If you have an idea for a blog post or a new forum thread, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org, with a summary of the topic and its source (e.g., an academic paper, conference talk, external blog post or news item).
Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use
RSS feed | RSS help
Introduction
Terms of Use
Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.
By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use RSS feed | RSS help
FQXi FORUM
May 19, 2013
Local observations should not mean a measure takes place by default?
If I observe a speck of dust, at the very horizon of my local field of vision, then I can recieve this information without actually disturbing the speck of dust. It is the photon which hits the speck of dust, and enters my eye that allows me to examine the speck of dust. This process is not measure, it is one way observation?
Now interestingly one way observation, can allow information from a far off non-local environment to be consequental of an event not from source? Example, the input of information into a blackhole, does not automatically re-appear as output from the same "observed" blackhole. It's emergence can be via a white-hole at a far off unobserved location.
Quote:"Cosmic vacuum cleaners known as blackholes,whose voracious gravity swallows any matter that passes inside their gravitational horizons."
Blackholes swallow information locally, but spits it out at non-local Whiteholes. The problem is certainly similar to the "critical electron" from 100 years ago, understanding why the Electron does not impart into a collision with the nucleus is really the key to the code of eerything.
Relativity explains this, and it is confirmed by Quantum Mchanics, it's just observers have to look elswhere?..in the presence of an observation, locally the electron does not collide with neucleus, this is compensated by an "event" at another location, wherby there is a nucleus that certainly does have impact, which consequently has a baring on spacetime vacuum, remove's particle?
Particle interaction number and anhilation process?..contribute to vacuum expansion?
Take a number of glass sphere's containing empty space, place them into a box and shake the box (brownian motion), if some of the sheres collide with enough energy, what happens to the overall volume of space inside the box?
The empty spave increase's, proportional to the total number of high energy collisions?..of course a lot of particles will retain their electron shields for a spacetime continuum to appear gravitationally fixed.
report post as inappropriate
If I observe a speck of dust, at the very horizon of my local field of vision, then I can recieve this information without actually disturbing the speck of dust. It is the photon which hits the speck of dust, and enters my eye that allows me to examine the speck of dust. This process is not measure, it is one way observation?
Now interestingly one way observation, can allow information from a far off non-local environment to be consequental of an event not from source? Example, the input of information into a blackhole, does not automatically re-appear as output from the same "observed" blackhole. It's emergence can be via a white-hole at a far off unobserved location.
Quote:"Cosmic vacuum cleaners known as blackholes,whose voracious gravity swallows any matter that passes inside their gravitational horizons."
Blackholes swallow information locally, but spits it out at non-local Whiteholes. The problem is certainly similar to the "critical electron" from 100 years ago, understanding why the Electron does not impart into a collision with the nucleus is really the key to the code of eerything.
Relativity explains this, and it is confirmed by Quantum Mchanics, it's just observers have to look elswhere?..in the presence of an observation, locally the electron does not collide with neucleus, this is compensated by an "event" at another location, wherby there is a nucleus that certainly does have impact, which consequently has a baring on spacetime vacuum, remove's particle?
Particle interaction number and anhilation process?..contribute to vacuum expansion?
Take a number of glass sphere's containing empty space, place them into a box and shake the box (brownian motion), if some of the sheres collide with enough energy, what happens to the overall volume of space inside the box?
The empty spave increase's, proportional to the total number of high energy collisions?..of course a lot of particles will retain their electron shields for a spacetime continuum to appear gravitationally fixed.
report post as inappropriate
There appear to be 2 questions raised by the article.
The first being does the structure of black holes show that there is non locality? The second being why doesn't an electron fall into the nucleus of an atom?
Assumptions have been made about black holes and the theory has grown out of those assumptions.In my opinion those original assumptions are incorrect.
A galaxy can be...
view entire post
The first being does the structure of black holes show that there is non locality? The second being why doesn't an electron fall into the nucleus of an atom?
Assumptions have been made about black holes and the theory has grown out of those assumptions.In my opinion those original assumptions are incorrect.
A galaxy can be...
view entire post
report post as inappropriate
Add a New Post