Hi Than,

Thanks for the thought provoking excursion into "analogies".

I consider the wave-particle duality as a traveling energy:

h----space-time----h----space-time----h----space-time----h

Best of Luck in the contest,

Don L.

Hi Jim,

I am still laughing from reading your essay.

Thanks for visiting my blog and sharing your kind comments. My mission is to unseat the uncertainty principle as a part of physics, so wish me luck I will need a lot of it.

I have a story idea for you. It is sort of like Les Miserables with Heisenberg as John Valjean being pursued by Schrodinger's cat (Javert) ....

Yes, some of the practitioners of physics want to expand to philosophy/religion, when it has a house of its own that is messy.

Thanks for your excellent and enjoyable essay.

Don L.

Don,

I must say you feel like a king when appreciated. I visited your website for more playful amusement as well. Now have it among my favorites.

Jim

Hello Don,

I have been skipping your essay not knowing how very informative essay. This inspite of having an informal flavour. Areas of agreement with you include that motion is digital. In fact, we share a lot in common in this respect by referring to Zeno and Newton. I do the same here. By the way, the Dichotomy paradox also has a big bite, especially if there is a Planck length limit. All mathematical solutions like those of Cauchy require division beyond this length.

Wish you luck in unraveling the mystery behind Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. I don't like it so I will check that reference. And finally, a big thank you for revealing so much misinformation in 9 pages!

Best regards,

Akinbo

    Hello Don,

    I read your essay at your invitation, and with great interest. I also went straight out to get a Siri of my own, but down under, i.e. Australia, they only have 1XL or 3XL upgrades, and the HST dialoged mode is a hack which must be added manually. They say the 2XL upgrade is on back order, and so those who what to have one foot in continuous space-time (1XL) and the other in discrete space-time (3XL) must wait because programmers are having a hard time making its conversation add up.

    In DDM mode your Siri says "I think that lamda-hopping or teleportation for particles would strike most people as unreal?" and in HST mode mine says that lamda-hopping by particles is a travelling salesman problem, far out! We all know that a travelling salesman hops from one place to another, and that a group of travelling salesmen who travel as a group find it much harder to get from one place to another because they are connected and must travel as a rag-tag bunch, and to get them moving quickly they must be energised and polarised. And as everyone knows, once you get a bunch of salesmen energised and polarised they're very hard to stop, but at least where they are and where they're going is more predictable. HST mode seems to explain inertia and momentum, but only if space-time is discrete and those who hop have hotels and motels to hop to and from.

    Cheers!

    Zoran.

    • [deleted]

    • Post #44

    Hi Akinbo,

    Thanks for visiting, and thanks for your insightful essay.

    I am going to give you a mark of 10, and if I could it would be 20.

    I believe I my be one of the few who know what you are talking about.

    I liked you history of monads, it made me realize that what I had

    labeled as a "thingy" and later called a Planck Instant is very, very close to

    a monad.

    Best of Luck,

    Don L.

    Dear Don,

    Your comments on my blog are treasured. If you can lay hold on Sir Heath's account of Euclid's elements you will enjoy the aspect on how geometric objects came to be defined.

    Yes, I agree Zeno left out a detail. What is that detail?

    The answer is "Nothing moves, everything changes". AGREE. There is no such thing as velocity outside of calculations we make on a changing space-time. PERFECT! How can CHANGING SPACE-TIME give us the phenomenon of motion?

    A suggestion I have is that in the direction of motion extension (or space-time) changes to non-extension while in the opposite direction space-time becomes extended. So while not actually leaving your own place and the space-time that is intrinsic to you as Zeno says you experience motion and get to your destination.

    Then a little poser I have asked a few, just for my knowledge:

    Is it being implied by the relational view of space and as suggested by Mach's principle that what decides whether a centrifugal force would act between two bodies in *constant relation*, would not be the bodies themselves, since they are at fixed distance to each other, nor the space in which they are located since it is a nothing, but by a distant sub-atomic particle light-years away in one of the fixed stars in whose reference frame the *constantly related* bodies are in circular motion?

    NOTE THAT in no other frame can circular motion between the bodies be described in this circumstance except in the 'observing' sub-atomic particle.

    I will check here for your reply.

    Best regards,

    Akinbo

    Hi Don,

    Thanks for an engaging essay that treats the core issue straightforwardly. You wrote:

    > A particle or photon consists of a core element that never moves, but disappears and reappears. It has a distance dimension that is the particles wavelength. It also has a time dimension that is the particles period. The particle itself consists of the core element plus its wavelength and period. Said another way, the actual particle is the core element and the hop.

    In any computational model, there is a need for some kind of discrete interpretation, and this looks like an especially simple one (which I mean approvingly). This appears to be consistent with my view (the simulation paradigm), in which observers take discrete snapshots of the cosmos.

    > This mistake can be forgiven because the Calvin and Hobbs cartoon is really good.

    Love the cartoon. One of the interesting aspects of the simulation paradigm is that it can have something to say about biology and philosophy, not just physics.

    > Wheeler's analysis of the delayed dual slit experiment is extremely creative and correct except for his misinformed conclusion... Wheeler has mistakenly calculated a position for the photon which it does not have.

    How does this resolve the timing problem in the delayed choice experiment? Is it just that the photon can determine where to reappear knowing the delayed choice of the experimenter?

    > We are becoming conditioned to magical thinking and this has lead us to over elevate the immaterial (bits, information) and make it the cause of the material (the IT).

    To my mind, a computational substrate for the material would be a way to create the effect of lamba-hopping. Consider a video game world as a model for the material world. You might say, by analogy, that the red (for example) pixels making up a video game character lambda-hop from place to place on the screen that is taken for reality within the game. Would this interpretation be consistent with your views?

    In my essay Software Cosmos I construct a computational model for the cosmos based on the simulation paradigm. To me, it seems consistent with your model, but I am curious what you think.

    Hugh

    Dear Don,

    One single principle leads the Universe.

    Every thing, every object, every phenomenon

    is under the influence of this principle.

    Nothing can exist if it is not born in the form of opposites.

    I simply invite you to discover this in a few words,

    but the main part is coming soon.

    Thank you, and good luck!

    I rated your essay accordingly to my appreciation.

    Please visit My essay.

      Amazigh,

      I replied on your blog and voted for your worthwhile essay.

      Thanks,

      Don L.

      Akinbo,

      Thanks for your questions. I will attempt to turn a lot of coffee into an answer. Give me a couple of days. I will post here and on your blog.

      I still think it is amazing that have such similar conclusions coming from such different directions.

      Thanks for visiting,

      Don Limuti

      Dear Don,

      Your essay was a real pleasure to read. Not only was it an engaging dialogue, it was very informative and fun too. I loved the explanation of the nature of Brahman compared to a two sided coin.

      You wrote that the experiment to test the predictability of electron movement with a coherent source is easy to do.

      Quote "Siri: Are you sure of this? Infallible one.

      Don: An experiment can be easily done to verify it. Just use a controlled electron or photon source "

      Has it been attempted? Is that what the references refer to? Or do you have plans to see it done?

      A really enjoyable and 'different' essay. Good luck, Georgina

      Hi Georgina,

      I am glad you stopped by. If I remember correctly we both have been in all five contests. It is a pleasure to participate with you again.

      OK, you caught me .... how should I say ....exaggerating! Getting a laser like electron source could be tricky because electron wavelengths are very short, so the electrons would need to be going very slow. It would be easier to use laser light. To get light with a wavelength of 1mm would probably require a free electron laser. 1 mm would give enough room to place the slits and position the beam between the slits. There might be a school with a FEL that would like to make the experiment.

      Easy to do, if you have the resources 1. an FEL and 2. a few good physicists and associated staff. Hey! think FQXi.org would go for it? I think it could be done for under 100k dollars given the FEL was donated.

      I was thinking about our old friend time, and the concept of now. Let me run something by you. If particles (anything with a wavelength) lambda-hop, then nothing really moves, instead everything changes. There technically is no motion. If we have a landscape in front of us 1.not all the particles are present 2. the few that are present are static and in our frame of reference. Time would be derived from having a memory of other static nows.

      I think this is a legitimate quantum perspective. Here space-time is continuous, but velocity does not exist except as a discrete calculation of the observer using delta x and delta t measurements. This does violate our notions of continuous motion, what I call the genetic defect.

      Let me know what you think.

      Thanks,

      Don L.

      Dear Don,

      I enjoyed reading your essay. You mentioned Wheeler's assuption of continuity. My opinion is that he used continuity when he couldn't find clearer ways to explain ideas. But his "it from bit", as described in "Information, Physics, Quantum The Search for Links" (1989) and in other articles, is fundamentally discrete, and it seems to me to be more close to your view of photon hoops. The difference seems to me to be that at Wheeler the observations (which are means to obtain the bits) are the "stops" of the photon, and not some points separated by the wavelength. Considering that the photons do the lambda-hopping, where are the "stops"? Are they the points of maximum? Are they points where the phase is 0? This works for real waves, but since photons are complex waves, it seems to me difficult to find a gauge invariant choice of the stops, but maybe you have such a choice, or maybe you adhere to a different description of photons than in QM.

      Your proposal can, as you observed, be easily distingushed from QM by experiments. While QM was confirmed so far every time, it is not impossible that someday a new experiment invalidates it. One possible experiment to confirm your lambda-hopping proposal, for instance, is to send coherent light through a wall. It seems to me that it should pass through the wall, if the stops of the photon are not inside the wall.

      You use at the beginning of the essay some philosophical ideas, mainly from Vedanta. The duality Nirguna Brahma / Saguna Brahma parallels that of unmanifested Tao / manifested Tao (a theme in my essay). Of course, nondualism is the answer to this koan.

      Best regards,

      Cristi Stoica

      Hi Cristi,

      Thanks for your input on my essay. It does feel good to be understood.

