac and Yang-Mills fields propagate and all real fields are just virtual fields asymmetric in time. What if space itself is a quantum field (which becomes visible at Planck scale)? What does that mean? It's not a field in space like an electron field represents particle paths. It's a field of that which underlies the continuum of paths in, for example, Dirac fields. Does it mean space is not continuous? A quantum field of space(time) does not contain particles, like an electron field excitation contains many electron paths. What kinds of paths are meant if an excitation of a space quantum field is considered? What is the equivalent of an electron field excitation (which is just a time-extended virtual particle fluctuation)? What is a spacetime field excitation (or fluctuation)? How does mass/energy couple to the space(time) curvature virtual field (like electrons to virtual photon field)? How does a virtual graviton field make up space?

Was I really born? Did I really woke up? Did I really take a breath one second ago? Did I really blink my eye a millisecond ago? Do I even really exist? These questions you end up with when not believing las Thursday didn't happen. Only in the creation myth this makes sense. The creation myth doesn't make sense though.

I will send him a letter of complaint if he does not and I hope anyone reading this thread will do the same. United, people have the power — universeness

Only like this changes can be made! :100:

From "We Are Our Brain" (Swaab):

Everything we think, do and refrain from doing is determined by our brain. From religion to sexuality, it shapes our potential, our desires and our characters. Taking us through every stage in our lives, from the womb to falling in love to old age, Dick Swaab shows that we don't just have brains: we are our brains.

This is nonsense, in the sense that it makes no sense. To Swaab it obviously does as he loves his brain.

This offers clarification. Maybe we are our body then.

Just send a message! I'm curious what happens now...

Wilhelm Reich was something else! His books got burned... In modern day!

A system which is capable of successful self-diagnosis and self-maintenance would have to know how all of its parts worked individually and as sub-systems and as a whole system. If this can be achieved electronically then it must be possible in the case of the universe. — universeness

I might disagree with you about the gods issue, but here I agree! If sub-systems collapse, I think the whole collapses. What is the whole though? If the spin inside the Schrödinger cat cage is measured the superimposed spin state is projected on one of the two states, up and down. Even for the observer observing the combined cat-observer state.

So it's not charges causing a potential energy field. Photons are not emitted or absorbed. The charges couple to this omnipresent virtual field.

If they are not careful, they will need a lot more Police because they will need to arrest me too and as time goes on, too many others for them to handle. — universeness

:strong:

I hope he treats you well and by doing so he will give the rest of us confidence that cosmologists such as him are not members of an aloof, exclusive group who are unapproachable by the majority of us. — universeness

That's exactly the problem of a lot of them. They think they possess a special kind of knowledge knowable to an elite group only and they try everything to keep up that image. They owe their money, power, reputation, etc. to it. Everything threatening it... Bang! I can imagine how Galilei felt back then. He had no proof either. Exactly what is told to me 1001 times. Every arguments is used... No proof doesn't mean a thing though. For Galilei it didn't.

I think I understand your words but then how do particles 'interact.' Perhaps ↪EugeneW can explain to me what you mean more clearly. I often turn to him, regarding cosmology stuff that I dont fully grasp. — universeness

It's easy and difficult at the same time. There is a field of virtual particles in empty space. If a charged particle moves through space it couples to this field. How can they couple if they are point? Simply because they are no points. Their coupling to this field cause that field around them to change. Same for other particles. This means that if a particle enters a region of space where that virtual field is disturbed by another charge (say both charges are electrical, which couple to virtual photons only), it will not move the same as before (unchanging velocity, apart from the "Zitterbewegung"). It's accelerated because of the potential created by the other charge (which actually is a so-called virtual photon condensate). These interactions happen in measurements, and take place continuously to maintain individuality of the parts. Bosons though don't have individuality when in groups.

They had little interest/conception/concern about what the unimportant/starving/abused mass of the French peasantry thought about them. The same applies to all historical aristocracies. Such an aloof attitude proved to be their biggest mistake. — universeness

This holds for modern capitalists even more. There is an absolutely disgusting TV show where the rich take the place of the poor and vice-versa. For a week or month (of course behind the scenes they consume...). When one family ended a month in poverty, the father said, when his Lamborghini arrived: "Ah, back in our own world!" Man, I could kick him in the ass, or slap him on his solarium-browned face! I would be arrested by the police. The rich capitalists have a huge machine behind them to guard property and keep people from taking from them.

Im gonna ask questions on Carroll's podcast! Ill let you know the answers.

I was just listening to him! In his interview with Rovelli! About the quantum nature of spacetime. I can relate to Rovelli. An iconoclast. I think I should send something to him too. I dont agree with him though. What causes space curvature? Einstein doesn't have an answer, nor Rovelli.

