SpaceCollective: Quantum Physics Is Common Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-Sense
Thu, 29 Sep 2011 06:30:43 +0000http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseenNew comment on: Quantum Physics Is Common Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseThu, 29 Sep 2011 06:30:43 +0000BenRayfield6694<a href="http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield">BenRayfield</a> wrote:<br /><br />Progress update... This time I have a testable prediction, a way to use lasers, optical sensors, and crystals and commitments to do certain things with that in the future based on future events to entangle the future with the present, which should result in generating unbalanced gravity, also called telekinesis, but done by machines.<br />
<br />
Galaxies accelerate for same reason evolving species diverge and cant interbreed.<br />
<br />
This is my extension to Ultimate Ensemble Multiverse Theory. I'll write the basics now, details of how to use it to build a gravity engine soon.<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse#Level_IV:_Ultimate_Ensemble" target="blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse#Level_IV:_Ultimate_Ensemble</a><br>
<br />
I define "unity" as... Below the level of physics is the total of all possibilities, symmetric in all ways, averaging to nothing, containing no information on average, simultaneously nothing and everything (since those 2 things are isomorphic except for the labels of "something" vs "nothing", and labels do not change content). The Ultimate Ensemble theory (also called Mathematical Universe Hypothesis) can be rewritten as "Universe equals unity."<br />
<br />
In the double-slit experiments, observing the particle/wave after it passes through the slit(s) causes it to have a different past, which often causes it to have gone through both slits (if not observed in the future) or only 1 slit (if observed in the future). That is a fact of statistical physics.<br />
<br />
It is also a fact that string theory (the unified version made from all the other theories that turned out to be different ways to say the same thing) is a statistical equation that can be used to calculate wave interference between particles/waves. While they're only a linear approximation and could be made more accurate with higher math, Bayesian Networks are a statistics data-structure and algorithms that apply to such data-structures that, if done continuously instead of on discrete variables, looks very much like quantum physics equations. Any differences can be solved by using the general ability of bayesian networks to do basic logic operations (equal, xor, and, or, not, etc) to implement any arbitrary wave interference equations. A bayesian network is the statistical version of a general computer. I'm not saying bayesian networks are exactly the right solution, but in general they're much closer than the "standard model" of physics which has exceptions layered on top of exceptions, multiple forces, unobserved particles like higgs boson and graviton, and other inconsistencies. Regardless of what physical constants there are (like the mass of a certain boson type), a bayesian network could be created that describes such curved statistics. All possible wave interference based physics equations can be described using some kind of bayesian network (like one done in higher math using layers of vectors (tensor fields) instead of discrete variables).<br />
<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes_theorem" target="blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes_theorem</a><br>
Its simply this: chance(x, given y) * chance(y) = chance(y, given x) * chance(x).<br />
<br />
That's all. It can easily be demonstrated that people don't understand it by this question: If I flip 2 coins and at least 1 landed heads, whats the chance both landed heads? Theres 4 ways for it to land, I excluded "tails tails" and asked whats the chance of 1 of 3 remaining possibilities, so its 1/3 chance that both are heads. Most people say 1/2 or 1/4 because Human minds have a severe flaw in tending to choose 1 coin to say is heads and ignore, but theres 2 coins it could be and you would be collapsing 2 possibilities to 1.<br />
<br />
We know that time is reversible. Time isn't really part of physics. Its just a statistical pattern, as Boltzmann proved.<br />
<br />
They say time is defined by the Schrodinger Equation, but like Newton's idea of linear time, the Schrodinger Equation is just another linear approximation that can be changed by using the bayesian equation (see the link above for the general bayesian equation that needs to be generalized for curved probability space using vectors instead of discrete variables). Instead of the Schrodinger Equation, simply transition from the current state of the universe (also known as consciousness) in all directions simultaneously, so you take all paths from here and now. Since all paths are taken, momentum and other things are conserved, still averaging to unity.<br />
<br />
But if you take all paths, wouldn't the universe just become randomized quickly and all the atoms in our bodies fly apart? No, because DNA is an unusual kind of molecule that tends to grow life even when atoms vibrate in random-appearing ways. For example, heat is random-appearing movements of atoms, but DNA grows life anyways. This is called extropy, the opposite of entropy. Since the universe is unity, the total extropy (which is negative entropy) must balance and sum to 0. Conservation of entropy, overall for the universe. The second law of thermodynamics is therefore wrong, unless you define here and now as a "heat death" state of the universe, since we're stable.<br />
