Theory of Everything - View Single Post

Mr. Nobody · 06-23-2005, 01:39 PM

Why is it so hard for us to see the universe as probability waves? Why do we insist on QM being incomplete and its description of the subatomic lacking? QM has been well established and is in accordance with its description for optics and may harness future application in quantum fluids and solids.

The C60 and C70 atoms are the largest objects for which quantum interference has been demonstrated (after passing through a multi-slit assembly and being properly isolated to prevent decoherance) I think of the particle as a bit of information (an idea from Wheeler). The reason you can not determine place and speed of a photon or electron at the same time is because it represents one bit of information, so either chose speed or location. Particles are not like kernels of sand, they are information of a wave. No true solids exist, what we touch, what we feel, is the electromagnetic force field of fingers interacting with the electromagnetic force field of objects. Even atoms are not matter, there core are quarks and leptons bound together by the strong force. And all we know is that quarks and leptons are smaller than 10-19 meters in radius. As far as we can tell, they have no internal structure or even any size. It is possible that future evidence will, once again, show this understanding to be an illusion and demonstrate that there is substructure within the particles that we now view as fundamental. Here we go again, even quarks are nothing tangible. It is pure energy at the boundary of becoming realized.

So, how do I see the famous double split experiment?
I see particles as a quantisized wave, not something solid flying through one or the other slit, but as a wave flying through both slits, creating the interference. If we peek then we "collapse" the wave and extract the one bit of information available and see the bit (particle) going through one or the other slit.

The atom experiment mentioned above shows that everything can be described as a wave and that a wave is a more correct way of "seeing" the universe. It seems that if you want to define what is "more real" you arrive that everything is a wave and that particles are just the description of the wave and the actual illusion and are subject to decoherance. Decoherance acts as the catalyst for appearance of this reality as it exits the fog of uncertainty in a haze of overlapping and interfering waves.

Just my humble imagination

	(#3 (permalink))
Mr. Nobody 2nd degree Black Belt Status: Offline Posts: 292 Thanks Given: 1 Thanked 19x in 18 Posts Join Date: Jun 2005 Rep Power: 15	06-23-2005, 01:39 PM Why is it so hard for us to see the universe as probability waves? Why do we insist on QM being incomplete and its description of the subatomic lacking? QM has been well established and is in accordance with its description for optics and may harness future application in quantum fluids and solids. The C60 and C70 atoms are the largest objects for which quantum interference has been demonstrated (after passing through a multi-slit assembly and being properly isolated to prevent decoherance) I think of the particle as a bit of information (an idea from Wheeler). The reason you can not determine place and speed of a photon or electron at the same time is because it represents one bit of information, so either chose speed or location. Particles are not like kernels of sand, they are information of a wave. No true solids exist, what we touch, what we feel, is the electromagnetic force field of fingers interacting with the electromagnetic force field of objects. Even atoms are not matter, there core are quarks and leptons bound together by the strong force. And all we know is that quarks and leptons are smaller than 10-19 meters in radius. As far as we can tell, they have no internal structure or even any size. It is possible that future evidence will, once again, show this understanding to be an illusion and demonstrate that there is substructure within the particles that we now view as fundamental. Here we go again, even quarks are nothing tangible. It is pure energy at the boundary of becoming realized. So, how do I see the famous double split experiment? I see particles as a quantisized wave, not something solid flying through one or the other slit, but as a wave flying through both slits, creating the interference. If we peek then we "collapse" the wave and extract the one bit of information available and see the bit (particle) going through one or the other slit. The atom experiment mentioned above shows that everything can be described as a wave and that a wave is a more correct way of "seeing" the universe. It seems that if you want to define what is "more real" you arrive that everything is a wave and that particles are just the description of the wave and the actual illusion and are subject to decoherance. Decoherance acts as the catalyst for appearance of this reality as it exits the fog of uncertainty in a haze of overlapping and interfering waves. Just my humble imagination