Re: Gravity is not a force which acts on objects at a distance.

I wrote:
You are correct, that one way to interpret the data, is to say that in
this one case, Special Relativity is violated, and a few very strange
effects propagate faster than light.

"travisgod@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <travisgod@xxxxxxx> wrote on Sat, 13 Dec 2008:
There are other examples of effects propagating at beyond lightspeed,
such as interference patterns in lightwaves. Just no information.

All these examples can be reexplained with no faster-than-light propagation
of any kind. It all depends on how you interpret quantum mechanics.

But, looking at all the evidence and all the theories and their consequences
together, this doesn't turn out to be the most likely explanation.

I don't think that this metaphysical "many worlds" thing is a more
likely explanation than that SR is incomplete.

You know, I agree with you, that if this was the only tradeoff, Many Worlds
seems weird, and there is nothing sacred about Special Relativity. Why not
modify it slightly? What's the harm.

I didn't mean to suggest that SR being violated was the proof of MW. It's
more, that it's a nice coincidence that MW happens to restore SR as well.

Multiple worlds is, in my opinion, complete bullshit.

I think everybody has that reaction when they first hear about it.

And I agree with you, that merely pointing out that SR says things shouldn't
go faster than lightspeed, isn't a very strong argument.

But that turns out not to be the real argument in favor of MW. It's just
a consequence.

I am to expect that an object beyond the planck length somehow is subject
to mass quantum effects simply because SR supposedly says that some effects
cannot operate beyond lightspeed?

No, not for that reason.

Why should we eff up both QM and SR to torture them into this?

I earlier provided a link to an extended non-technical explanation, about
why. I'm not sure I can summarize in a few sentences, in any way that would
be convincing.

The basic story is: at the level of subatomic particles (like individual
photons and electrons), it is completely clear that the things don't act like
the commonsense world. You send a photon to a half-silvered mirror, and it
isn't a 50% that it passes through, vs. a 50% chance that it reflects.
There's no question, from quantum experiments, that the single photon does
BOTH at the same time. It results in a "superposition", with half of the
photon's "amplitude" reflecting, and half transmitting.

Similarly with the double-slit experiment and interference: single photons
pass through BOTH slits at the same time.

(Oh, and by the way: it isn't just photons. Electrons and all other
particles do the same thing.)

So. We KNOW this "multiple world" thing happens at the subatomic level.
The question is, what changes as you zoom out to the macroscopic level?
The original explanation ("interpretation") of quantum mechanics was:
some kind of "wavefunction collapse", maybe due to macroscopic scale, maybe
due to "measurement", maybe due to "consciousness".

All those theories turn out to be unsupported, pathetic, and mostly
self-contradictory.

The "Multiple Worlds" interpretation basically says: exactly what we KNOW
is happening at the subatomic level, never changes. We have no evidence
for anything ever being different, so let's just assume the same thing happens
at all scales. And what do you know, all the experiments become easy to
understand, and there's no contradiction, and you even get Special Relativity
back for free.

So that's the real story. Multiple World is ALREADY HAPPENING, FOR SURE,
at the subatomic level. And there is zero evidence that anything ever
changes that, as you change scale.

The measurement at one end of the laboratory on a synchronized atomic
clock happens before the one at the other end. There is no multiple
world that is catching up where the shit at the other end of the lab
is subsequently measured. The effects are not random, they are
predictable. I say again, photons are real strange, as demonstrated
by slit experiments where photons at times appear to pass through
diffraction grating that they should be unable to pass through.

Yup, I agree with all that.

I used to have a subscription to Science and some of these experiments
appeared to produce results that were conceptually impossible.

"Conceptually impossible" is a feature of the map, not the territory.
MW is a conceptualization that explains all the experimental data clearly.

Photons do not have the power to make multiple me's, multiple clocks,
and to reorganize all these realities to beffuddle experimenters and
theoreticists alike.

:-) Maybe, maybe not.

I hope you realize that you, and the clocks, are made up of photons too.
It's not something photons "do" to you. It's what photons _are_, and you
happen to be made up of them.

That c is independent of reference frame is a big "huh" to begin with.
Even the electron's orbit and the Uncertainty Principle are nonintuitive
but factual. Obviously the universe is kooky but SR is hardly the last
word...

I agree with all that too.

the shit can't even reconcile with QM, which is also testably correct.

I'm pretty sure that SR and QM are not in conflict. Quantum Field Theory
(I think) is the merger of Quantum Mechanics with Special Relativity.

Now, _General_Relativity_ with QM might be a different story...

-- Don
_______________________________________________________________________________
Don Geddis http://don.geddis.org/ don@xxxxxxxxxx
[On having a 6-month-old son with his wife:] We're hands-on parents. It's us
and only us that drop him off at daycare and choose the nanny.
-- Kevin Nealon (People magazine, August 13, 2007)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Gravity is not a force which acts on objects at a distance.
    ... and there is nothing sacred about Special Relativity. ... Similarly with the double-slit experiment and interference: single photons ... The original explanation of quantum mechanics was: ... is happening at the subatomic level, ...
    (rec.martial-arts)
  • Re: OT: Global warming update: Coldest April in 113 years ...
    ... Quantum mechanics is full of random events. ... So if, say, 1000 photons travel towards a piece of glass, ... Suppose one photon travles toward the glass. ... Observe at the scale of the photon and particles in the glass and see ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: High data rate in narrow band - Why doesnt it work?
    ... >> a photons location and momentum to be calculated. ... detection of such a split photon by detection in two tetectors at once. ... experiments, because by assumptions, it quantum mechanics, not classical ... realist individual-particle interpretation of the quantum mechanical ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: OT: Global warming update: Coldest April in 113 years ...
    ... how does that scripture conflict with the belief in free-will? ... Quantum mechanics is full of random events. ... Another example: Light going through glass. ... So if, say, 1000 photons travel towards a piece of glass, ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • =?UTF-8?Q?Re:_=C2=BFWhy_one_cannot_push_light_but_ju?= =?UTF-8?Q?st_in_the_normal_direction_
    ... learned some electromagnetic theory. ... of light is of a propagating wave with a changing>electric field component and a changing magnetic field>component. ... understand the physics of the displacement of photons). ... discussing, nor reading, nor learning any more on special relativity until I can understand a bit about those "photons's displacements". ...
    (sci.math)