Non-existence is their one and only defense! — universeness

They're just laughing at us!

I would send to 'all of them' and I would pester until they responded, even to just get me off their back.
Sometimes you have to be stubborn in your determination to gain an adequate response.
It is of course vital to always stay within the law. — universeness

Yeah, sounds like a good idea! The net is ideal for that. How did they do that 150 years ago? 50 years ago even. Took a lot longer. Knowledge is growing exponentially because of that and new ideas prosper... when considered. Maybe it's best to be just satisfied with what I know, but people wanna share. I have the story written in prose almost, with as little math as possible. Somehow math seems to turn people off.

Jesus just had a Jesus complex!

Why did they create a world with so much pain? I really don't know.

I have send stuff to Tamara Davis. She seemed open minded. No reply. Ive send stuff to Verlinde. No reply. Hope they don't run with my idea! No, I wouldn't care. But why they don't reply? On forums you get banned or no rational or constructive arguments are given. Even a "beyond the standard model" rejects a model and deletes the contribution. Is one afraid of preons? I had a short email conversation with Harari and he said he didn't know it to be a good idea to consider preons massless.

The I that us subject of all of those is still nevertheless one. None of those sensations or experiences arises in the second person. — Wayfarer

I could say though: EugeneW is typing this message to you. Is it the unity of the I? Then there is no unified I.

JC Superstar! Where he walks almost naked through the streets? Great song!

Im working on it, but usually you get banned for these ideas because they go against the status quo and threaten the standard (model). I have experienced this on many forums of physics. But people don't even wanna think about it or criticize it constructively. Even just stating quarks and leptons are composite gives frowns only. There was one guy on a physics site with whom I had a good chat, but in the end he stated (quite irrationally) that they are just fundamental. He mentioned the mass paradox but that holds for massive preons only. And when reason fails, the irrational surfaces. There are only things to be gained with this theory. It only explains. Quark and lepton mass, mass generation, matter/antimatter asymmetry (there isn't one, and this confuses people because it seems so obvious, and in a sense there is), it explains the weak force, etcetera. Somehow people, peers or not, just wanna stay blind to it. Only irrational reactions. You think it gets peer reviewed? No way. Well I got a mathematical model now for a particle. I asked on a math forum, and as everything it's quite simple when you know it. The quantum gravity problem is solved by letting the virtual graviton field interact with space (so the virtual condensate is not one in flat space, and there is no foam on the smallest scales). I have an idea though for the quark or lepton masses to calculate. It's similar to calculating proton mass from quarks interacting. But quarks replaced by preons. The DIMP theory is easily and rationally debunked. I haven't seen one rational argument though against mine. Only underbelly reactions.

Thanx for the link! I still don't understand the unity they talk about. Is it the mind not having parts? I read:

Descartes then asserts that if the mind is not made of parts, it cannot be made of matter because anything material has parts. He adds that this by itself would be enough to prove dualism, had he not already proven it elsewhere. Notice where it is that I cannot distinguish any parts. It is in “myself inasmuch as I am only a thinking thing” (ibid.); that is, in myself as a whole—which requires unified consciousness of myself as a whole. The claim is that this subject, the target of this unified consciousness, is not a composite of parts.

Then I disagree. The mind is just as composite as the parts in the world. Left I hear sounds, I see my moving fingers, feel burning in my right eye, direct attention to my right foot, hear a voice outside, and smell the coffee in front of me. Right now music sounds. If I would put on headphones I even hear it inside my skull, a proof that it originates in my brain (outside sounds involve the body). The Cartesian argument doesn't hold. Though mind is not matter. But this is no proof of that.

When Russia bombed Aleppo it was tolerated. It was fighting IS. Now the great system of western free democracy is fought against. He attacks our modern system of slavery and the possessing capitalist class, holding both hemispheres in a firm grip. A system propagating endless wars, poverty, cultural destruction, and stabbing nature in the back. Monitoring property, while keeping out poverty and economic refugees. But refugees from Ukrain, hey they're welcome! Our system is great and caring! Give them shelter right away! What hypocrit propaganda talk! And the poor homeless got this winter no place to sleep. Thousand Ukrain women crying on TV. Never saw so many crying women on TV yet (or men, for that matter). We can show how good we are by donating goods or shelter. Of course it's f*****g s**t if there is a threat of war and your house can get a bomb on it. But Putin in power, Biden in power, or that French piece of smelly cheese in power, we are fucked by the system, be it chosen "freely" in elections or forced on you (free to choose by whom you get fucked, while in Russia you just get fucked). All that glorification of the free western democracy... no... Iraq was brought live during breakfast. Great war for freedom. There is not one image shown now. Bad war. Bad Putin. Does he wanna join the Tsars? Does he want to join Stalin in hell, walhalla, or the elysian fields? As usual, the common people are fucked. What's the difference between living your life in Ukrain or Russia? People are warned before bombing. By the whistling of the bombs. I have read that Afro-Ukrainians are discriminated when fleeing. Ultra-right nationalists help the Ukrain army. Taking advantage of the situation, showing how much they care for the (Kaukasian) people. The new enemy. Russians. Russian musea close. IKEA, Nike, McDonald's, and other corporations withdraw, afraid of profits going down by boycot. What mass hysteria. Russian folks attacked. Ukrainian people attacked.
How civilized we are! All conflict should be resolved with words. We shouldn't involve in fighting. Yet there are tons of weapons. Even laws of war...

Putin:
мама возьми мою грудь
пойдем домой!
mama voz'mi moyu grud'
poydem domoy!

I'm curious about the video! What did you upload? I can't see it... :smile:

Is last Thursdayism about time dilation as that the pace of time varies, or is it about lets say a God creating everything within a weeks time giving the impression that things have been around longer? Like the bible saying humans haven't existed longer than 3,000 years and yet there is evidence of human history alone for 10,000 years? — TiredThinker

It's about God who created all 6000 years ago. Including all "fossil" memories. Who calls himself "God"...? Dumb name! "God! Dinner's ready!" I would change my name! In Fred maybe...

But science has not closed all the gaps yet as unanswered questions remain. — universeness

I think I have. I know what space and time are, their basic constituents, the forces between them, the nature of dark matter and dark energy, etc. What more is there to know?)

And this is another way of deflating the Hard Problem. What is good for the givenness - the unconditionedness - of the experience of Mach bands is good for the experience of seeing red. — apokrisis

The conscious experience of color, shape, motion, velocity (some people can see motion while seeing black only), pain, sound, smell, love, hate, etc. can be described by neural structured currents (that's all what's going on), but not explained.

I think it would be a greater problem if there wasn't binding. Not sure about what unity you talk though.

Act' makes it sound like some action or intent is required, and 'act of observation' makes it sound like a human is required to be involved in the act. — noAxioms

In standard QM this is actually the case.

An event in physics is not actually an event. It's the time and position of a particle. If particles were devoid of charge all individualities of partìcles would be lost and the universe would spread out into a uniform mass in which nothing could be defined or have outlines. All would be one. When particles interact, by their charges coupling to the omnipresent field of virtual particles, their evolving wavefunctions (which are, loosely speaking, the temporal cross sections of quantum fields) collapse every time upon an interaction. The standard view doesn't speak of collapse but the objective collapse approach does.

So particles tract characteristics and identity because a relation with other particles. Their condensations in spacetime are relational.

I don't see why consciousness couldn't be explained. — Daemon

Because already the interaction and motion of particles can't be explained. Consciousness can be described only.

What's the pivotal evidence that all of the universe is non-mathematical, not just some of it? — ucarr

I think the evidence is that we don't see perfect mathematical structures. Plato delegated them to a mathematical extramundane world, from where they are projected as shadows, I think we project math from the mind to the physical world and in some situations, when asked in mathematical language, the physical world answer in a back mathematically, but in most cases she doesn't have an answer.

To every process in the physical world, a corresponding parallel process of currents running on the neural network can be found. There are more possible pathways to run on than there are processes in the physical world so the brain can accomodate all. You can walk around in the world while it's projected onto the brain, which makes it come alive. It's a continue process, which started already in the womb so you're thrown into the world kind of prepared.

That's because it can't be explained. Described at most.

But that doesn't explain how consciousness arises, any more than saying "it's all particles" — Daemon

Maybe that's because we don't know the nature of particles. They contain charges by means of which the interact, by coupling to the glue fields between them.

The connections between neurons" doesn't explain how we have unified subjective experience — Daemon

Off course not the individual strengths. The currents on a single pathway run coupled to other paths. All these parallel currents constitute an experience of a whole (their content, that is; not the material currents). There is not one of these ion peaks traveling alone. If they all would travel independently, it would be a mess. A single neuron can be involved in many memories. How is morality materialized in ion currents on neurons and the body (and felt in their content)? I imagine taking away food from a poor person. The image of the food and me taking it runs around on the neurons, which makes me say not to do it.Empathy. Dunno how this can be seen or translated in ion currents. It's complicated... :smile:

If science has closed all gaps, what else can we conclude?

That's for the god(s) to decide, not my problem! — universeness

Then maybe a voice in our head is proof.