Reconciliation of Perception [Incomplete]
[date written: 2006-04-27]
It is necessary for me to speak of my perception of spacetime and alternate realities in order for the subsequent posts to make sense.
There are clues in existence to how things work. Often we see puzzles that we believe to be solvable, but that seem to lack enough data to be solved. When we encounter these puzzles, we need to look inside the data that we are given to find the clues. This data has hidden information in it, sometimes redundant information, that when combined creates new data and sometimes precludes certain outcomes. Sometimes we cannot solve a puzzle directly, we must simply identify all possible solutions, and eliminate those that are not viable. Sometimes a puzzle has multiple solutions, but I believe that the reason for this is a lack of further data that would eliminate some of the solutions. Where there is a lock, there is always a key.
Simply put, many of the concepts of the spacetime element of our existence fail to prevent contradiction. I have avoided this subject until now as the following is not science, it is simply a reconciliation of my perceptions with science. This is not to say that it is pseudoscience, although I am certain that some stalwart followers of contemporary theory will label it as such. I am not personally looking for verification of this perception of mine, although I would suggest that others do so before expounding it as a theory.
There is a principle in contemporary science known as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (also the principle of complementarity). Put simply, it states that there are complementary physical observables in existence (such as position and momentum) that are intrinsically linked. Further, it is impossible to measure both of these precisely and simultaneously. This imprecision is not a fault of our technology, it is inherent in existence.
As a consequence of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, there are phenomena such as quantum tunneling. Perhaps it is not conclusive enough to say that "it is impossible to measure both the position and momentum of a particle precisely and simultaneously", rather it should be said that "a particle never has both a precise position and momentum". This may seem indifferent at first, but consider yourself to be that particle: you are not in a precise position; you are not going at a precise speed; you are not going in a precise direction; you do not have a precise mass. Because of the imprecision in position, an electron can be both inside the pull of an atom's nucleus' electromagnetic field, and outside of it; in fact, electrons are. Here again exists a subtle but profound semantic difference: particles are not just in an imprecise position, they are in multiple positions simultaneously.
This lead Bohr to postulate that particles have a wave nature. Consider turbulent water: a wave does not exist in a single position, rather it exists in a great number of positions; we recognize the crest to be the wave, but we also recognize the raised water around the crest to be the wave. Now consider a flat, two-dimensional sheet to be existence; like the wave, a particle is not a dot on that sheet (a precise position like the wave crest), but a fuzzy-circle (a great number of positions like the raised water). In fact, the wave nature of a particle extends through all spacetime. It is because of this nature of particles that electrons can escape the pull of an atom's nucleus' electromagnetic field, even though they lack the energy to escape this field otherwise; this is quantum tunneling.
When we measure the location of a particle, we do so at the cost of not knowing its momentum; the more precisely we measure the position of that particle, the less we know about its momentum. The Double-Slit Experiment has established that if the position of a particle is measured twice (as it is when leaving the source, and when passing through one of the slits), the wave nature of that particle in the time between the two measurements is destroyed by the second measurement. More precisely, in observing the slit that the particle passes through, we move from an indeterminate quantum reality, to a less indeterminate alternate quantum reality.
It is necessary for me to speak of my perception of spacetime and alternate realities in order for the subsequent posts to make sense.
There are clues in existence to how things work. Often we see puzzles that we believe to be solvable, but that seem to lack enough data to be solved. When we encounter these puzzles, we need to look inside the data that we are given to find the clues. This data has hidden information in it, sometimes redundant information, that when combined creates new data and sometimes precludes certain outcomes. Sometimes we cannot solve a puzzle directly, we must simply identify all possible solutions, and eliminate those that are not viable. Sometimes a puzzle has multiple solutions, but I believe that the reason for this is a lack of further data that would eliminate some of the solutions. Where there is a lock, there is always a key.
Simply put, many of the concepts of the spacetime element of our existence fail to prevent contradiction. I have avoided this subject until now as the following is not science, it is simply a reconciliation of my perceptions with science. This is not to say that it is pseudoscience, although I am certain that some stalwart followers of contemporary theory will label it as such. I am not personally looking for verification of this perception of mine, although I would suggest that others do so before expounding it as a theory.
There is a principle in contemporary science known as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (also the principle of complementarity). Put simply, it states that there are complementary physical observables in existence (such as position and momentum) that are intrinsically linked. Further, it is impossible to measure both of these precisely and simultaneously. This imprecision is not a fault of our technology, it is inherent in existence.
As a consequence of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, there are phenomena such as quantum tunneling. Perhaps it is not conclusive enough to say that "it is impossible to measure both the position and momentum of a particle precisely and simultaneously", rather it should be said that "a particle never has both a precise position and momentum". This may seem indifferent at first, but consider yourself to be that particle: you are not in a precise position; you are not going at a precise speed; you are not going in a precise direction; you do not have a precise mass. Because of the imprecision in position, an electron can be both inside the pull of an atom's nucleus' electromagnetic field, and outside of it; in fact, electrons are. Here again exists a subtle but profound semantic difference: particles are not just in an imprecise position, they are in multiple positions simultaneously.
This lead Bohr to postulate that particles have a wave nature. Consider turbulent water: a wave does not exist in a single position, rather it exists in a great number of positions; we recognize the crest to be the wave, but we also recognize the raised water around the crest to be the wave. Now consider a flat, two-dimensional sheet to be existence; like the wave, a particle is not a dot on that sheet (a precise position like the wave crest), but a fuzzy-circle (a great number of positions like the raised water). In fact, the wave nature of a particle extends through all spacetime. It is because of this nature of particles that electrons can escape the pull of an atom's nucleus' electromagnetic field, even though they lack the energy to escape this field otherwise; this is quantum tunneling.
When we measure the location of a particle, we do so at the cost of not knowing its momentum; the more precisely we measure the position of that particle, the less we know about its momentum. The Double-Slit Experiment has established that if the position of a particle is measured twice (as it is when leaving the source, and when passing through one of the slits), the wave nature of that particle in the time between the two measurements is destroyed by the second measurement. More precisely, in observing the slit that the particle passes through, we move from an indeterminate quantum reality, to a less indeterminate alternate quantum reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment