Sounding the Drums to Listen for Gravity’s Effect on Quantum Scales

James, I'm sorry for getting the way you define mass wrong. It is clear to me now that it is quite different from what I supposed.

I think you might agree that there is a difference between a materially existing thing and a non existent thing. Some quality at the foundational level that enables material being, that differentiates it from not it outside. IE the difference between that being and not being (of a fermion particle, atom, substance, material or Object thing.) Different materially existing things can be compared giving a measurable with the name 'mass'. What is being compared, as I see it, is their material 'existing-ness'. Beables with material 'existing-ness (mass) have other associated measurables enabling mass to be put into equations.

Is the phishing bot attack over? The headings column is still full of lead-ins which seem to have been deleted from access as 'inappropriate'. There apparently is no sub-routine in the FQXi server to eliminate those corresponding headings that crowd out clicks to ongoing dialogue in the forum. The likelihood of such blanket postings as those of 'brain wave' being a sucker punch to get responses that open a malicious software of some sort is potentially high in the so called 'self-policing' of the www. And unfortunately, that same 'self-policing' fails due to the costs of trying to hold the large competing publishers of content accountable. "There's no end of it" so let's just clear out this batch of intrusive mass marketing hype; is the cost effective response of most open source websites.

However, as an effort to reclaim the FQXi header column in effect of a class action, I now submit this post.

Dear Anonymous,

You may not have noticed that Professor Scott Aaronson and Professor Max Tegmark are users of this site. They are the foremost experts of computer programming in the world. No phishing intrusions take place, and although individual members sometimes chuck in a self advertisement comment, those comments are easily removed.

Joe Fisher, Realist

"No phishing intrusions take place..." - Joe Fisher, Realist!?!

My tech guy says that the sort of "IT support" links that have been appearing in fast succession on FQXi are typical of a common 'Trojan Horse' virus which is robotically perpetrated as coming from different sources. And, DO NOT call that number, and DO NOT provide your email address or password(s), and DO NOT surrender administrator function to any instructions. Just close out and shut down!!! jrc

Dear John R, Cox,

You have an anonymous tech guy who has told you this for free? Wow. All of the tech guys and gals I have ever contacted have always charged me a fee for any information I have requested about my computer, telephone, television, and dishwasher.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Joe,

You are certainly defensive of what most all educated computer users are accustomed to being very careful to avoid.

It is not correct to say that noise does not convey information. After all, every null result is ultimately limited by noise and so null results are necessarily what we call noise.

Robert H McEachern replied on Aug. 14, 2017 @ 17:49 GMT But Shannon offered a long-ignored insight, into why naive observers seem to perceive two; they remain inappropriately focused on the measurements, rather than the measurements' information content. The latter is the only thing that conveys repeatable, actionable "detection" of anything to ever interact with (and thus capable of supporting the existence of identical interactions amongst identical particles).

Thus classical noise is what carries the Shannon "0" bit while quantum noise is what carries the quantum qubit, which is a superposition of both "0" and "1".

The confusion here is due to the limitations of classical knowledge, which is causal and deterministic and sources are always singular, and quantum knowledge, where sources remain uncertain and in superposition.

Dear Physicists,

The first mistake y'all made was when you decided that Nature had to have complex secrets, without specifying why. Only humanly contrived conjecture am capable of sustaining complex speculation Nature had to furnish reality for all living beings and all non-living things. Nature's visible simplicity is utterly extravagant. Every real surface of every real person place and thing am actually existing securely attached to a real visible Natural infinite surface occurring in one infinite dimension that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

Joe Fisher, Realist

I'm a little surprised that this article has gotten so little interest, given the preferences of a number of regular commentators for either QM or Relativistic theoretical interpretation. While the article itself is quite brief and does not go into specifications of the experimental protocols to be employed, careful reading does reveal that firstly; the experimenters led by Andrew Briggs at U of Oxford are treating the theoretical question as an attempt to find a realistic measurement in the relativistic macro-realm produced by Quantum events in the micro-realm. I would personally expect some success.

It does not take too great a leap to consider the parameters of 'superposition of quantum states' as proposed by Gerard Milburn, U of Queensland, Brisbane, being collapsed under gravity into definite states, as a practical mathematical deconstruction into several spin characteristics associated with any particular chosen atom. And a little research into the lattice structure of silicon nitride shows that depending on the method of processing a pure molecular product can result in an inherent stress at the corners of the atomic matrix. So by supercooling the thin wafers, that stress would tend to sustain resonant vibration in the lattice structure without much dampening interference from spurious vibrations. It would be nice to know more about what sort of detection systems the Briggs team with Edward Laird and Natalia Ares are employing, but as very brief, low intensity emissions of energy as electromagnetic frequency pulses could be expected, Small Quantum Interference Detectors (SQUIDs) placed in an array might get some clicks. jrc

I must be losing my mind. I find that I carried on a running dialogue in this forum, and posted the same article. Maybe it bears repeating--maybe not.

Tom,

The Briggs experiment as presented in the article does clearly imply that there is no boundary between the Quantum and Classical. It takes a little bit of teasing out of the article to recognize where the Quantum events occur, and where the effects produce a measurable condition. Both, it seems, are in those tiny, membrane-like flecks of silicon nitride. What is not explained in the article is how those flecks are suspended in what sort of containment, to be set vibrating by what means, in the first place. But it is interesting to treat the QM methodology of the additive process of Spin Number for any given Characteristic, as a superposition of several Characteristics of one particle, rather than the usual treatment of the same single Characteristic as a superposition of several particles. At least that is how I understand the Milburn theory base as articulated.

Researchgate requires certifications to gain access to archives, which does keep the discourse scientific but also limits knowledge of your papers. I do have at least one on my reader that is on the soliton, and which I think might find a fit as a gravitational collapse model of the Briggs/Milburn superposition of characteristics into a definite state. Though I would think that where the gravitational collapse of superposed states under near absolute Zero K would approach a definite ground state, would be where an emission of energy would become necessary. And it would be by detection of that thermodynamically necessary emission that would produce a quantitative result in the experiment. The scope of the article doesn't allow for a presentation of the theoretical base, but it can be safely assumed that is predictive of a time dependent shedding of energy quantity for any collapsing superposition and thus would be detectable in a frequency window by a SQUID.

In casual language, how do you see your paper as having a pertinent fit with the experiment? best - jrc

Dear John D. Cox,

Visible reality does not contain invisible quantum particles.

The Foundational Questions Institute (FQXi)

FAQ

MISSION

To catalyze, support, and disseminate RESEARCH on questions at the foundations of physics and cosmology, particularly NEW frontiers and innovative ideas integral to A DEEP UNDERSTANDING OF REALITY but unlikely to be supported by conventional funding sources.

My research has concluded that NATURE must have constructed the simplest visible physical Universe obtainable. The real Universe must consist of only one single unified visible infinite surface occurring eternally in one single infinite dimension that am always illuminated by infinite non-surface light.

Unfortunately, the Foundational Questions Institute's author of its MISSION lied when he or she wrote of its protocol. Not only has the executive board made no attempt to accept my research, they have offered no funding to help with its dissemination whatsoever.

Joe Fisher, ORCID ID 0000-0003-3988-8687. Unaffiliated

John,

"But it is interesting to treat the QM methodology... as a superposition of several Characteristics of one particle..."

Exactly. That is what "bandwidth" is all about, in Information Theory. Any process that limits bandwidth, necessarily imposes correlations upon all the otherwise-independent Characteristics under the influence of the band-limiting process. In other words, all independent, input characteristics, flowing through such a process, get "blurred" together (a superposition), so that the process output no longer exhibits the same independent Characteristics as its input. That is the ultimate origin of all the so-called quantum correlations; When you process the "living crap" out of a signal, such that there is only a single bit of information left, you get all sorts of weird correlations between measurements, whenever you attempt to make more than one measurement, or attempt to measure more than one bit value (like spin-up or spin-down), from the one independent measurement that you can actually make.

Rob McEachern

Thanks Robert,

The nomenclature often gets confusing, and in QM there are so many ad hoc 'characteristics' that are simply required to maintain the half and whole integer additive procedure. The educational system since WWII has stressed QM to such a practical applications extent, that I think many practitioners do not get much fundamental grounding in its origin. The over simplification begins with the early assumption that the *proton* was an even multiple of the electron mass, and that was in an age when Chemistry not Physics reigned supreme. So it was in Conventions of the era that it was the Chemical weight that set the standard where Hydrogen was an even Atomic Weight of "1". That of course underwent revision with the ascendance of Physics, and still the Std. Model persists in procedures of simple additions. We do obtain just a single bit of information, and in fact what we get is physically only the behavior of the detector, from which the source is theoretically supposed. Suppose; that in reality the determinant is not an additive process but an optimal volume condition for any given energy quantity. Then, One Bit would naturally and mathematically describe a real form. best - jrc

John, I apologize. I didn't know the site was so restricted. I knew you had to register to join, but I thought that was to facilitate communications among researchers, not to keep the public out.

I guess I should have my own web site, but I'm too lazy to maintain it, and too broke to pay someody to do it. I'll figure something out.

Meanwhile, I have attached an excerpt--the introduction--which lays out the main idea and purpose. If anyone is sufficiently interested, I will Email them the paper.

No collapse, no superposition -- gravity is dealt with as a non quantized wave.Attachment #1: excerpt_from__dynamic_spacetime__paper.pdf

Tom,

Thanks, I was able to download the attachment but have been combatting a virus this afternoon and the reply box isn't showing the anti-robot function. This panel has a separate 'I'm not a robot' quiz and maybe that will reactivate things. Onward through the fog! jrc

https://callpcexpert.com/Microsoft-Support-CallPC.php