Oh blast it...somebody voted for my essay...

It is not that I do not want people to read what I write...it is that my desire is to have people have pleasure in what I write and not read because it is assigned by the teacher.

I like reading and commenting on essays, but ranking them is simply without meaning for me. The Yellow Emperor essay last time still remains with me because of my knowledge of Chinese history and it had little meaning for others.

There is a way to unite physical reality...but noone seems to even care...

    but Steve you merit good points.Accept the recognizings of people.Your works are relevant and general about aethertime and this and that.Regards

    I do appreciate thoughtful comments, but rote comments seem capricious. Essay voting seems rather like a silent auction to me, especially since there are so many different ways to like one essay over another.

    In the end, it is really only thoughtful comments that really count for anything from the essay effort, not some spurious vote...

    It is nice to see the notions of aethertime infusing into the surreality of quantum entanglement...

    15 days later

    Dear Agnew,

    You have nicely differentiated about the roles of classical and quantum observers

    In page3 in last line, you took " a decreasing entropy for shrinking mass and increasing entropy for expanding action". Probably you are considering red- shifted Galaxies only. You may be knowing that the red-shifted Galaxies are only 40 percent.

    I request you to reconsider your thinking and modify your equations accordingly...

      7 days later

      Of course, in aethertime, it is force that expands and not space and matter shrinks just as force expands. What this means is that in a shrinking universe, galaxy light actually blue shifts due to that shrinkage.

      It is expanding force that makes distant galaxies show red shifts. I don't know what you mean by 40%...

      Dear Sir,

      You have made a brilliant analysis using modern views. But can we go a little out of box and analyze the facts?

      What is the fundamental difference between classical physics and quantum physics? It is basically the motions of the collective versus the individual. In classical physics, the bonding of quantum particles makes the interaction non-linear. In case of quantum particles, it is linear. You also agree when you say: "A classical observer predicts a determinate albeit chaotic path for a goal". But is noise of classical chaos for macroscopic action usually masks the decoherence of quantum phase noise? Should it not be the opposite? After all, penetrability and energy level of quantum particles are more than classical particles.

      Phase noise is the frequency domain representation of rapid, short-term, random fluctuations in the phase of a waveform, caused by time domain instabilities or "jitter". The idea of phase noise is based on some sort of a circuit model derived from practical measured data and/or intuitive observation regarding noise phenomena.

      Phase defines a trajectory versus time (t), whose variance around the noiseless straight line trajectory grows proportionally with elapsed time. This is because ¤å(t) = Ô꽤ë(t)dt. Nevertheless ¤å is stationary, and has a well-defined power spectral density S¤å(f). Phase fluctuations in a sinewave correspond to voltage fluctuations; AM sidebands and PM sidebands at offset frequency fm from average oscillation frequency. In an oscillator circuit, there are multiple sources of voltage and current noise circuit. Noise sources collectively pull the free-running oscillator's frequency, through injection locking to generate phase noise.

      Jitter could be bound or unbound. Deterministic jitter arises from coupling on to signal lines from: 1. Electromagnetic interference 2. Crosstalk 3. Reflections. Though random and deterministic effects are independent, they may be de-convolved from histogram, by first fitting tails of distribution to best-fit Gaussian. Then histogram of deterministic jitter is extracted by deconvolution. Histogram does not specify frequency of jitter-inducing signal. Spectral density of jitter is useful to isolate frequencies, which appear as discrete lines.

      How are these relevant in the double slit experiment? The double shit experiment is usually conducted with electrons or photons. We do not know WHAT is an electron, though we know all about what it does. Photon is massless. Does the experiment conducted using protons behave similarly? If not why not? If you watch the water waves behind a steamer, they reconnect just like the interference pattern of the double slit experiment. Can there be no macro examples for the micro phenomena? We will comment on the other aspects of your paper separately.

      Regards,

      basudeba

        Dear Sir,

        Zero is something that does not exist at here-now, but exists elsewhere. So you imply that your thought is at a different level and not coinciding with the mainstream, which is evident from your post.

        Best wishes and regards,

        basudeba

        Dear Sir,

        As we understand, entropy is a measure of disorder in a system, whereas information is a measure of order in the system. Thus, entropy is not unidirectional. Negantropy or negative entropy is already known, though we do not fully agree with that interpretation - we believe in reversible cycles of time. You also talk of two entropies, though reversible in a different way. It is true that there can be many future states, but it is because we do not always know the initial conditions. For any initial condition, there can only be one future state, unless it is modified by other influences. Of course uncertainty is inherent in nature. But that is because of our limitations to know all factors affecting an outcome and our lack of control over the environment that affects the outcome after we complete the operation and before we take the measurement. On the contrary, present can be fully explained based on past and future can be fully explained based on present.

        There are questions on the concept of expanding universe. It is not evident in local scales. Galactic blue-shift has been observed. There are galactic mergers. The parameters of the galaxy rotation curve are questionable. The CMB is not homogeneous and has a direction after all - the Axis of Evil. The theory and observation relating to dark energy is dubbed the biggest mismatch in science. Thus, the observation can be better explained by accepting the universal rule: everything including the universe spins in its axis. Then the redshift and blue-shift can be explained with analogy from the solar system. Planets sometimes appear to move away from us at a fast pace while they appear to come close at other times. This will not need any dark energy.

        Mass - classical or quantum, is never constant. The distinction between mass and weight is erroneous. If we take a stone to the Moon, its weight will not go up four-fold, as is written in text books. We have to take the same balance to Moon to measure the weight where the balance and the unit will also be the same effect, cancelling it. It will still weigh the same. If we use a different balance and unit, we cannot compare both. We cannot measure the stone on Moon while sitting on Earth. Thus, mass and weight are not different since acceleration due to gravity affects both sides of the balance equally at all places in the universe. Do we apply g in calculating atomic weight? Are the quantum particles immune from gravity? On the contrary, if we hold the same stone under water, it feels light. Thus, mass is an emergent property of the medium - forces acting on it. Action is possible only with energy, and is related to energy density in the medium. You say: "the universe actually shrinks in mass even while universe action grows". What this implies is that the barrier between mass and energy gets altered. After all, mass is energy confined and energy is mass released from confinement. You seem to agree when you say: "chemical replication is a natural process driven by free energy that occurs with the actions of nucleation or seeding along with replication or growth followed by re-dissolution in recursive cycles of dissolution, seeding, growth, and re-dissolution".

        Regards,

        basudeba

          Dear Sir,

          You have brought in a very important aspect involving ATP etc. which we wish you could have elaborated. The same mechanism that energizes the sodium-potassium pump also energizes the senses to receive and send external impulses to the brain.

          The nervous system uses electrical and chemical means to help all parts of the body to communicate with each other. The brain and spinal cord make up the central nervous system. Nerves everywhere else in the body are part of the peripheral nervous system. The peripheral nerves run from the spinal cord to all parts of the body. They surround all the organs, muscles and tissues--the heart, liver, intestines, lungs, skin and blood vessels. The peripheral nerves pick up information about the body and send messages through the spinal cord to the brain. The brain sends messages via the spinal cord to peripheral nerves throughout the body that serve to control the muscles and internal organs. The somatic nervous system is made up of neurons connecting the CNS with the parts of the body that interact with the outside world. But the brain lacks pain receptors (nociceptors) - hence it cannot sense anything. What we feel when we have a headache is not our brain hurting -- there are plenty of other areas in our head and neck that do have nociceptors which can perceive pain, and they literally cause the headaches. Since brain lacks sensory receptors, it does not hurt to have brain surgery.

          An object receives all wavelengths of light, but reflects only few after absorbing the rest. That gives the object its color. We see only through eyes because eyes only can measure electromagnetic radiation (measurement is a system of comparison between similars). We feel only with our skin when something comes in close contact. Thus, what we see is the radiation emitted by the object, whereas what we touch is not the radiation, but the body emitting radiation. In both cases, our information is incomplete. When these are carried to the brain, these are mixed and a composite picture is prepared. Emotions are cognitive responses to sensory stimuli after they have been processed.

          This picture is measured (compared with similar responses earlier) with memory. Then the perception is matched with the earlier perception of similar impulses. If it matches, we "know" that "it (the concept arising from the perceived impulses) is similar to that (an earlier perceived concept). Hence it (the object of perception) is that (equivalence of the concept).

          Modern research on consciousness is confined to the actions of neurons, which is the process and not the perception itself. We must differentiate between the observer, the observed and the process of observation. Thus, modern research is wandering aimlessly.

          Finally, thank you very much, because your paper gives much food for thought.

          Regards,

          basudeba

            Dear Steve Agnew,

            You considered only red shifted Galaxies only. You may be knowing that the red-shifted Galaxies are only 40 percent. In the remaining 60 percent Galaxies in the Universe; there are "Blue shifted Galaxies Quasars (also Blue shifted)" are 40 percent and final remaining 20 percent dont show any shift....

            Please see the (4 th) Book on blue shifted Galaxies from Dynamic Universe Model blog, which is available for a free down load, for further details.....

            Have a look at my paper also............

            So Request you to reconsider with this fundamental data.

            Best Regards

            =snp. gupta

            Interesting essay Steve...

            I like the way you contrast the effects of classical and quantum noise. In any confined sample of a gas, at room temperature, we note the increase of thermodynamic entropy and a co-existence of quantum and classical chaos. I have wondered if whether the formulation of entropy involving microstates is inherently quantum mechanical - given its dependency on n, the number of gas molecules - or is it just statistical mechanics? I think we see both a superposition of states, and the presence of alternate paths, so it gets complicated. You might want to check out J. Miguel Rubi, as his work offers some interesting insights.

            I examined a question related to the decoherence issues you bring up, for my presentation at FFP10. I thought that perhaps QM non-locality and Thermodynamic Entropy might have a common basis. Erich Joos was pretty emphatic in correspondence that decoherence is not dissipation, and it would appear that you take the view it contributes to self-organizing dynamics instead of disorder; is this correct? Finally; I see some connection of your work with the Continuous Spontaneous Localization folks. I had some correspondence years ago with Philip Pearle, regarding Statevector Reduction. But it would appear that you are saying the wavefunction collapse brings order out of chaos. Care to comment?

            All the Best,

            Jonathan

              Your comments are quite detailed and well appreciated. Your questions seem to have more classical than quantum bias and it is certainly true that the chaos of classical noise usually overwhelms any of the effects of quantum phase noise, even for science.

              You mention in particular the without the hidden knowledge of an initial condition, prediction of action is of course impossible. However, this is a distinctly classical view that presumes that all causes are in principle knowable. There are quantum causes that are not knowable and that means there are things about the universe in which we must simply believe.

              The double slit experiment represents one of many examples of how quantum phase noise determines the path of either a photon, electron, or indeed any particle. Recent experiments have actually shown that even large molecules show interference effects where a single molecule interferes with itself. In other words, a single particle's many possible futures represent uncertain paths and no single path is knowable.

              The one big hole in mainstream science is the lack of an acceptable quantum gravity. By supposing an inherent role for quantum decoherence, aethertime posits just such a quantum gravity and that is the basis of the entropy flow noted in this essay.

              You offer once again the classical notion that the future is solely determined by knowable causes. However, quantum phase noise represents a cause that is not knowable and that is the point of my essay.

              You also note that there are some questions about universe expansion and my essay is based on a shrinking matter and expanding action universe. Therefore, the fact that the Andromeda galaxy blue shift is heading towards us at about 0.28 ppb/yr is a part of our shrinking mass. Other more distant galaxies have red shifts due to our expanding force, not really our expanding space.

              The classical mass of an electron is indeed a constant of mainstream science. Two hydrogen atoms show the dominance of the gravity attraction of mutual mass once they are more than about 70 microns apart, which is the dispersion limit. Aethertime supposes that each hydrogen mass decays at a very slow rate even as their gravity increases at the same slow rate. This decay is what drives aethertime force.

              It is possible to build a universe with many different axioms as beliefs. Aethertime supposes a universe from the duality of just matter and action and so space and time are both emergent properties and not actually axioms. But the time decay and space that both emerge from the action of the universe matter pulse are still what mainstream science believes are axioms.

              Energy is just another form of matter as you mention, but phase also plays a very important role. What aethertime supposes is that motion and time are simply how we interpret the mass changes that are apart of all action. It is from the differential of action with mass that space and time emerge. Aethertime does not alter the barrier between mass and energy since both are just different forms of aether action.

              Aethertime simply embraces the Schrodinger equation as the basic action equation for both charge and gravity forces. Gravity is due to the same universal matter decay as charge, just scaled by the size of the matter size of the universe.

              Neural action potentials are the chemical ion pulses that excite and inhibit action for many organisms including, of course, human consciousness. What truly surprised me was that quantum gravity would play any role at all in neural action. However, it is not really quantum gravity per se, it is rather the underlying aether exchange that defines all quantum action.

              The action of ATP provides the basic energy for all of life and that includes neural life. The core concept of neural action is that a pulse-echo neural pair forms a particle of aware matter just like two atoms as observer and source form a transient bond by exchanging a photon. But there is both phase and amplitude information in a photon exchange and that is true for a neural exchange as well.

              Mainstream science presumes that neural action of ion charge phase decay is much too fast for any quantum neural effects like interference or entanglement. However, with quantum aether, this statement is no longer true. While it is true that the phase decay of quantum charge is very fast for neurons, the phase decay of a neural pulse-echo pair is what defines each moment of thought.

              In other words, the current loop of a neural pair results in a magnetic field that couples aware matter particles as a quantum aether into moments of thought. Science measures these neural couplings as the EEG spectra of consciousness, but there is not a theory of the mind that yet understands what EEG spectra really mean.

              Once again, thanks for your thoughtful comments.

              Since I am not an astronomer, I leave interpretations of galaxy red shifts to those who do the observations. I am a spectroscopist, though, and so do know how to interpret spectra. You have taken the red shift spectral data of hundreds of thousands of galaxies and reinterpreted spectral red shifts as blue shifts.

              I have looked at the same dataset and see the red shift spectra as very good spectral information. However, my expanding force and shrinking mass aethertime universe does posit a different reason for the spectral red shifts. Denying the large body of evidence for spectral redshifts of increasingly distant galaxies seems futile to me.

              Measurements are key to making sense out of the observer-source quantum bond and the measurements of galaxy spectra are how science makes sense out of the universe. Since the SDSS redshift spectra data is very certain, there is no reason to change that view.

              What a really nice comment...indeed, it would appear that wavefunction collapse brings order out of chaos, but it is important to stipulate: When quantum phase noise drives wavefunction collapse, that is distinct from the wavefunction collapes driven by the noise of classical chaos.

              Of course, an isolated compressed gas does not change classical entropy unless heat or mass exchanges with the reservoir. However, in the quantum entropy of aether, even a classically isolated system is still subject to the decay of matter and expansion of force. All of the universe decays in matter and expands in action and the quantum phase decay of an isolated system entangles all other isolated systems as well.

              Therefore even a classically isolated system shows the same arrow of time of phase decoherence or as you say, dissipation. Does your isolated system account for tunneling? Or coherence? How about interference?

              Certainly classical decoherence is not classical dissipation, but then again, the classical universe has no role for quantum gravity in any event. Without quantum gravity, there is no meaning for gravitational decoherence and what I call gravity matterism. The motion of stars along with their radiation provides the dimension of a vector force that has no classical meaning, but happens to be exactly what keeps galaxy rotation constant in aethertime. Galaxy rotation is a consequence of quantum gravity and yet cold dark matter halos are still the classical belief of mainstream science.

              Statistical mechanics integrates quantum mechanics by quantizing the modes of an empty box. This works really well for many thermo applications, but does not include the dissipation effects of quantum phase noise just like QED does not either. Really Stat Mech and QED both need to quantize the universe with a finite discrete aether instead of an infinity of vacuum oscillators and then let the space and time of empty boxes emerge from that quantized and finite discrete aether.

              Any math that begins with the assumptions of continuous space and time is necessarily stuck with the limitations of continuous space and time. The issue with quantum nonlocality is stuck with the conundrums of continuous space and time because of what the word local means. Beginning a universe instead with discrete matter and quantum action in place of space and time makes life so much easier...and thanks for the Rubi and Pearle links...

              Dear Sir,

              We find similar echoes in your reply with our views. We have also made distinctions between classical and quantum aspects. Majority people accept that these are different. But are they really different? Every micro phenomena has a macro equivalent. In 2003, we told Leggett about this. Our inability to know does not change the rule of Nature. Just like hydrogen and oxygen have properties different from water, micro world shows different behavior from macro world. But it is not random - there is order behind such coupling. Hence, theoretically, it is knowable. Can you please list a few quantum causes that are not knowable?

              Regarding the double slit experiment, when you say "even large molecules show interference effects where a single molecule interferes with itself", are you not proving my statement - the macro world is a composite of the micro world?

              When you say: "a single particle's many possible futures represent uncertain paths and no single path is knowable", are you not expressing our inability to know? The same initial conditions will lead to the same final outcome - the same future. If we accept that it has a possibility to lead to different futures, can we have science at all? All equations will have different solutions, which cannot be known? We agree that we are talking against mainstream science. But are we wrong? Should we accept majority view without proper analysis? Is majority always right?

              Regards,

              basudeba

              Dear Steve Agnew,

              It is very nice to contact a spectroscopist, who knows how to interpret spectra.

              I have taken the spectral data of hundreds of thousands of QUASARS and interpreted spectral lines as blue shifts, but not Galaxies as you said.

              But NOW I will ask the FUNDAMENTAL question... which way is correct? Why something like that is possible?

              I say probably your "expanding force and shrinking mass aethertime universe" explains well present scinerio. But we have to exclude the fundamental question first is that not?

              You are correct in saying that Measurements are key to making sense out of the observer.

              The SDSS redshift spectra data is very certain, that is exactly correct, but the interpretation of data is done by the software we use. That depends on the requirement and guidance given to programmer.

              Finally it will be your will to change that view or not.....

              Best Regards

              =snp.gupta

              ...of course, what I meant is that any particle path is not precisely knowable, but that does not mean that we do not know anything about the path. It simply means that there are limits to what we can know.

              It also means that given precisely the same initial conditions, a similar but not exactly the same future occurs. Thus, science works just fine, but the quantum uncertainty principle does limit the knowledge of science and so that means that quantum phase noise is different from the chaos of classical noise.

              The Schrodinger equation only admits probabilistic solutions, not the determinate solutions of the Hamilton-Jacobi action equation of gravity and relativity. However, there is a quantum Hamilton-Jacobi action equation that describes the determinism of gravity's relativity as well and the probability of quantum charge.