Credit: SPL
I was recently talking with a colleague who was a fellow theoretical physics graduate student at Princeton University back in the early 1980s. He had been thinking about an obscure academic physics journal he would occasionally skim in the library during those years. This journal was filled with bizarre extra-dimensional models of particles and forces, esoteric ideas about cosmology, and a slew of highly speculative theorising, with little in common other than a lack of any solid evidence for a connection with reality.
"You know," he said, "at the time I thought these things were a joke, but now when I look at mainstream physics papers, they remind me a lot of what was in that journal."
Why is it that central parts of mainstream physics have started to take on aspects that used to characterise the outer fringes of the subject? At the very centre of the physics establishment, things have been getting more and more peculiar.
A QUARTER-CENTURY AGO, in the 1980s, it was clear to both of us what serious theoretical physics looked like. A hugely successful theory of elementary particles and the fundamental forces governing them had come to final form a few years earlier. It was referred to as the Standard Model (see "The whole shebang", p62), and evidence for it was pouring in from experiments around the world.
The Standard Model is a quantum theory of fields – of which the electromagnetic field was just one variety – and much of our time as students was spent trying to master the complex mathematical techniques needed to understand these quantum field theories. According to the Standard Model, there are three fundamental forces: electromagnetic, weak and strong. There are also a small number of fundamental particles carrying specified charges that determine which forces they experienced, such as photons for the electromagnetic force, and gluons for the strong nuclear force.
The mathematics of the theory is deep and highly sophisticated; the fields responsible for the forces are basic geometrical quantities that mathematicians call 'connections'. The excitations and interactions of these fields were also responsible for the fundamental particles. The whole thing satisfied a beautiful equation as presented to the world by British physicist Paul Dirac in 1928.
At the time, no experimental evidence had been found that contradicted the Standard Model, but it was clearly not complete, since it didn't address certain fundamental questions. The task for theorists was to find a better theory that could.
On of the key questions was regarding the origin and nature of mass. In the Standard Model, one conjectures the existence of something called a 'Higgs field' (named somewhat arbitrarily after Peter Higgs, one of several theorists responsible for the idea it implements). This field is responsible for giving particles their unique mass. Unfortunately, in many ways, the Higgs field just highlights our ignorance; the mass of a particle is determined by a number that characterises how strongly it interacts with the Higgs field, but we have no idea where these numbers come from.
Another crucial question was why we have this specific pattern of forces and fundamental particles. In particular we'd like to be able to explain the charges of the fundamental particles, as well as the three different numbers that determine the strengths of the three forces.
Then there's the question of the mysterious fourth force: gravity. We have an excellent theory of this force – Einstein's theory of general relativity – but this theory doesn't mesh with quantum mechanics, and there appears to be a problem of inherent inconsistency in treating one of the forces differently than the other three.
What neither my fellow student nor I would ever have guessed during our graduate student days was that, in our middle age some 25 years later, we'd be no closer to answering any of these questions, and ever more speculative attempts to find such answers would have taken on some of what used to be the characteristics of the fringes of science.
Too early
How many well-founded scientific ideas were established after a mere several decades of effort? None!
Ideas such as string theory are in their mere infancy; it is too early to give-up on them. Even if the future reveals such models are not as useful as hoped much can still be gained by continuing to pursue them at this time. Modelling is as important to science as experimentation. A part of the scientific model is to construct a number of candidate models. With time, these candidates are either pruned or modified. Also, some components of string theory, and the like, may help in directing the modification more of fruitful models, including the current standard model.
Finally, we never know if a model will be useful until it is fully tested. The premature abandoning of new ideas is poor science.
Trevor Phelps
a "mere" several decades of effort?
Go back and read a history of scientific accomplishments over the past three centuries. There were major reality-shaking theories, followed by empirical discoveries, nearly every other decade - until the 70's, 80's, and 90's. The problem with most of the the newer theories is that they are untestable, therefore, they are not falsifiable.
Unified String Theory
To find the mass of fundamental particles, try going back to an ether with mechanical waves that has a simple parameteric wave energy equation for a one-dimensional string/spring:
mc^2 = (1/2)k(x^2)
where m = mass of particle that corresponds to the potential energy stored in the spacetime fabric, x = range of force (amplitude of string). The value of k = 7.18 x10^17 N/m in the above equation is the same for the boundary conditions of the four forces as follows:
{x = radius of universe = 2x10^26 meters, m = mass-universe = 10^53 Kg}.
{x = Planck Length, m = mass of photon (JP Vigier) = 10^-69 Kg},
{x = strong force range = 7x10^-15 meters, m = mass of +pi-meson} and
{x = weak force range = 10^-18 meters , m = predicted mass of electron-neutrino = 2.24 eV}. The value of k is also close for the mass of the electron and radius of electron. Particles are appearances of interacting waves/strings.
M. Harney
looking at the universe as an artist
microcosms reveal the macro or vice versa
perhaps we see the universe as we ourselves are patterned - lets look at mystical concepts - the great Geometer - the Logos - obviously the Uneverse is reflected within us perhaps selfsame with tiny variations in all its parts like fractals - there are many correct ways of seeing and descrbing the same thing -- when I think of string theory visualized, I think of neural networks, dna, when i see flowers I see giant radio receivers and the sun and its corona sending data that forms what it touches i.e. informs -
the universe is made of "matturgy" a constant substance infinitely sensitive and rarefying and conrracting in pulses without losing contact with the rest of the fabric but stretching it around the contracting pulse the universe is a topological plain
spin is electromagnetic having an axis and a diameter perpendicular to it -spin is the prime movement
opposing spins are the source of gravity -interlocking spins cause aggregation and the axis of the spin is force - orientation of axes will weaken or multiply the force - diameter and orientation hence geometry creates pattern i.e.interconnecting vibrations -the fabric of matturgy can sustain many dynamics as it pulses, many states of matter and shape in its contractions and of energy in its rarefaction -when spins form contractions that are complex and more or less tightly bound this we interpret as matter in its many shapes -(spins bound together as gravity) and retaining their combined electric field as a corona or halo (fron the multiple spin axes) this force field is light or heat in the spectrum - when the node is too dense from the interlocking magnetism of spin which is gravity - then no light escapes but perhaps is infraheat that creates a fluid dynamic that splashes out as say a supernova and rarefies out as a pulse seething though the matturgy in tighter coils at first and flattening into the fabric as it extends ..... the greatest mystery is the prime mover since movement is all and movement is pattern and force
---- these are the words of a science idiot, but sometimes lofty minds can find a seed in the most abject places - what I am trying to say is lets start or keep on listening and looking at different ways of seeing the same thing so we can see the forest in the trees - anonymous
looking at the universe as an Idiot
Why and How are the questions
Or is there a why
But what a gift
It is to exist
oh my
you're insane
time and space
FROM SPACE-TIME
TO TIMELESS QUANTUM SPACE
Amrit S. Sorli
sorli.bistra@gmail.com,
Scientific Research Centre BISTRA, Ptuj, Slovenia
Abstract
The universe is in a continuous change. A change n gets transformed into a change n+1, the change n+1 into a change n+2 and so on. Clocks measure a frequency, velocity and numerical order of change. Experimental date confirms that changes and clocks do not run time; they run in quantum space only. Time is not a part of quantum space. Quantum space itself is timeless. Physical time that is clocks run is man created physical reality. Space-time is a math model merely. Fundamental arena of the universe is timeless quantum space. In the timeless quantum space into which massive bodies and elementary particles move there is no past and no future. Past and future belong to the inner time that is a result of neuronal activity of the brain.
Key words: change, time, quantum space, space-time, time dilatation, inner time, observer
Introduction
Quantum gravity describes space as granular. Space is made out of quanta of space volume of Planck (1). Experimental data confirms that with clocks we measure a frequency , velocity v and numerical order of material changes that occur in a quantum space.
We experience stream of changes in a linear concept of the inner time that is based in neuronal activity of the brain. Research done in 2003 introduces idea that part of the brain is creating time: “The brain is the “local” creator of time, space, and space-time as our special maps of the reality we “observe” and participate in” (2).
Research done in 2005 shows that consequent experience of changes in a “past-present-future” perspective is a result of neuronal dynamics in certain areas of the brain (3).
Time is not a part of quantum space in which change occurs. The fundamental arena in which changes occur is the quantum space. With clocks we do not measure time, we measure frequency, velocity and numerical order of change in quantum space. Space-time is mathematical model merely.
A growing number of modern researchers are challenging the view that space-time is the fundamental arena of the universe. They point out that the mathematical model of space-time does not correspond to the physical reality, and propose a “timeless space” as the arena instead. One recent paper on the subject is: “A New Geometric Framework for the Foundations of Quantum Theory and the Role Played by Gravity:Since quantum theory is inherently blind to the existence of such state-space geometries, the analysis here suggests that attempts to formulate unified theories of physics within a conventional quantum-theoretic framework are misguided, and that a successful quantum theory of gravity should unify the causal non-Euclidean geometry of space time with the atemporal fractal geometry of state space (4).
Another recent paper says: “We illustrate our proposal using a toy model where we show how the Lorentzian signature and Nordstroem gravity (a diffeomorphisms invariant scalar gravity theory) can emerge from a timeless non-dynamical space” (5).
Julian Barbour says in The Nature of Time: “I will not claim that time can be definitely banished from physics; the universe might be infinite, and black holes present some problems for the time picture. Nevertheless, I think it is entirely possible, indeed likely, that time as such plays no role in the universe”(6).
Time definitely does not play any role in the universe. With clocks we do not measure time; we measure frequency, velocity and numerical order of change that run in quantum space. There is no time as a physical reality. Space itself is timeless. The only time that exists is inner time that is based on neuronal dynamics of the brain.
Ernst Mach said: “It is utterly beyond our power to measure the changes of things by time. Quite the contrary, time is an abstraction, at which we arrive by means of the changes of things”. Mach is right. Clocks are man-made inventions and time is an abstraction of the mind. In physical equations symbol “t” means “tick of clock”, not more and not less. And clocks “tick” in space only, not in space-time.
In physics numerical order of change is represented by a straight infinite line composed of real numbers. Since the real numbers are a continuum also changes are a continuum. Transformation of the change n into n+1, n+1 into n+2 is an unbroken continuous process. Number zero represents the present moment in which we measure changes. Changes that have happened are represented by the real numbers to the left from zero and changes that will happen are represented by real numbers to the right from zero.
_-____________________________0____________________________+__
As we experience changes through linear concept of inner time we are not aware that changes run in the space only and not in time. With clocks we measure frequency, velocity and numerical order of changes running in space.
changes occurring in the space - perception – processing of the inner time - experience
In today physics still stream of change is understood run in time as a physical reality although there is no experimental data for such interpretation. Experimental data confirm that changes run in space only and with clocks we measure their frequency, velocity and numerical order. Smallest unit of numerical order is “Planck time” and largest is “one year”.
Materials and Methods
We perceive changes that occur in the universe through our eyes. Then the information about the changes is processed by the brain into the inner time, and finally becomes our experience. Between the perception and the experience there is processing through the inner time that creates a distortion of perception. However, once we become aware of the inner time, we can experience changes directly as they occur. This direct experience gives a scientist an objective view of the physical world.
This direct experience is essential for the further development of physics. The direct experience can be achieved by observing a pendulum. For the first few minutes you will experience the pendulum moving in space and time. After closing your eyes to envisage an image of the pendulum moving in your mind's eye, you become aware of the inner time in which you experience pendulum motion. You experience the change directly as it occurs in space.
An observer is a constituent part of a scientific experiment. In the indirect (temporal) experience the observer is captured within the inner time. He experiences timeless space through inner time as a present moment. In the direct (atemporal) experience the observer is fully aware of the inner time and experiences changes directly as they occur in a timeless space. He experiences timeless space directly as a fundamental physical reality in which changes occur (7).
INDIRECT TEMPORAL EXPERIENCE
change – perception - processing through the inner time - temporal experience of the observer
DIRECT ATEMPORAL EXPERIENCE
change - perception (eyes) - atemporal experience of the observer
Discussion
With discovery of inner time, a new interpretation of relativity emerges. The universe is a timeless phenomenon where changes exist “before” and “after” only in a sense of a numerical order. Experimental physics confirms that changes occur in the present moment in the timeless space only and not in space-time that is only a mathematical model. In a faster inertial system that moves in the timeless space the speed of change is slower than in a slower inertial system. With stronger gravity the speed of change is slower than with weaker gravity. The so-called “time-dilatation” means that the speed of change slows down, including the speed of clocks.
Recent research indicates that some change happens in zero time. Timeless quantum communication is a real phenomenon: “We show how continuous-variable systems can allow the direct communication of messages with an acceptable degree of privacy. This is possible by combining a suitable phase-space encoding of the plain message with real-time checks of the quantum communication channel. The resulting protocol works properly when a small amount of noise affects the quantum channel. If this noise is non-tolerable, the protocol stops leaving a limited amount of information to a potential eavesdropper” (8).What is meant here is that information does not move through space-time, but through the timeless space, an immediate medium for identifiable quanta.
The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) experiment similarly reminds us that physical space is a timeless environment. There is no discernible signal in the form of a photon travelling between A and B. The time of information transfer between A and B is essentially zero. We might infer that A and B are extended entities. The timeless space represents an immediate communication medium between the quanta A and B (9).
The timeless physical space as an “immediate information medium” resolves the causality problem of the Fermi two-atom system: “Let A and B be two atoms or, more generally, a ‘source’ and a ‘detector’ separated by some distance R. At t=0 A is in an excited state, B in its ground state, and no photons are present. A theorem is proved that in contrast to Einstein causality and finite signal velocity, the excitation probability of B is non-zero immediately after t=0. Implications are discussed”(10).The excitation probability of B is non-zero because the space in which atoms exist is an “immediate medium of excitation”.
It can be said that certain physical phenomena are timeless, since no measurable time (no run of clocks) elapses for them to happen. For example in the article entitled Attosecond Ionization and Tunneling Delay Time Measurements in Helium by Eckle et al, a conclusion is drawn that "an electron can tunnel through the potential barrier of a He atom in practically no time" (11).
In similar vein, a recent arxiv paper depicts a system of diagrams to represent various elements of a quantum circuit, in a form which makes no reference to time (12).
Quantum Teleportation, Communication, Entanglement
What is meant here is that the quantum space is an immediate medium for information (I) and energy (E) transfer. At Planck size (IE), transfers are immediate; at photon size, they move at the light speed; at larger scales they move at the speed lower than the light speed.
Gravity is not an energy transfer from an object A to an object B, gravity is a result of dynamics between mass and quantum space. Existence of certain mass in a given volume of space changes the quantum structure of space and this generates gravity. In the General Theory of Relativity structural change of quantum space is described by curvature of space. Quantum space itself is timeless. Gravity is immediate.
Understanding of time here confirms a vision of Einstein and Gödel who considered the universe to be a timeless phenomenon (13). “Back in time” and “forward in time” exists only as a numerical order of changes. Hypothetical “travelling in time” in spaceships is out of question; one can travel in timeless quantum space only. With clocks we measure velocity and numerical order of motion of a spaceship in space.
Research of J. J. Halliwell on quantum cosmology develops cosmological models where there is no physical time coordinate at all: “The decoherent histories approach is a particularly useful approach to quantum theory especially when time enters in a non-trivial way, or indeed, when there is no physical time coordinate at all, as is the case in quantum cosmology. Here, attempts to apply the decoherent histories approach to quantum cosmology are described” (14).
Author proposes the idea of timeless physical space in his article “From Space-time to A-temporal Physical Space” back in 2005 (15).
Conclusion
In today’s physics the conviction still prevails that time is a part of space and so a fundamental physical reality in which change occurs. Most physicists are still experiencing changes through the linear inner time. They “project” the inner time into the physical reality and so their experience is temporal. Temporal experience is an obstacle for deeper understanding of immediate quantum phenomena for which clock run is zero. Physicists who know only the temporal experience are convinced that no change can happen without clocks run.
Once a physicist is aware of the inner time he experiences changes directly as they occur in quantum space. This atemporal experience confirms experimental data according to which with clocks we measure frequency, velocity and numerical order of changes that occur in the quantum space. Physical time exists only a as run of clocks in timeless quantum space.
References:
1. C. Rovelli, “Loop quantum gravity”, Physics World, November (2003)
2. Hitchcock. C. M., T-computers and the Origins of the Time in Brain, NeuroQuantology (2003); 4: 393-403 https://www.msu.edu/~hitchco4/Smh9.pdf
3. Catalin V. Buhusi, Warren H. Meck, What makes us thick?, Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing, Nature reviews, Volume 6, October 2005
4. T.N.Palmer, The Invariant Set Hypothesis: A New Geometric Framework for the Foundations of Quantum Theory and the Role Played by Gravity, Submitted on 5 Dec 2008, last revised 17 Feb 2009, http://arxiv.org/abs/0812.1148
5. Florian Girelli, Stefano Liberati, Lorenzo Sindoni, Is the notion of time really fundamental?
Submitted on 27 Mar 2009, http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.4876
6. Julian Barbour, The Nature of Time, submitted on 20 Mar 2009, http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3489
7. Sorli A., Sorli I. (2005). Consciousness As A Research Tool Into Space And Time,
Electronic Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 2, Num. 6 www.ejtp.com
8. S. Pirandola and others, Quantum direct communication with continuous variables, A
Leters Journal Exploring Frontier of Physics (2008)
9. Fiscaletti D. Sorli A.S. Non-locality and the Symmetryzed Quantum Potential , Physics
Essays, 21(4), (2008)
10. Gerhard C. Hegerfeldt. Causality problems for Fermi’s two-atom system, Phys. Rev. Lett.
72, 596 - 599 (1994). http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v72/i5/p596_1
11. Eckle, A. N. Pfeiffer, C. Cirelli, A. Staudte, R. Dörner, H. G. Muller, M. Büttiker, U. Keller,
Attosecond Ionization and Tunneling Delay Time Measurements in Helium, Science, Vol. 322. no. 5907, pp. 1525 – 1529 (2008) http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/322/5907/1525
12. Robert B. Griffiths, Shengjun Wu, Li Yu, Scott M. Cohen, Atemporal diagrams for quantum
circuits, submitted on 21 Jul 2005, http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0507215
13. Yourgrau P. A World Without Time: The Forgotten Legacy of Godel and Einstein, Amazon (2006)
14. J. J. Halliwell, Decoherent histories analysis of models without time, Brazilian. Journal. Of Physics. vol.35 no.2a Săo Paulo June 2005 http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0103-97332005000200015&script=sci_arttext
15. Sorli A., Sorli K. (2005) From Space-time to A-Temporal Physical Space, Frontier Perspectives, Temple University, Philadelphia, Vol. 14, Num. 1