Experiment: Quantum particles can violate the mathematical pigeonhole principle

_{Denyse O'Leary

February 19, 2019

Cosmology, Intelligent Design, Physics}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Which says that if there are more holes than pigeons, some pigeons must share:

In the study, three photons took the place of the pigeons. Rather than crowding the photons into holes, the researchers studied the polarization of the particles, or the orientation of the photons’ wiggling electromagnetic waves, which can be either horizontal or vertical. Since there were three photons and two polarizations, standard math would suggest that at least two must have had the same polarization. When the scientists compared the particles’ polarizations, the team found that no two particles matched, verifying that the quantum pigeonhole effect is real.Emily Conover, “Photons reveal a weird effect called the quantum pigeonhole paradox” at Science News

Paper. (paywall) Significance:

We have demonstrated the quantum pigeonhole paradox with three single photons. The effect of variable-strength quantum measurement is experimentally analyzed order by order and a transition of violation of the pigeonhole principle is observed. We find that the different kinds of measurement-induced entanglement are responsible for the photons’ abnormal collective behavior in the paradox. The experimental violation of pigeonhole principle presents a challenge to the fundamental counting principle of nature. – Ming-Cheng Chen, Chang Liu, Yi-Han Luo, He-Liang Huang, Bi-Ying Wang, Xi-Lin Wang, Li Li, Nai-Le Liu, Chao-Yang Lu, and Jian-Wei Pan PNAS January 29, 2019 116 (5) 1549-1552; published ahead of print January 29, 2019 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1815462116

See also: Whether or not man has free will, quantum mechanics means that nature does

and

If quantum mechanics were a researcher, she’d be fired

Note: The recent uproar around a review of Adam Becker’s book at Inference Review, denounced by Becker at Undark, turned on issues in quantum mechanics. “So Inference Review allows dissenting opinion and Peter (PayPal) Thiel made money in the new economy. Which proves what, exactly? Becker goes on at length, editorializing against Inference Review, which he is compelled neither to read nor support through his tax funds. – News ”

Comments

BA @29: I don't think I could be classified as a classical theist anymore. As Mr. Arrington noted, I'm better described as a Pantheist. Edited to add: to be perfectly clear, I am first and foremost a metaphysical pragmatist. All my other views are adopted, informed and dismissed accordingly. PeterA: I differ with probably everyone here on multiple points, not just one. Addressing your comment about the absolute exclusivity of truth, the most important part is to begin with a sound dichotomy. If you are referring to my position that in one fundamental way we are the same thing (unity), and in another we a distinct, individual identities (self/other), I refer you to the example of the apparent paradox of the quantum wave/particle effect. One can ask what the truth is and apply the exclusion principle and demand that it is true that something is either a wave OR a particle (compare to unity OR indviduality), but both cannot be fundamentally true. However, experimentation has shown that this is in fact the case and that it (apparently) depends upon the observer as to how it (whatever light is) behaves or how it appears. It also apparently violates our normal sense of linear cause and effect (quantum eraser) and, from the information in this thread, many other qualities that appear to violate certain truth dichotomies we previously thought were exclusionary in nature. Or, perhaps I don't understand your objection?William J Murray_{February 20, 2019
February
02
Feb
20
20
2019
07:41 AM
7
07
41
AM
PDT}

Here another finding from quantum mechanics that is inexplicable for Darwinian materialists. Specifically, in quantum mechanics, "an object's physical properties can be disembodied from the object itself"
Physicists add 'quantum Cheshire Cats' to list of quantum paradoxes - November 25, 2013 Excerpt: Given all the weird things that can occur in quantum mechanics—from entanglement to superposition to teleportation—not much seems surprising in the quantum world. Nevertheless, a new finding that an object's physical properties can be disembodied from the object itself is not something we're used to seeing on an everyday basis. In a new paper, physicists have theoretically shown that this phenomenon, which they call a quantum Cheshire Cat, is an inherent feature of quantum mechanics,,, The physicists begin their paper with an excerpt from Lewis Carroll's 1865 novel Alice in Wonderland: 'All right', said the Cat; and this time it vanished quite slowly, beginning with the end of the tail, and ending with the grin, which remained some time after the rest of it had gone. 'Well! I've often seen a cat without a grin', thought Alice, 'but a grin without a cat! It's the most curious thing I ever saw in my life!' Just as the grin is a property of a cat, polarization is a property of a photon. In their paper, the physicists explain how, "in the curious way of quantum mechanics, photon polarization may exist where there is no photon at all." ,,,when the photon's location and polarization are measured simultaneously, the results are identical to those of the original experiment: the photon is in the left arm while the polarization is in the right arm. http://phys.org/news/2013-11-physicists-quantum-cheshire-cats-paradoxes.html 39:00 minute mark: “Mass turns out not to be an intrinsic property of matter either” – Bruce Gordon: – The Incompatibility of Physicalism with Physics: A Conversation with Dr. Bruce Gordon https://youtu.be/wk-UO81HmO4?t=2344
LOL :)bornagain77_{February 20, 2019
February
02
Feb
20
20
2019
06:00 AM
6
06
00
AM
PDT}

Hazel, If you read the comments starting @ 20 , you should see why I was asking the questions I asked earlier. Actually, it seems like WJM’s comments on my questions eventually led to a few very insightful comments posted by BA, BA77, StephenB. If you still don’t understand it, feel free to ask what exactly you don’t understand. WJM and KF differ in at least one fundamental point, according to WJM himself. The same can be said about WJM and BA or WJM and BA77. Truth is absolutely exclusive: (1) They both could be wrong, or (2) one of them could be right and the other wrong, but (3) both can’t be right. I strongly believe that in this case KF, BA and BA77 are in the right side of that philosophical argument.PeterA_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
06:10 PM
6
06
10
PM
PDT}

To support Isabel Piczek’s claim that the Shroud of Turin does indeed reveal a true ‘event horizon’, the following study states that 'The bottom part of the cloth (containing the dorsal image) would have born all the weight of the man’s supine body, yet the dorsal image is not encoded with a greater amount of intensity than the frontal image.'
Particle Radiation from the Body - July 2012 - M. Antonacci, A. C. Lind Excerpt: The Shroud’s frontal and dorsal body images are encoded with the same amount of intensity, independent of any pressure or weight from the body. The bottom part of the cloth (containing the dorsal image) would have born all the weight of the man’s supine body, yet the dorsal image is not encoded with a greater amount of intensity than the frontal image. Radiation coming from the body would not only explain this feature, but also the left/right and light/dark reversals found on the cloth’s frontal and dorsal body images. http://www.academicjournals.org/app/webroot/article/article1380798649_Antonacci.pdf
Moreover, besides gravity being dealt with, the shroud also gives us evidence that Quantum Mechanics was dealt with. In the following paper, it was found that it was not possible to describe the image formation on the Shroud in classical terms but they found it necessary to describe the formation of the image on the Shroud in discrete quantum terms.
The absorbed energy in the Shroud body image formation appears as contributed by discrete (quantum) values - Giovanni Fazio, Giuseppe Mandaglio - 2008 Excerpt: This result means that the optical density distribution,, can not be attributed at the absorbed energy described in the framework of the classical physics model. It is, in fact, necessary to hypothesize a absorption by discrete values of the energy where the 'quantum' is equal to the one necessary to yellow one fibril. http://cab.unime.it/mus/541/1/c1a0802004.pdf
Kevin Moran, an optical engineer working on the mysterious '3D' nature of the Shroud image, states the 'supernatural' explanation this way, “This suggests a quantum event where a finite amount of energy transferred abruptly. The fact that there are images front and back suggests the radiating particles were released along the gravity vector.”
Optically Terminated Image Pixels Observed on Frei 1978 Samples - Kevin E. Moran - 1999 Discussion Pia’s negative photograph, from 1898, showed what looked to be a body that was glowing, but slightly submerged in a bath of cloudy water. This condition is more properly described as an image that is visible, at a distance, but by locally attenuated radiation. The unique front-and-back only image can be best described as gravitationally collimated. The radiation that made the image acted perfectly parallel to gravity. There is no side image. The radiation is parallel to gravity and, if moving at light speed, only lasted about 100 picoseconds. It is particulate in nature, colliding only with some of the fibers. It is not a continuum or spherical-front radiation that made the image, as visible or UV light. It is not the X-ray radiation that obeys the one over R squared law that we are so accustomed to in medicine. It is more unique,,, Theoretical model It is suggested that the image was formed when a high-energy particle struck the fiber and released radiation within the fiber at a speed greater that the local speed of light. Since the fiber acts as a light pipe, this energy moved out through the fiber until it encountered an optical discontinuity, then it slowed to the local speed of light and dispersed. Discussion The fact that the pixels don’t fluoresce suggests that the conversion to their now brittle dehydrated state occurred instantly and completely so no partial products remain to be activated by the ultraviolet light. This suggests a quantum event where a finite amount of energy transferred abruptly. The fact that there are images front and back suggests the radiating particles were released along the gravity vector. The radiation pressure may also help explain why the blood was "lifted cleanly" from the body as it transformed to a resurrected state." https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/moran.pdf
Moreover, the following article found that it would take 34 Trillion Watts of what is termed VUV (directional) radiation to form the image on the shroud.
Astonishing discovery at Christ's tomb supports Turin Shroud - NOV 26TH 2016 Excerpt: The first attempts made to reproduce the face on the Shroud by radiation, used a CO2 laser which produced an image on a linen fabric that is similar at a macroscopic level. However, microscopic analysis showed a coloring that is too deep and many charred linen threads, features that are incompatible with the Shroud image. Instead, the results of ENEA “show that a short and intense burst of VUV directional radiation can color a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin, including shades of color, the surface color of the fibrils of the outer linen fabric, and the absence of fluorescence”. 'However, Enea scientists warn, "it should be noted that the total power of VUV radiations required to instantly color the surface of linen that corresponds to a human of average height, body surface area equal to = 2000 MW/cm2 17000 cm2 = 34 thousand billion watts makes it impractical today to reproduce the entire Shroud image using a single laser excimer, since this power cannot be produced by any VUV light source built to date (the most powerful available on the market come only to several billion watts)”. Comment The ENEA study of the Holy Shroud of Turin concluded that it would take 34 Thousand Billion (trillion) Watts of VUV radiation to make the image on the shroud. This output of electromagnetic energy remains beyond human technology. http://www.predatormastersforums.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3014106
To provide further plausibility to Christ’s resurrection from the dead providing the correct solution for the much sought after ‘Theory of Eerything” it is also important to note that humans ‘naturally’ emit quantum light:
Photocount distribution of photons emitted from three sites of a human body - 2006 Excerpt: Signals from three representative sites of low, intermediate and high intensities are selected for further analysis. Fluctuations in these signals are measured by the probabilities of detecting different numbers of photons in a bin. The probabilities have non-classical features and are well described by the signal in a quantum squeezed state of photons. Measurements with bins of three sizes yield same values of three parameters of the squeezed state. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16520060 Photonics – Quantum Optics Excerpt: Another area of quantum optics involves nonclassical light, such as squeezed states of light, having unusual quantum noise properties. https://www.rp-photonics.com/quantum_optics.html Evidence of quantum nature of life in human photon emission – video (22:31 minute mark) http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=liIDKLZVRdM#t=1351s
And here is a picture of a human emitting quantum biophotons,,,
Image - This first image shows one of the test subjects in full light. The middle image shows the body giving off weak emissions of visible (biophotonic) light in totally dark conditions. The rightmost image of the subject, captured in infrared wavelengths, shows the heat emissions. http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/090722-body-glow-1p.grid-6x2.jpg
Thus to sum up what we have thus far, when we rightly let agent causality back into the picture of modern physics, as quantum physics itself now demands with the closing of the free will loophole, and as the Christian founders of modern physics originally envisioned, (Sir Isaac Newton, James Clerk Maxwell, Michael Faraday, and Max Planck, to name a few), then a empirically backed reconciliation, (via the Shroud of Turin), between Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity, i.e. the ‘Theory of Everything’, readily pops out for us in Christ’s resurrection from the dead. And to further differentiate Christianity for the classical Theism that WJM holds, and to see how nicely Christianity meshes with the evidence presented thus far, it is also important to read the entire context of the exact Bible passage that Barry cited:
Colossians 1:15-20 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.
Thus in conclusion, while WJM may feel that classical Theism does fine and well at explaining what we see in Quantum Mechanics (and it does), when gravity is brought into the picture we find that Christian Theism alone provides a coherent solution for the much sought after ‘Theory of Everything’, and classical Theism is left wanting for a singular explanation as to why Quantum Mechanic and General Relativity will not reconcile into a single overarching 'Theory of Everythng". IMHO, that is a pretty gigantic unexplained hole to have in one's worldview. Verse:
Matthew 28:18 And Jesus came to them and spake unto them, saying, All authority hath been given unto me in heaven and on earth.
bornagain77_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
05:42 PM
5
05
42
PM
PDT}

Of course since the universe is not blowing itself apart, and yet our two best theories in science predict that it should be blown apart, then it is readily apparent that something very powerful must be holding the universe together. For the Christian this should not be surprising. Christianity predicts that Christ is before all things, and in him all things hold together, and that He upholds the universe by the word of his power.
Colossians 1:17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. Hebrews 1:3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power.
As to the scientific plausibility of Christ Himself holding all things together, it is first important to note that both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics have now overturned the Copernican Principle as being a valid principle in science and have restored humanity to ‘centrality’ in the universe:
Overturning of the Copernican Principle by both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/bill-nye-should-check-wikipedia/#comment-671672
Moreover, with the closing of the free will loophole in Quantum Mechanics by Anton Zeilinger and company in 2018, then, as Steven Weinberg states in the following 2017 article, “humans are brought into the laws of nature at the most fundamental level”.
,,, In the instrumentalist approach,,, humans are brought into the laws of nature at the most fundamental level.,,, the instrumentalist approach turns its back on a vision that became possible after Darwin, of a world governed by impersonal physical laws that control human behavior along with everything else. It is not that we object to thinking about humans. Rather, we want to understand the relation of humans to nature, not just assuming the character of this relation by incorporating it in what we suppose are nature’s fundamental laws, but rather by deduction from laws that make no explicit reference to humans.,,, In quantum mechanics these probabilities do not exist until people choose what to measure, such as the spin in one or another direction. Unlike the case of classical physics, a choice must be made,,,, – Steven Weinberg – The Trouble with Quantum Mechanics – JANUARY 19, 2017
Thus, with the overturning of the Copernican Principle by both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, and with humans being “brought into the laws of nature at the most fundamental level”, then of course that makes it entirely plausible that Christ could have possibly reconciled General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics into the ‘quote unquote ‘Theory of Everything” with his resurrection from death. In order to provide empirical evidence for this claim I will appeal to the Shroud of Turin. First off, given the extreme scrutiny that the Shroud of Turin has been through, as well as the disingenuous, (i.e. Darwinian), way atheists have tried to refute the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin, I hold the Shroud to be 100% authentic:
The Shroud of Turin – Evidence it is authentic Below is a summary of scientific and historical evidence supporting the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin as the ancient burial cloth of the historical Jesus of Nazareth. https://www.newgeology.us/presentation24.html Why is the Turin Shroud Authentic? – Giulio Fanti* – November 2018 Conclusion excerpt: If, as discussed above, by authenticity of the Shroud is meant a funerary sheet, of very ancient manufacture, of about 2000 years ago, that wrapped the corpse of a man hard tortured and dead on a cross, all the scientific clues considered seem favorable to this hypothesis. Six [8, 10-14] out of seven independent dating methods (and [9] has been widely criticized) indicate that this linen Sheet is datable to a period including the first century after Christ. The most important Relic of Christianity wrapped a corpse. The blood traces correspond to those of a tortured man. The body image cannot be explained, but the most reliable hypotheses refer to an intense and probably very brief burst of energy. The corpse, endowed with considerable corpse rigidity, remained wrapped in the Shroud for a short period, not exceeding forty hours. All these clues therefore confirm the authenticity of the Shroud [27] https://juniperpublishers.com/gjaa/pdf/GJAA.MS.ID.555707.pdf
Moreover, the repeated ‘voluntary forgetfulness’ of established facts and the repeated ‘distortion of scientific evidence’ by leading critics of the authenticity of the Shroud are gone over in the following paper, and contrary to what the critics would prefer, actually, due to the dishonest tactics the critics themselves have to resort to to try to refute it, actually bolsters the claim that the Shroud is authentic.
Why is the Turin Shroud Not Fake? – Giulio Fanti* – December 04, 2018 Excerpt page 5: a. As reported above, some important arguments in favor of authenticity are forgotten in an apparently voluntary way. For example the scientific fact [6,19,20,25] that the Shroud wrapped the corpse of a severely tortured man, scourged, crowned with thorns and crucified according to Roman techniques is forgotten when a painting technique to explain the body image of the Shroud is supposed. Other recent results are also forgotten, such as the numismatic dating of the Shroud through the Byzantine coins [25], which sees it already in 692 AD, while someone keeps on stating that the Shroud did not exist before 1300 AD. b. The reality of scientific experiments are distorted and the global result is forgotten at the expense of a particular detail useful for the present goal. For example the work [22] detected the presence of pigments of various colors on the Shroud, probably due to the contamination with other paintings, but only the red pigments have been mentioned in a paper [13] to sustain a particular thesis. c. Statements relative to a distorted reality can be found when for example we read that pollen grains detected by a researcher on the Shroud have not been seen afterwards [13]. In fact, the same kind of pollen grains [29] together with other particles coming from powders vacuumed from the Shroud have been recently detected thus confirming more dated results. d. Not correct statements are still frequent like that asserting that the sample of Shroud used in 1988 for radiocarbon dating had been perfectly cleaned or that the pollutant should weigh about 80% of the total weight of the fabric to reach the age in which Jesus Christ lived in Palestine.,,, https://juniperpublishers.com/gjaa/pdf/GJAA.MS.ID.555715.pdf
As well, seeing is believing
Shroud of Turin: From discovery of Photographic Negative, to 3D Information, to Hologram https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-TL4QOCiis Turin Shroud Hologram Reveals The Words “The Lamb” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Tmka1l8GAQ
And as Isabel Piczek and Chuck Missler note in the following video and articles, the Shroud of Turin reveals a strange ‘event horizon’:
“When you look at the image of the shroud, the two bodies next to each other, you feel that it is a flat image. But if you create, for instance, a three dimensional object, as I did, the real body, then you realize that there is a strange dividing element. An interface from which the image is projected up and the image is projected down. The muscles of the body are absolutely not crushed against the stone of the tomb. They are perfect. It means the body is hovering between the two sides of the shroud. What does that mean? It means there is absolutely no gravity. Other strange you discover is that the image is absolutely undistorted. Now if you imagine the clothe was wrinkled, tied, wrapped around the body, and all of the sudden you see a perfect image, which is impossible unless the shroud was made absolutely taut, rigidly taut.” Isabel Piczek - Turin shroud – (Particle Physicist explains event horizon) – video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIpdIz5Rp3I THE EVENT HORIZON (Space-Time Singularity) OF THE SHROUD OF TURIN. - Isabel Piczek - Particle Physicist Excerpt: We have stated before that the images on the Shroud firmly indicate the total absence of Gravity. Yet they also firmly indicate the presence of the Event Horizon. These two seemingly contradict each other and they necessitate the past presence of something more powerful than Gravity that had the capacity to solve the above paradox. http://shroud3d.com/findings/isabel-piczek-image-formation A Quantum Hologram of Christ's Resurrection? by Chuck Missler Excerpt: “You can read the science of the Shroud, such as total lack of gravity, lack of entropy (without gravitational collapse), no time, no space—it conforms to no known law of physics.” The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically. Dame Piczek created a one-fourth size sculpture of the man in the Shroud. When viewed from the side, it appears as if the man is suspended in mid air (see graphic, below), indicating that the image defies previously accepted science. The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically. http://www.khouse.org/articles/2008/847
bornagain77_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
05:40 PM
5
05
40
PM
PDT}

To further solidify Barry's contention that the findings of modern science support Colossians 1:17 in particular and Christianity in general,,
Colossians 1:17 “He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.”
To further solidify Barry's claim,,, in quantum mechanics, especially with the necessity of appealing to a non-local, i.e. beyond space-time, cause in order to explain quantum entanglement,,,
Looking beyond space and time to cope with quantum theory – 29 October 2012 Excerpt: “Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,” http://www.quantumlah.org/highlight/121029_hidden_influences.php
,,, in quantum mechanics it easy to see exactly why quantum non-locality supports what Colossians 1:17 'predicted'. But as WJM's remarks make clear, this still does not completely differentiate WJM's classical Theism from Christianity in particular. To do that we must go further into exactly what modern science reveals. But before we get into that, I would like to point out that Barry’s objection that WJM’s classical view of Theism, ("The whole IS God.”), is dangerously close to Pantheism has some merit. Although WJM objected that his classical view of Theism did not directly imply Pantheism, none-the-less, it is interesting to note that “it is almost natural for a Jewish or Muslim intellectual to become a pantheist.” In fact, Stanley Jaki holds that the ‘natural’ drifting into Pantheism by Jewish and Muslim intellectuals is one of the major reasons why modern science was never born out of the ancient Jewish and Muslim cultures and why it was born uniquely out of the Christian cultures of medieval Europe..
The War against the War Between Science and Faith Revisited - July 2010 Excerpt: Jaki notes that before Christ the Jews never formed a very large community (priv. comm.). In later times, the Jews lacked the Christian notion that Jesus was the monogenes or unigenitus, the only-begotten of God. Pantheists like the Greeks tended to identify the monogenes or unigenitus with the universe itself, or with the heavens. Jaki writes: Herein lies the tremendous difference between Christian monotheism on the one hand and Jewish and Muslim monotheism on the other. This explains also the fact that it is almost natural for a Jewish or Muslim intellectual to become a pantheist. About the former Spinoza and Einstein are well-known examples. As to the Muslims, it should be enough to think of the Averroists. With this in mind one can also hope to understand why the Muslims, who for five hundred years had studied Aristotle’s works and produced many commentaries on them failed to make a breakthrough. The latter came in medieval Christian context and just about within a hundred years from the availability of Aristotle’s works in Latin,, http://www.scifiwright.com/2010/08/the-war-against-the-war-between-science-and-faith-revisited/
But anyways, to get back to the primary question of exactly where modern science differentiates Christianity from classical Theism. Where WJM's view of classical Theism breaks down, "The whole IS God.”, i.e. where that particular view of classical Theism breaks down, and where Christianity differentiates itself from WJM's classical Theism, is when we bring gravity into the mix. General Relativity, (i.e. Gravity), and Quantum Mechanics are, by far, our two most precisely tested theories in science.
The Most Precisely Tested Theory in the History of Science - May 5, 2011 Excerpt: So, which of the two (general relativity or QED) is The Most Precisely Tested Theory in the History of Science? It’s a little tough to quantify a title like that, but I think relativity can claim to have tested the smallest effects. Things like the aluminum ion clock experiments showing shifts in the rate of a clock set moving at a few m/s, or raised by a foot, measure relativistic shifts of a few parts in 10^16. That is, if one clock ticks 10,000,000,000,000,000 times, the other ticks 9,999,999,999,999,999 times. That’s an impressively tiny effect, but the measured value is in good agreement with the predictions of relativity. In the end, though, I have to give the nod to QED, because while the absolute effects in relativity may be smaller, the precision of the measurements in QED is more impressive. Experimental tests of relativity measure tiny shifts, but to only a few decimal places. Experimental tests of QED measure small shifts, but to an absurd number of decimal places. The most impressive of these is the “anomalous magnetic moment of the electron,” expressed is terms of a number g whose best measured value is: g/2 = 1.001 159 652 180 73 (28) Depending on how you want to count it, that’s either 11 or 14 digits of precision (the value you would expect without QED is exactly 1, so in some sense, the shift really starts with the first non-zero decimal place), which is just incredible. And QED correctly predicts all those decimal places (at least to within the measurement uncertainty, given by the two digits in parentheses at the end of that). http://scienceblogs.com/principles/2011/05/05/the-most-precisely-tested-theo/
And yet despite General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics being confirmed to almost absurd levels of precision, General relativity simply refuses to be mathematically unified with quantum mechanics in any acceptable way. And this ‘discrepancy’ is where Christianity differentiates itself from classical Theism. But before we get into that, it is also important to note that the ‘almost absurd’ levels to which General Relativity has been confirmed in particular has stymied attempts for alternate theories that seek to reconcile Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity into a 'theory of everything'
Confirming Einstein, scientists find 'spacetime foam' not slowing down photons from faraway gamma-ray burst (Update) - Mar 16, 2015 Excerpt: Albert Einstein formulated the general theory of relativity, one of the theory's basic assumptions: the idea that all light particles, or photons, propagate at exactly the same speed.,, The researchers analyzed data, obtained by NASA's Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope, of the arrival times of photons from a distant gamma-ray burst. The data showed that photons traveling for billions of years from the distant burst toward Earth all arrived within a fraction of a second of each other. This finding indicates that the photons all moved at the same speed, even though different photons had different energies. This is one of the best measurements ever of the independence of the speed of light from the energy of the light particles.,,, One of the attempts to reconcile the two theories (Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity) is the idea of "space-time foam." According to this concept, on a microscopic scale space is not continuous, and instead it has a foam-like structure. The size of these foam elements is so tiny that it is difficult to imagine and is at present impossible to measure directly. However light particles that are traveling within this foam will be affected by the foamy structure, and this will cause them to propagate at slightly different speeds depending on their energy. The fact that all the photons with different energies arrived with no time delay relative to each other indicates that such a foamy structure, if it exists at all, has a much smaller size than previously expected. "When we began our analysis, we didn't expect to obtain such a precise measurement," said Prof. Tsvi Piran, the Schwartzmann University Chair at the Hebrew University's Racah Institute of Physics and a leader of the research. "This new limit is at the level expected from quantum gravity theories. http://phys.org/news/2015-03-einstein-scientists-spacetime-foam.html Troubled Times for Alternatives to Einstein’s Theory of Gravity - April 30, 2018 New observations of extreme astrophysical systems have “brutally and pitilessly murdered” attempts to replace Einstein’s general theory of relativity. Excerpt: The neutron-star collision was just the beginning. New data in the months since that discovery have made life increasingly difficult for the proponents of many of the modified-gravity theories that remain. Astronomers have analyzed extreme astronomical systems that contain spinning neutron stars, or pulsars, to look for discrepancies between their motion and the predictions of general relativity — discrepancies that some theories of alternative gravity anticipate. These pulsar systems let astronomers probe gravity on a new scale and with new precision. And with each new observation, these alternative theories of gravity are having an increasingly hard time solving the problems they were invented for. Researchers “have to sweat some more trying to get new physics,” said Anne Archibald, an astrophysicist at the University of Amsterdam.,,, For any alternative theory of gravity to work, it has to not only do away with dark matter and dark energy, but also reproduce the predictions of general relativity in all the standard contexts. “The business of alternative gravity theories is a messy one,” Archibald said. Some would-be replacements for general relativity, like string theory and loop quantum gravity, don’t offer testable predictions. Others “make predictions that are spectacularly wrong, so the theorists have to devise some kind of a screening mechanism to hide the wrong prediction on scales we can actually test,” she said. https://www.quantamagazine.org/troubled-times-for-alternatives-to-einsteins-theory-of-gravity-20180430/
The main reason that Gravity has yet to be successfully included into a theory of everything with Quantum Mechanics and Special Relativity (Quantum-Electrodynamics) is because the infinities that crop up in that attempt are not renormalizable as they were in Quantum-Electrodynamics (QED).
Does quantum mechanics contradict the theory of relativity? Sanjay Sood, Microchip Design Engineer, Theoretical and Applied Physicist – Feb 14, 2016 Excerpt: quantum mechanics was first integrated with special theory of relativity by Dirac in 1928 just 3 years after quantum mechanics was discovered. Dirac produced an equation that describes the behavior of a quantum particle (electron). In this equation the space and time enter on the same footing – equation is first order in all 4 coordinates. One startling by product of this equation was the prediction of anti matter. It also gave the correct explanation for the electron’s spin. Dirac’s equation treats an electron as a particle with only a finite degrees of freedom. In 1940s Dirac’s equation was incorporated into the relativistic quantum field theory that’s knowns as quantum electrodynamics (QED) independently by Feynman, Schwinger and Tomonaga. This is the theory that describes the behavior of electrons and photons and their interactions with each other in terms of relativistic quantum fields that have infinite degrees of freedom. QED allowed extremely precise calculation of anomalous magnetic dipole moment of an electron. This calculated value matches the experimentally measured value to an astonishing precision of 12 decimal places! The integration of Einstein’s general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics has proved to be far more difficult. Such an integration would give a quantum theory of gravity. Even after a sustained effort lasting more than half a century, no renormalized quantum field theory of gravity has ever been produced. Renormalization means a theory that’s free of infinities at zero distance or infinite energy because 2 point particles can interact with each other at zero distance. A non renormalizable theory has no predictive value because it contains an infinite number of singular coefficients. https://www.quora.com/Does-quantum-mechanics-contradict-the-theory-of-relativity Unified field theory Excerpt: Gravity has yet to be successfully included in a theory of everything. Simply trying to combine the graviton with the strong and electroweak interactions runs into fundamental difficulties since the resulting theory is not renormalizable. Theoretical physicists have not yet formulated a widely accepted, consistent theory that combines general relativity and quantum mechanics. The incompatibility of the two theories remains an outstanding problem in the field of physics. – per wiki/Unified_field_theory#Current_status Quantum Leaps – Jeremy Bernstein – October 19, 2018 Excerpt: Divergent series notwithstanding, quantum electrodynamics yielded results of remarkable accuracy. Consider the magnetic moment of the electron. This calculation, which has been calculated up to the fifth order in ?, agrees with experiment to ten parts in a billion. If one continued the calculation to higher and higher orders, at some point the series would begin to break down. There is no sign of that as yet. Why not carry out a similar program for gravitation? One can readily write down the Feynman graphs that represent the terms in the expansion. Yet there remains an irremediable difficulty. Every order reveals new types of infinities, and no finite number of renormalizations renders all the terms in the series finite. The theory is not renormalizable. https://inference-review.com/article/quantum-leaps Jeremy Bernstein is professor emeritus of physics at the Stevens Institute of Technology.
Besides Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity not being mathematically renormalizable with each other, the theories, when combined, actually predict that spacetime, atoms, and the universe itself should all be literally torn apart. Here are a few references that get this point across.
“There are serious problems with the traditional view that the world is a space-time continuum. Quantum field theory and general relativity contradict each other. The notion of space-time breaks down at very small distances, because extremely massive quantum fluctuations (virtual particle/antiparticle pairs) should provoke black holes and space-time should be torn apart, which doesn’t actually happen.” – Gregory J. Chaitin , Francisco A. Doria, and Newton C. a. Da Costa – Goedel’s Way: Exploits into an Undecidable World “In order for quantum mechanics and relativity theory to be internally self-consistent [Seeking consistency between quantum mechanics and relativity theory is the major task theoretical physicists have been grappling with since quantum mechanics emerged], the physical vacuum has to contain 10^94 grams equivalent of energy per cubic centimeter. What that means is, if you take just a single hydrogen atom, which is one proton and one electron and all the rest of the atom is ‘empty space,’ if you take just that volume of empty space, … you find that you end up with a trillion times as much vacuum energy as all the electromagnetic energy in all the planets, all the stars, and all the cosmic dust in a sphere of radius 15 billion light-years.” To summarize, the subtle energy in the vacuum space of a single hydrogen atom is as great as all the electromagnetic energy found in everything within 15 billion light-years of our space-time cosmos.” ,,, Dr. William Tiller – Human Intention Cosmic coincidence spotted – Philip Ball – 2008 Excerpt: One interpretation of dark energy is that it results from the energy of empty space, called vacuum energy. The laws of quantum physics imply that empty space is not empty at all, but filled with particles popping in and out of existence. This particle ‘fizz’ should push objects apart, just as dark energy seems to require. But the theoretical value of this energy is immense — so huge that it should blow atoms apart, rather than just causing the Universe to accelerate. Physicists think that some unknown force nearly perfectly cancels out the vacuum energy, leaving only the amount seen as dark energy to push things apart. This cancellation is imperfect to an absurdly fine margin: the unknown ‘energy’ differs from the vacuum energy by just one part in 10^122. It seems incredible that any physical mechanism could be so finely poised as to reduce the vacuum energy to within a whisker of zero, but it seems to be so. http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080219/full/news.2008.610.html The 2 most dangerous numbers in the universe are threatening the end of physics – Jessica Orwig – Jan. 14, 2016 Excerpt: Dangerous No. 2: The strength of dark energy ,,, you should be able to sum up all the energy of empty space to get a value representing the strength of dark energy. And although theoretical physicists have done so, there’s one gigantic problem with their answer: “Dark energy should be 10^120 times stronger than the value we observe from astronomy,” Cliff said. “This is a number so mind-boggling huge that it’s impossible to get your head around … this number is bigger than any number in astronomy — it’s a thousand-trillion-trillion-trillion times bigger than the number of atoms in the universe. That’s a pretty bad prediction.” On the bright side, we’re lucky that dark energy is smaller than theorists predict. If it followed our theoretical models, then the repulsive force of dark energy would be so huge that it would literally rip our universe apart. The fundamental forces that bind atoms together would be powerless against it and nothing could ever form — galaxies, stars, planets, and life as we know it would not exist. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/two-most-dangerous-numbers-universe-194557366.html
bornagain77_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
05:39 PM
5
05
39
PM
PDT}

Barry
As an orthodox (small “o”) Christian, I obviously do not agree that “the whole is God.” That is pantheism. However, I think conceptually you and I are not far apart. Christian orthodoxy holds that God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient. It also states that God is simultaneously within and without (i.e., both immanent and transcendent). And it states that God can be apprehended/known regardless of one’s location or perspective. I am not sure what you mean by both “universal and personal,” but Christians believe that God is universal in the sense that he is omnipresent and that “of him, and through him and to him are all things.” And Christians believe God is personal in that he deals with each of us as an individual.
I basically agree with Barry's well framed formulation. God, *as the whole* (defined as being a part of his own creation or vice versa), seems untenable to me. I would add that matter is the principle of individuation. Anything that you can imagine, such as a triangle, is particularized. Two units of matter cannot be in the same place, if it were so, they would be exactly the same thing and therefore, not individuated particulars. (Ontology) You can know the universal essence or definition of a triangle , but you can only imagine this or that triangle, which could be small, scalene, colored etc. (Epistemology). I submit, therefore, that we know universals and we sense particulars. If I feel the hard wood on an oak tree, my senses are operating, but when I apprehend a tree for what it is (essence), my mind is operating by interpreting what my senses present to it.StephenB_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
03:44 PM
3
03
44
PM
PDT}