      Here is what I propose for the stops: A photon in free space moves with uniform lambda-hops unless it is absorbed or reflected by matter. A particle in free space lambda-hops with uniform wavelength (velocity) unless it emits or absorbs a photon (in which case it changes its wavelength) or is reflected or absorbed by matter.

      Laser's usually do not go thru walls but we can use precise 1mm laser light (produced by a free electron laser) in the dual slit experiment. Here we would aim the laser so that each photon lands in the exact same spot between the slits. My notion is that the photon will go thru the slits but no interference pattern will be produced.

      Another experiment would be to look for lambda-hopping directly using Buckyballs. The experiment is outlined on my blog:

      http://www.digitalwavetheory.com/DWT/20_Experiments-_QM.html

      Do you think FQXi would entertain either of these tests?

      Appreciate your comments on my essay very much.

      Don L.

        Thanks all for another stimulating essay contest!

        Don Limuti

        Dear Don,

        Thank you for explaining the lambda-hopping and the experimental predictions. You ask "Do you think FQXi would entertain either of these tests?". Hmmm, that is an interesting question indeed. I have no idea, depends whether they consider it to be interesting enough. Your laser experiment doesn't seem too difficult, I suppose it could be performed easily at a quantum lab, if you find someone with access and interested in helping you. How you do any of these, I don't know.

        Best regards,

        Cristi

        Akinbo,

        Please understand this is high speculation on my part.

        1.How can CHANGING SPACE-TIME give us the phenomenon of motion?

        > The photon does not need an external space-time to move in.

        > This is because the photon brings its own space-time within itself.

        > The photon consists of a Planck Instant (monad) that appears disappears, and reappears etc. etc.

        > With no outside influences the Planck Instance hops in a straight line.

        > The photon is this hopping process of the Planck Instance.

        > This process can also be considered as creating space-time.

        > Thus we can say that the motion of the photon is identical to changing space-time

        > Changing space-time does not necessarily have to do with the cosmos. It actually happens on the quantum level.

        2. How does Foucault's pendulum work? This is more than just looking at particles in isolation. So, if you have any notions let me know.

        Check out my web page. www.digitalwavetheory.com

        I think it may give you some ideas.

        Best wishes,

        Don L.

        Dear All

        A standard-issue big city all-glass high-rise stands across the street from my usual bus stop. When I look up the high-rise facade, I can see the reflections of the near-by buildings and the white clouds from the sky above. Even when everything else looks pretty much the same, the reflections of the clouds are different, hour to hour and day to day.

        After I boarded the bus, I rushed to get a single seat facing four others on a slightly elevated platorm. From my vantage point, I can't help noticing the shoes of the four passengers across from my seat are not the same, by either the make , the design, or the style, and that is true even when the four passengers happen to be members of the same family.

        I could change the objects of my fascination from shoes to something else, to buttons on the dresses for example, but I do not think the result would have been any different. Diversity or Uniqueness would still rule the day! (There is a delightful essay on the subject of uniqueness by Joe Fisher in this contest.)

        I am pretty sure people are fascinated by the diversity and the uniqueness in the world, when the other side of it is the inevitable boredom of sameness every time.

        However, we have a need to know where all this beautiful and enchanting diversity comes from. Borrowing Wheelerian phraseology of "How come the quantum?", I ask "How come the diversity?" A standard physics answer is "Entropy always increases." (I am not a physicist, and I don't know if that is the final answer.)

        Whenever I'm out of my depth, I go back to my theory of everything (TOE), which is a mental brew of common sense, intuition, gut, analogy, judgement, etc. etc. , buttressed when I can with a little thought-experiment.

        The thought-experiment is simple. Imagine cutting a circle into two precisely, identical, and equal parts. Practically, there is no way we can get the desired result, because one part will be bigger or smaller in some way.

        Physics - especially quantum physics - says it don't matter, do the superposition!

        But superposition is fictive, an invention like the Macarena dance, and it has given us a cat, alive and dead at the same time.

        I have heard that angels can dance on the tip of the needle, and now I'm finding out some of us can too!

        Cheers and Good Luck to All,

        Than Tin

        Dear Don,

        Interesting read. Its got that tang of an original perspective.

        You say of your "lambda-hopping": "This kind of motion also provides an alternative to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle."

        would it be right to say then that to move is to change and vice versa i.e. TIME is simply the evolution of matter and vice versa for SPACE such that given any apparent space and time then the excluded middle [of Peter Jacksons's essay] i.e. the "virtual exchange" of SM or "space-time" of GR indeed the "QUANTUM" or "lambda-hopping defines the term "observer"("unit" of/or any measurement)?

        Let me say that this assumption actually BESTRIDES (or "blends") your Nirguna Brahman/Saguna Brahman positions. I tend to agree with Cristi's observation above that "Of course, nondualism is the answer to this koan."

        "

        This is the position I take to your λ-hopping as summed in my 4 axioms. I hope you can find time to read and comment on What a Wavefunction is. And I will be back here to rate. For me your essay is very much on the high side.

        Just allow my essay a little of your time.

        Regards,

        Chidi