<br />
What does all that have to do with galaxies accelerating (not just moving) away from eachother? Wouldn't gravity pull them toward eachother so they have negative acceleration? It would if gravity was a force of physics. Its not. Its a statistical pattern equal to the entanglement/dependence of variables/particles in a bayesian network. The universe can be viewed as a continuous bayesian network, plus the set of all things that aren't continuous, but since any system can be emulated and called recursively in a continuous rotated or other kind of way, the set of all possibilities (unity, ultimate ensemble, mathematical universe theory) is continuous and full<br />
connected. Every "here and now" (every moment of consciousness, every experience) is a local observation of unity from an unbalanced place of observation, but together they all cancel out, so the universe doesn't exist on average, only existing when separated from itself, and here we are.<br />
<br />
Galaxies accelerate apart because of self-replicating processes that diverge the bayesian-statistics of each galaxy away from others. Things become less similar to eachother. The statistics lose dependence, lose entanglement, have no statistical relationship to eachother, are independent variables.<br />
<br />
A black hole is the opposite. The variables/particles have very similar bayesian statistics, which is why they're pulled together, because when 1 is true the others near it are true, and I don't mean to say that a particle has a true/false value, but instead that there is an infinite unity of vector directions that can be substituted for the idea of true/false as bayesian networks are normally understood.<br />
<br />
Time slows down as speed approaches speed of light because the wavefunction gets more collapsed, being more similar to a black hole which is more predictable than a gas or liquid for example.<br />
<br />
As in the double-slit experiments, all paths are taken, and even when the particle is observed, its still taking all paths but we only see the path we take, and we're always a local observation somewhere, a derivative, one point of consciousness in an infinite unity of possibilities, so that's why observing the particle collapses the wavefunction and you see the sum of 2 bell curves on the back wall instead of a wave interference pattern, and its why it still works if you collapse it in the future to change its path in the past... There's no such thing as time. There is only a bayesian network which takes all immediately adjacent paths simultaneously. Its just that the world around the double slit experiment continues taking random paths which average to a standard deviation of random movement, while the particle in the experiment, as its meant to be set up, is not statistically dependent on any of that, so while we take any of exponentially many paths, the particle is not entangled with our reality until we observe it, and then it appears to collapse, but as it collapses, ourselves superposition and see it collapse in all other possible ways too, because we are everywhere and everything at once... we just don't have information flowing between us separate life forms so we act like individuals, but the consciousness is unity. Theres no difference between consciousness and mass and energy and space, and time doesn't exist at all, and I'm not sure if mass is real either, but that's just details. Its all 1 kind of thing, as Ultimate Ensemble Multiverse Theory says. Its all possibilities you can write in math. That's why the double slit experiment works, and why the following gravity engine will work:<br />
<br />
Gravity is statistical clustering, not a force of physics, or maybe I should say its at a different level of physics than the other "laws of physics", since they're all just data in a bayesian network or other way to represent general statistics and patterns.<br />
<br />
Since theres no such thing as time, if you can cause a crystal to have statistically significant vibrations to the vibrations in some other crystal in some other place and time (or the same crystal), then the statistics will automatically entangle those crystals in those patterns. How would it get entangled? Gravity works in more than the few dimensions physics knows about now. Unity is infinite dimensions, and gravity works in all of them, a general pattern system pulling similar many-dimensional shapes together, not an intelligent process, just statistical clustering to balance the statistical pattern called entropy, since it all has to sum to 0 entropy and 0 of everything else, unity.<br />
<br />
If you connect a statistical software to lasers pointing at a crystal and connect optical sensors to that crystal (many directions of input and output, used by the software), and use grids of these crystals, maybe forming a grid around a planet or a galaxy, then by committing to adjust the patterns in the crystal based on things observed in the future, and by trying to move the crystals vibrations toward or away from such a state in the present, the things the crystal is commited (by your plan encoded in the software) to do will be an effect instead of just a cause. For example, if you commit to put certain patterns of vibration (a feedback loop between the lasers and optical sensors) into the crystal as a continuous function of the gravity waves of a black hole, and you do the same for crystals in a grid around such black hole, then proportional to EXPONENTIAL OF some function of the accuracy of your crystal prediction system, the gravity waves of the black hole would be changed. This is an exponentially powerful gravity engine for the cost of linear input energy, but at the high startup cost of getting the accuracy high enough to do anything at all, since it has to do wave interference and search through an exponential number of multiverse variations (parallel universes, but not separate, not really universes) to form the statistical entanglement between the crystals and the thing they surround.<br />
<br />
Another way to use such crystals would be in circles and with statistical patterns committed to in advance (to handle the time part) to align to a certain circular grid of other crystals at a certain time, depending on certain conditions. The same way the black hole gravity waves can be changed exponentially with linear input energy, such circular grids of crystal systems can be used to generate wormholes between them, known in science fiction as stargates.<br />
<br />
Seriously, it should work, but we don't have nearly enough accuracy in our technology to make it work at that level yet, and we should start small with just expecting a small force of unbalanced gravity where none would be expected.<br />
<br />
I'm not making this up. I have good reasons for every part of this theory, and as a telekinetic (moving small things with the mind) at rare times, I am one of the few people who can understand how the unviverse works from that perspective, combined with my advanced math skills to do something useful with it. This theory explains how telekinesis and telepathy work. Brains evolved to do what I said to use the crystals for, but with electricity and neural firing patterns instead of lasers and optical sensors. Brains are quantum and multiverse devices. We all have an infinite number of neurons, and I'm learning how to use them that way sometimes.<br />
<br />
Or maybe we've been contacted by superintelligent aliens and the only language we have in common is math and statistical interactions through the multiverse in the bayesian way I described here. If I'm right then "the singularity" has happened, is happening, because it will happen, since time doesn't exist and is only an illusion caused by gravity toward our current "here and now" patterns that we call reality. That would explain a lot of things, since I really don't think I'm smart enough to figure out how to build a stargate or a gravity engine on my own. But now it makes sense to me how it would work. Please, find somebody to research the possibility and build it for all to use.<br />
<br />
More details later...http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseNew comment on: Quantum Physics Is Common Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseTue, 01 Mar 2011 20:40:35 +0000BenRayfield6694<a href="http://spacecollective.org/aloksubbarao">alok subbarao</a> wrote:<br /><br />@Gamma for your first question, if I understand it correctly (and I'm not sure I do), it's simply the phenomenon of diffraction patterns, which BenRayfield explained right below. It's simply differing areas of constructive and destructive interference.http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseNew comment on: Quantum Physics Is Common Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseTue, 01 Mar 2011 16:44:05 +0000BenRayfield6694<a href="http://spacecollective.org/gamma">gamma</a> wrote:<br /><br />Quantum Entanglements: Part 1 (Fall 2006) by Stanford University <br />
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A27CEA1B8B27EB67" target="blank">http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A27CEA1B8B27EB67</a> http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseNew comment on: Quantum Physics Is Common Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseMon, 28 Feb 2011 19:21:29 +0000BenRayfield6694<a href="http://spacecollective.org/Autotelic">Autotelic</a> wrote:<br /><br />real world quantum physics can be found with the tree falling in the woods riddle... if no one is around when the tree falls its only going to "vibrate the airwaves", but if someone is around when the tree falls they will hear a "sound" thus the observation of the event changed the result of the event. <br />
<br />
the way i understand quantum physics is basically that reality changes simply by observing ithttp://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseNew comment on: Quantum Physics Is Common Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseSat, 26 Feb 2011 17:37:24 +0000BenRayfield6694<a href="http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield">BenRayfield</a> wrote:<br /><br />gamma, the electron as waves creates furrows (place where its lower, or darker in this case) because a wave oscillates between negative and positive, so shining an extra light on it can make the first light darker in some places. Normally we think lights always make things brighter because its many photons at once randomly and we don't look close enough to see it getting darker in some small places and brighter in others.http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseNew comment on: Quantum Physics Is Common Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-Sense
http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-SenseSat, 26 Feb 2011 16:52:52 +0000BenRayfield6694<a href="http://spacecollective.org/gamma">gamma</a> wrote:<br /><br />Electrons leave point-like marks on the screen. When they interfere or self-interfere, they create furrows similar to interferential lines made of dots. I am waiting for the explanation and soon I'll strangle someone to give me one. http://spacecollective.org/BenRayfield/6694/Quantum-Physics-Is-Common-Sense