Welcome to the Theory of Everything forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
| | | | | Raider of the lost time
Status: Offline Posts: 5,139
Thanks Given: 654
Thanked 103x in 102 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003 Rep Power: 72 | dynamic principle of measurement -
04-14-2006, 12:53 PM
Julian Schwinger said: A measurement is a physical operation in space and in time. The properties of a system are described in relation to measurements at a given time, and no value of the time is intrinsically distinguished from another by the results of measurements on an isolated physical system. See Julian Schwinger, Quantum Kinematics and Dynamics, page 73, Perseus Publishing, Cambridge, MA, 1991.
Is he talking about temporal independence?
Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c²
| |
|  | | | | | The Thinker
Status: Offline Posts: 3,278
Thanks Given: 14
Thanked 9x in 9 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2005 Rep Power: 47 |
04-17-2006, 04:56 AM
My interpretation of the quote is that the time values in two systems, even if they are taken by the same time measurer, are mutually independent if and only if at least one of the systems is independent of the measurer. This is easier to understand with an example: If we are chemists in a lab and we are timing how much time 100cl of water in a beaker take to start evaporation in contrast to how much time 100cl of oil in a beaker take to start evaporation, even if the water's heating rate towards 100ºc (evaporation temp) is controlled, and this controlling method is somehow connected to the stop watch, and you use the same stop watch with the oil, but the oil is not connected to any heating rate controller, then the oil's time to evaporate is independent of the water's time to evaporate. | |
| | | | | | Raider of the lost time
Status: Offline Posts: 5,139
Thanks Given: 654
Thanked 103x in 102 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003 Rep Power: 72 | chemically plausible -
04-17-2006, 01:35 PM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by GUILLE that the time values in two systems, even if they are taken by the same time measurer, are mutually independent if and only if at least one of the systems is independent of the measurer | That's a plausible chemical analogy. How about the speed of light? Is its value the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow?
Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c²
| |
| | | | | | Moderator
Status: Offline Posts: 7,201
Thanks Given: 335
Thanked 617x in 591 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005 Rep Power: 90 | 
04-17-2006, 04:26 PM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by AntonioLao That's a plausible chemical analogy. How about the speed of light? Is its value the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow? | Yes; it is as there is only the eternal now,the other two,tomorrow,and yesterday have no real existance.
kind regards michael.
Humilty,coupled with boldness,surprises truth to
reveal herself? | |
| | | | | | The Thinker
Status: Offline Posts: 3,278
Thanks Given: 14
Thanked 9x in 9 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2005 Rep Power: 47 |
04-18-2006, 07:14 AM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by AntonioLao That's a plausible chemical analogy. How about the speed of light? Is its value the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow? | The quote from Schwinger doesn't tell me what he thinks about that. It might be different the speed of light yesterday from today and from tomorrow, he doesn't say it is not the same nor that it is the same, but he does say that it will not be independent, that is, the speed light of yesterday will be a cause of the speed light of today, even if it is not the same. So this mean sthere must be a pattern which might allow us to make an equation to predict the speed light of tomorrow, and to know the one of today and of yesterday without having to measurem them. | |
| | | | | | Raider of the lost time
Status: Offline Posts: 5,139
Thanks Given: 654
Thanked 103x in 102 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003 Rep Power: 72 |
04-18-2006, 12:13 PM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by GUILLE The quote from Schwinger doesn't tell me what he thinks about that. | Reading between the lines, Schwinger might just be implying that at the subquantum level, there exists extremely high frequency as energy-momentum tensor which is not measurable by our standard of measurement and that the speed is superluminal, just could be the speed of human consciousness which can be faster than light.
Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c²
| |
| | | | | | The Thinker
Status: Offline Posts: 3,278
Thanks Given: 14
Thanked 9x in 9 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2005 Rep Power: 47 |
04-18-2006, 12:35 PM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by AntonioLao Reading between the lines, Schwinger might just be implying that at the subquantum level, there exists extremely high frequency as energy-momentum tensor which is not measurable by our standard of measurement and that the speed is superluminal, just could be the speed of human consciousness which can be faster than light. | And does this superluminal energy-momentum tensor follow Einstein's rules and thus go backwards in time? Do we think in anti-time and anti-entropy direction? Does this mean that, when I write something I think about Platon's idealism, that he himself (Platon) hasn't thought about it yet (and will not think about it until 2,300 years pass)? | |
| | | | | | Raider of the lost time
Status: Offline Posts: 5,139
Thanks Given: 654
Thanked 103x in 102 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003 Rep Power: 72 | beyond Einstein -
04-19-2006, 11:59 AM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by GUILLE And does this superluminal energy-momentum tensor follow Einstein's rules and thus go backwards in time? | It is independence of Einstein's rules. The speed limit is infinite.
Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c²
| |
| | | | | | The Thinker
Status: Offline Posts: 3,278
Thanks Given: 14
Thanked 9x in 9 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2005 Rep Power: 47 |
04-19-2006, 03:56 PM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by AntonioLao It is independence of Einstein's rules. The speed limit is infinite. | "God is dead" said Nietzsche, and with his death in 1900, the following century was the century when God died as an idle.
"Einstein is dead" I said, in 2005, and now too. 100 years after that Einstein had his mirabilis year. It's time for a new idle for physics... but who? | |
| | | | | | Raider of the lost time
Status: Offline Posts: 5,139
Thanks Given: 654
Thanked 103x in 102 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2003 Rep Power: 72 | new idol -
04-19-2006, 08:05 PM
Quote: |
Originally Posted by GUILLE but who? | The new idol of physics would be someone who makes superluminal speed a reality.
Time independence: [∂E(g)]²=[∂F(a)×∂r(a)]·[∂F(b)×∂r(b)] and Mass independence: ¶a(t)·¶r(t)=c²
| |
| | |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | | |
