[deleted]
Yes, I'm confident CIG Theory is correct.
Yes, I'm confident CIG Theory is correct.
Are you confident that CIG Theory is correct?
I like that
The terms 'past' and 'future' refer to configurations of the universe which we can visualize in our imaginations and about which we can speculate and hypothesize, but which have no objective reality for those of us who are living in the present. Our empirical observations lead us to conclude that the 'past' consists of those configurations of the universe which once had an objective reality, i.e., which once actually existed. These past configurations subsequently have evolved, through physical displacements of the various bits and pieces which make up the universe -- relative to one another -- into the 'present' configuration, portions of which we can perceive with our senses. And we infer that this configuration will evolve into yet others which we imagine as the 'future.'
We can only engage in educated speculation about what sorts of things will or will not be included in future configurations of the universe. By understanding the laws of physics, we can predict, or extrapolate, more or less accurately, the likely future configurations of at least some gross, observable features of the universe, up to a point, but we observe no empirical evidence of the objective reality of these predicted configurations. We find no 'fossilized remains' of the future as we do of the past, the reason being that the future, unlike the past, has never existed.
Believing in retrocausality in essence means believing that configurations of the universe which have never existed can affect configurations of the universe which *have* existed. This is simply magical thinking. Good luck with that.
jcns
My posted paper - " From Absurd to Elegant Universe" and my book - "The Hidden Factor: An Approach for Resolving Paradoxes of Science, cosmology, and Universal Reality" show that the observations of the universe and galactic expansion can be predicted without an absolute cosmic time and without any past, present, or future evolution of the universe. The fundamental assumption of an absolute Cosmic Time or clock (and hence, past, present, and future) is shown to be WRONG since it does not support the universe and galactic observations and leads to unexplainable paradoxes and inconsistencies. The current operational (Newtonian) definition of an absolute time and space is only good enough for the worldly and solar system related physical phenomena and not valid at the universe scale. The paper also demonstrates that the operational worldly definition of time can reveal only 4% (material-only) reality and unable to explain the majority 96% (dark energy and dark matter) of the universal reality. The classical time is the time that is experienced in the Newtonian frame (V much smaller than C) and no-time or fully dilated time is observed in the relativistic frame of a light photon (V=C). In between these two states, there are infinite number of intermediate clocks and times (V between 0 and C). Moreover there is no synchronicity among these clocks, hence any moment (past, present, or future) of time in one clock does not have any correlation or relevance to a moment in any other clock or frame of reference.
In summary, past, present, and future moments (even though experienced as a stubborn reality in the classical world), and hence "Retrocausality", have no meaning at all from a universal point of view. Retrocausality seem to represent a misguided concept based on Newtonian or classical misinterpretations of the quantum observations (during slit experiments) occurring in a dominantly dilated space-time (V close to C). While the observer and test setup are classical, the phenomenon being observed is primarily relativistic. This leads to the common misinterpretations that are based on the incorrect assumption of the fixed Newtonian space and time for the relativistic quantum phenomenon being observed. Numerous successes of the widely accepted theories - quantum mechanics and general relativity, against experiments limited to the worldly and solar system have blinded us to misapply or impose an absolute operational time on all observations causing the current paradoxes of physics and leading to an absurd universe.
Sincerely,
Avtar Singh
Very interesting article/video. The "map" quote by Eddington is really neat, almost as if Einstein was leaving something "out of the future"?
The "map" of course, is only a map if there is a red X upon it? From the red X, one can locate other red X's relative to one another, which actually creates the map itself.
Think about it,if the "map" is the big bang, then the X is Earth, here and now, relative to the big bang. Remove the X and replace it with another X, any location on the map will do, then this X will have its own distinct "now", relative to, only the removed X, because the removed X is actually paramount to all other X'S, we are not relative to any other big bang but our own?
From the Earth "now", to the instant of the big bang, there is a lot of red X's, from this text I am writing on this computer, the big bang has literally occured just seconds ago?
I expect that you will realize that all this talk of the past affecting the future, or whatever, are acts of desperation compared to a simple explanation that was considered but prematurely discarded long ago. It is the loading theory (LT). Take for example the double slit experiment with light; it is easy to understand with LT. Light is a wave. There are no photons. Emission is sudden at hf but thereafter spreads classically. Absorption is continuous, so the wave energy can load up to threshold hf and then show a particle-like reaction due to another emitted hf. LT is Planck's second theory of 1911.
We were taught in our textbooks that LT, also known as the accumulation hypothesis, was not at play; they misrepresented the experimental data. Out textbooks describe "the element of time in the photoelectric effect" (experiment by E O Lawrence and Beams). The argument convinced physicists LT was wrong, but they compared a minimum loading time with a total loading time. No fair. They ignored the pre-loaded state, which can react suddenly. LT can work easily for light.
The hard part is understanding LT with the charge-wave (electrons) and element-waves (atoms). I developed LT and applied it theoretically to key experiments. The situation is so shocking that I had to develop, perform, and describe in detail the crucial experimental test of QM, for the reader to take LT seriously. The new experiments support LT for both light and atoms. These are the only experiments that challenge a strong prediction of Quantum Mechanics, and reveal the flaw of QM. Please see essay: A Challenge to Quantized Absorption by Experiment and Theory
Thank you; Eric Reiter, August 2012
I suspect that most physicists still struggle with the idea that time isn't fundamental. In addition to 'letting go' of the concepts of flow and direction of 'time' and the concept of 'now' as fundamental physical properties of reality -- we also need to remember that these appear to be very real emergent properties.
I suspect most would agree that consciences - and therefore free will - are also emergent properties. Following Kauffman's lead (Re-inventing the Sacred), emergent properties -- derived from but more than the sum of the parts of the underlying substrates -- are just as 'real' as the components of the substrate. Free will is only threatened if we assume some simplistic mechanistic mapping from day to day reality to the underling physical substrate -- and all the recent work in Complex Adaptive Systems tells us not to do this.
I'm very intrigued by Barbour's approach, and see Huw Price's T-symmetry arguments as stepping stones in this direction. But thanks to Kauffman my free will is just fine with that ;)
Taking a risk here since I am reading essays and haven't read the article in question:
"...emergent properties -- derived from but more than the sum of the parts of the underlying substrates -- are just as 'real' as the components of the substrate. "
I would say more real than its components. The supposed emergent property is pointing us back to our lack of sufficient knowledge of its supposed components.
Nothing emerges without justification. Gifts are from the God's. They should be intolerable in physics. The shortcut of 'emergent properties' taken by theoretical physicists is added to a line of previous shortcuts that have become so ingrained that they are now foundational shortcuts passed off as foundational facts. My definition of shortcut is for the theorist to give a name to an unsubstantiated property supposedly responsible for making it unnecessary to admit the lack of explanation for cause. That is what I think.
James
Hello! My latest paper answers Eddington's Challenge, while referencing Huw Price's work!
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1429
MDT's dx4/dt=ic Triumphs Over the Wrong Physical Assumption that Time is a Dimension,Unfreezing Time and Answering Godel's, Eddington's et al.'s Challenge, Providing a Mechanism for Emergent Change, Relativity, Nonlocality, Entanglement, and Time's Arrows and Asymmetries
by Dr. Elliot McGucken
From the paper:
"Something must be added to the geometrical conceptions comprised in Minkowski's world before it becomes a complete picture of the world as we know it." -Sir Arthur Eddington calling for dx4/dt=ic
Huw Price notes that "Eddington's Challenge" to apprehend a physical mechanism for time and its arrows (which MDT provides!) has been ignored, writing:
By the end of the nineteenth century, on the shoulders of Maxwell, Boltzmann and many lesser giants, physics had realized that there is a deep puzzle behind the familiar phenomena described by the new science of thermodynamics. On the one hand, many such phenomena show a striking temporal bias. They are common in one temporal orientation, but rare or non-existent in reverse. On the other hand, the underlying laws of mechanics show no such temporal preference. If they allow a process in one direction, they also allow its temporal mirror image. Hence the puzzle: if the laws are so even-handed, why are the phenomema themselves so one-sided? What has happened to this puzzle since the 1890s? I suspect that many contemporary physicists regard it as a dead issue, long since laid to rest.
MDT, whose profound, far-reaching simplicity is illustrated in FIG. 1, resurrects and resolves the Giants' primal concerns regarding time while replacing Einstein's two postulates of relativity with a more fundamental maxim dx4/dt=ic and formulation: "Suppose a universe with four dimensions wherein the fourth dimension is expanding at c relative to the three spatial dimensions dx4/dt=ic: ergo relativity ." MDT provides a physical model for quantum nonlocality, entanglement, all of time's arrows and asymmetries , including the radiative and entropic arrows of time first noted by Maxwell, Boltzman, et. al, intuitively seen in FIG. 1 and my previous papers which may be viewed at http://herosjourneyphysics.wordpress.com.
The term "Time's Arrow" makes its first appearance in Eddington's work , where he reflects that "the geometrical conceptions comprised in Minkowski's world" are incomplete:
Time's Arrow. The great thing about time is that it goes on. But this is an aspect of it which the physicist sometimes seems inclined to neglect. In the four-dimensional world . . . the events past and future lie spread out before us as in a map. The events are there in their proper spatial and temporal relation; but there is no indication that they undergo what has been described as the formality of "taking place" . . . We see in the map the path from past to future or from future to past ; but there is no signboard to indicate that it is a one-way street. Something must be added to the geometrical conceptions comprised in Minkowski's world before it becomes a complete picture of the world as we know it.
MDT's dx4/dt=ic is that something that "must be added to the geometrical conceptions comprised in Minkowski's world before it becomes a complete picture of the world as we know it." MDT provides time's "one-way" street via Minkowski's very own x4=ict, which physically means that dx4/dt=ic, or the fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions. MDT adds motion to the geometrical conceptions comprised in Minkowski's world, while also replacing the mathematical construct of a static 4D block universe with a 3D universe in which the fourth dimension manifests itself as a spherically-symmetric wavefront expanding at c (FIG. 1). The expansion of the fourth dimension dictates all of Time's Arrows as I show in a previous paper , from the radiative arrow, to the thermodynamic arrow, to the quantum arrow as the expansion of the fourth dimension provides the nonlocality that the photon surfs, until it is measured or the expanding wavefront collapses as the photon is absorbed in a photographic plate, darkening a grain of film.
Read the full paper here:
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1429
More papers on MDT--the source of time's arrows and asymmetries--may be found here:
http://herosjourneyphysics.wordpress.com/three-foundational-papers-on-moving-dimensions-theory-time-as-an-emergent-phenomenon-traveling-back-to-the-heroic-age-of-physics-by-dr-elliot-mcgucken/Attachment #1: 4_j.a.wheeler_recommendation_for_dr._elliot_mcgucken.jpgAttachment #2: 1_figure9.jpg
Moving Dimensions Theory (MDT) offers a far-simpler explanation of nonlocality, entanglement, "spooky action at a distance," and the double-slit and delayed-choice experiments, all of which I studied with J.A. Wheeler at Princeton University. In addition, MDT also offers the foundational physical model for relativity that Einstein yet sought, as well as the physical mechanism for time and all it arrows which Sir Arthur Eddington yet ought, as well as the physical model for quantum entanglement--the characteristic trait of quantum mechanics according to Schrodinger!
Long story short, dx4/dt=ic represents the expansion of the fourth dimension x4. This expansion distributes locality, manifesting itself as a spherically-symmetric 3D wavefront expanding at c. So it is that the surface of the expanding sphere yet defines a single locality in the fourth dimension, and hence the nonlocal, wavelike properties of photons which are but matter surfing the fourth expanding dimension. All of this is illustrated on FIG. 1 of page 3 of my paper "MDT's dx4/dt=ic Triumphs Over the Wrong Physical Assumption that Time is a Dimension by Dr. Elliot McGucken:"
http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1429
Huw Price states above, "To see how retrocausality can help resolve some quantum paradoxes, take for instance the aspect that bothered Einstein: "spooky action at a distance." Even if two entangled particles are shot millions of light years apart into space, a measurement of one still seems to have a subtle influence on the results of the measurements on the other, in a way that is very hard to reconcile with Einstein's theory of special relativity."
Not only does MDT derive all of relativity from dx4/dt=ic, but it also shows that dx4/dt=ic provides the physical model for nonlocality, entanglement, and "spooky action at a distance."
Huw Price continues:
"Retrocausality gives a means to decompose that spooky non-local action into two local actions, the first one backwards in time," said Price. In other words, according to Price, the properties of the entangled particles are correlated backwards in time, from the point in spacetime where the measurement is made, to the point in spacetime where they become entangled, allowing the correct hidden variables to be encoded into the pair of particles. "In a case with retrocausality, the measurement that one observer makes affects her particle 'backwards' to the point where they are together," says Price. "There's a zigzag path connecting the two particles through time and space and no need for instantaneous action at a distance."
There is no need for any "zigzag paths" nor backwards time travel in MDT, but rather, MDT provides a simple *physical* model for time and all its arrows and asymmetries, entanglement, nonlocality, Huygens' Principle, relativity, and more.
Long story short, the delayed choice experiment is contemplated within the context of a light-sphere defined by the emission of two or more entangled photons, or a single photon that interferes with itself. As the photon propagates because it surfs the fourth expanding dimension, and as the fourth expanding dimension distributes locality, any point on or within the expanding wavefront may be considered to retain its locality in space and/or time. Hence there is no need for retrocausality, nor action-at-a distance as the photon has not aged nor moved relative to the fourth expanding dimension.
And here again MDT--the great unifier--unifies nonlocality in space and nonlocality in time. For consider two entangled photons propagating to opposite ends of thee universe. QM tells us they will yet be entangled, while relativity tells us they have not aged. This is because they have remained in the same place in the fourth expanding dimension during their entire journey.
More papers on MDT's far-reaching unifications of foundational physics be be viewed here:
1. Time as an Emergent Phenomenon: Traveling Back to the Heroic Age of Physics In Memory of John Archibald Wheeler
http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/238
2. What is Ultimately Possible in Physics? Physics! A Hero's Journey with Galileo, Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, Planck, Einstein, Schrodinger, Bohr, and the Greats towards Moving Dimensions Theory. E pur si muove!
http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/511
3. On the Emergence of QM, Relativity, Entropy, Time, iħ, and ic from the Foundational, Physical Reality of a Fourth Dimension x4 Expanding with a Discrete (Digital) Wavelength lp at c Relative to Three Continuous (Analog) Spatial Dimensions
http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/873
4. MDT's dx4/dt=ic Triumphs Over the Wrong Physical Assumption that Time is a Dimension, Unfreezing Time and Answering Godel's, Eddington's, et al.'s Challenge, Providing a Mechanism for Emergent Change, Relativity, Nonlocality, Entanglement, and Time's Arrows and Asymmetries
http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1429
I look forward to your questions and comments.
Best,
Dr. Elliot McGuckenAttachment #1: figure9.1.jpgAttachment #2: j.a.wheeler_recommendation_for_dr._elliot_mcgucken.2.jpg
Anyway, past and future are connected through the present. Whether it is the past that decides the future or the future that decides the past,there is an element of determinism.Will we go back to determinism? Then Eddington has yet another chance.
This is an interesting article.
My essay :"Rethinking the Double Slit Experiment" have discussed the three slits experiment. The cross-link angle establish the magic connection between two slit.
http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1452?search=1
The usual arguments for retrocausality using delay-choice experiments are all based on a fallacy which mistakes the sort of "separations" as in say Stern-Gerlach experiments or calcite crystals with a measurement. This fallacy is surprisingly common in textbooks as well. This paper covers all the usual examples from the texts and then considers the more sophisticated delayed choice experiments known as quantum eraser experiments. Since all these cases can be explained without resorting to retrocausality, it would seem that the whole facination with "retrocausality" is based more on the its "woo-woo" factor which some researchers seek to emphasize rather than dispel. There are so many counter-intuitive aspects of QM, that many researchers' critical faculties are so in abeyance that they will believe almost anything that allegedly appears in QM--such as retrocausality. But in this case, such a counter-intuitive in unnecessary.
Why delayed-choice and quantum erasers do NOT imply retrocausalityAttachment #1: QuantumEraser2.pdf
Professor Huw Price:
Physicist Andreas Albrecht quoted that When asked the question, "What is time?", Einstein gave a pragmatic response: "Time," he said, "is what clocks measure and nothing more." Of course Einstein was right "is what clocks measure and nothing more." and in this article we will add, What the clock measure
I am going to be as concrete as possible; if you read the article you will realize why it can't be shorter. Mainly theoretical physicists are the most interested in "the nature of time" and they like to believe the subject is inherent to physicists and you will see it's no so.
I will follow with an advice of somebody than most physicists in the world respect, Albert Einstein. "The whole of science is nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking. It is for this reason that the critical thinking of the physicist cannot possibly to be restricted to the examination of the concepts of his own specific field. He cannot proceed without considering critically a much more difficult problem, the problem of analyzing the nature of everyday thinking.
Our psychological experience contains, in colorful succession, sense experiences, memory pictures of them, images, and feelings. In contrast to psychology, physics treats directly only of sense experiences and of the "understanding" of their connection. But even the concept of the "real external world" of everyday thinking rests exclusively of sense impressions" "Ideas and Opinions" Einstein, pg.283 y 284, ISBN Nº 440-04150-150.
I think this should be read slow, understanding each and every word of his thought about mind functioning, some times is as important as mathematics formulas.
To make possible to comprehend this article, first you should believe possible that "The problem of time" can be solve. Second let the mind freer to the understanding of new things, for this, we should say that
"time" has no definition, no empiric meaning, also can't be sense by any of our senses or by any man designed artifact, nobody can make a description or recognize "time". To make clearer this article we should keep in mind the last three lines through all the reading.
If was any other word with those characteristics we immediately would say "time does not exist".
why we don't say that, because since pre-Socratic Heraclito ,and after Socrates Plato and Aristoteles 2600 or 2300 years ago we are measuring what we call "time" and as physicist Sean Carroll said being quote by Lee Smolin "There is no question that time exists--we use it everyday," If we give this, as a reason of "time" existence. How he can be sure that exist, if he don't know what it is? The Carroll reason is, that he think he use it every day. Certainly for use, he meant measuring the so called "time". How he knows that what he is measuring is "time" and no something else? like movement ?
Everybody knows movement, it has definition, empiric meaning. Everything with physical existence moves, from a galaxy to a subatomic particle. Movement origin is very much older and certain that "time". If the big-bang, happen, there was movement, life is possible because movement, our brain metabolism, which moves, is our mind that consider all movement we know of, that surround us. How we are not going to measure movement? We did it since the beginning of written history, but thinking that we were measuring "time".
People think that with the clock movement we measure "time" and with it, comparatively we measure every other movement, change and transformation. A clock, to be one should have a "constant", "uniform" movement, if it is not so, it's not a clock.
The physical prove that we measure movement with movement consist that with a clock "constant" movement we measure fractions of "constant" earth rotation movement represented by clock dial numbers, as the hour, these are the reasons that this are "movements units" and no "time units"
New duration definition: It is the period of change and transformation that movement allows and men limit.
Then the so called "time" is movement .When we think we are measuring "time" we are not conscious, that in fact we are measuring movement, as we always did, we do and we are going to keep doing it. Knowing this does not change any physic law. We have to remember that classic physics, relativity and quantum mechanics were created, developed and physicist keep working with them with out the need to know of "The nature of time", but knowing that "time" it is not a mysterious thing, but is movement, a quality or property of everything with physical existence, we know that we can related it to anything of physical existence.
Not only is needed to quantized general relativity to the goal of the "the theory of everything" but we also can understand conclusions of general relativity like "that velocity and gravity slows time" in GPS (imagine an analogical clock) the satellite one slows respect it's similar on land, why? because the satellite clock inertia, because it's speed slows clock parts movement, slowing it's functioning respect the one on land, what slows it is not "time", but it's functioning
Gravity slows the clock in the valley respect it's similar on top of the mountain, because the first one is affected for more gravity than the other, gravity slows clock parts functioning it is not the "time" than slows.
Since Heraclito to Einstein passing through Newton men always ask themselves, What it is time? to reach reality, they should instead ask themselves What we are measuring? And they would find out that was movement. If this is understood I can make this article clearer, showing how movement being part of everything is related with everything.
Time probably is a remnant word which represented a very important concept for men, that mankind forgot it's meaning as Einstein pre-scientific concepts. Héctor Daniel Gianni
E-mail: hectorgianni38@hotmail.com