WJM, As an orthodox (small "o") Christian, I obviously do not agree that "the whole is God." That is pantheism. However, I think conceptually you and I are not far apart. Christian orthodoxy holds that God is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient. It also states that God is simultaneously within and without (i.e., both immanent and transcendent). And it states that God can be apprehended/known regardless of one’s location or perspective. I am not sure what you mean by both "universal and personal," but Christians believe that God is universal in the sense that he is omnipresent and that "of him, and through him and to him are all things." And Christians believe God is personal in that he deals with each of us as an individual.Barry Arrington_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
11:49 AM
11
11
49
AM
PDT}

Barry Arrington @20: I think that's a fairly good way to phrase it, although I would phrase it differently. I wouldn't say "God is holding it all together", rather, I would say "The whole IS God." This gives a good perspective on the qualities we usually assign to God - omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient. Those would be the necessary qualities of God if God IS everything that exists, including throughout what we call time. It also makes God both universal and personal, both within and without, and something that can be apprehended/known regardless of one's location or perspective. And, to be clear, by "the whole" I mean everything that exists, not just that which we assign to physicality or the physical universe.William J Murray_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
11:19 AM
11
11
19
AM
PDT}

BTW, I just want to clear something up. In the prior comments I'm using the term "fundamental" from a physicalist perspective. From an idealist perspective (my perspective), the quantum field level is only partly fundamental to experience; consciousness and psyche are also fundamental aspects of experience, and individuation is achieved by consciousness using what we usually describe as the quantum field as a means to generate the "illusion" of a distinct identity.William J Murray_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
11:13 AM
11
11
13
AM
PDT}

Two caveats: (1) this is extremely speculative theology; (2) the Bible is not a science text and it is dangerous to treat it as such. Colossians 1:17. "He is before all things, and in him all things hold together." I wonder if the fundamental "inseparable whole" at the quantum level to which WJM alludes can be accounted for by the fact that at the most fundamental ontological level of all, all things are held together in God. I make no claim. Again, just speculating.Barry Arrington_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
11:09 AM
11
11
09
AM
PDT}

PeterA @17, I don't see how it could be interpreted to not relate. At the macro or our normal perceptual level, experience occurs as from the perspective of individuated persons. At the quantum level, all of existence appears to be an inseperable whole - nonlocal and instantaneous, not even distinct in terms of intrinsic characteristics or locations in space or time.William J Murray_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
10:57 AM
10
10
57
AM
PDT}

Peter, I don't think you are understanding. wjm said there are limits to how deep separable parts can be found. He didn't say that there are no separable parts.hazel_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
10:30 AM
10
10
30
AM
PDT}

WJM, You wrote: “there would be a limit as to how deep one could examine their experience and still get results that correspond to the idea that there are separable parts with intrinsic, distinct qualities.” How does that relate to what you wrote last? ““Person” refers to an individual, an individuated experience/perspective.”PeterA_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
10:27 AM
10
10
27
AM
PDT}

PeterA said:
Are you saying that KF and you are the same person?
Of course not. "Person" refers to an individual, an individuated experience/perspective.William J Murray_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
10:17 AM
10
10
17
AM
PDT}

as to:
The experimental violation of pigeonhole principle presents a challenge to the fundamental counting principle of nature.
This experiment further validates Dr. Gordon's contention that quantum mechanics falsifies materialism. Specifically, it verifies that "these entities, whatever they are, fail the criterion of material individuality."
Why Quantum Theory Does Not Support Materialism - By Bruce L Gordon: Excerpt: Because quantum theory is thought to provide the bedrock for our scientific understanding of physical reality, it is to this theory that the materialist inevitably appeals in support of his worldview. But having fled to science in search of a safe haven for his doctrines, the materialist instead finds that quantum theory in fact dissolves and defeats his materialist understanding of the world.,, The underlying problem is this: there are correlations in nature that require a causal explanation but for which no physical explanation is in principle possible. Furthermore, the nonlocalizability of field quanta entails that these entities, whatever they are, fail the criterion of material individuality. So, paradoxically and ironically, the most fundamental constituents and relations of the material world cannot, in principle, be understood in terms of material substances. Since there must be some explanation for these things, the correct explanation will have to be one which is non-physical - and this is plainly incompatible with any and all varieties of materialism. http://www.4truth.net/fourtruthpbscience.aspx?pageid=8589952939
And this experiment also further validates Dr. Gordon's contention that the "reality of our experience can be seen to be best explained by an occasionalist idealism of the sort advocated by George Berkeley (1685-1753) or Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758). In the metaphysical context of this kind of theistic immaterialism, the vera causa that brings coherent closure to the phenomenological reality we inhabit is always and only agent causation. "
Divine Action and the World of Science: What Cosmology and Quantum Physics Teach Us about the Role of Providence in Nature - Bruce L. Gordon - 2017 Excerpt page 295: In light of this realization, the rather startling picture that begins to seem plausible is that preserving and explaining the objective structure of appearances in light of quantum theory requires reviving a type of phenomenalism in which our perception of the physical universe is constituted by sense-data conforming to certain structural constraints, but in which there is no substantial material reality causing these sensory perceptions. This leaves us with an ontology of minds (as immaterial substances) experiencing and generating mental events and processes that, when sensory in nature, have a formal character limned by the fundamental symmetries and structures revealed in “physical” theory. That these structured sensory perceptions are not mostly of our own individual or collective human making points to the falsity of any solipsistic or social constructivist conclusion, but it also implies the need for a transcendent source and ground of our experience. As Robert Adams points out, mere formal structure is ontologically incomplete: [A] system of spatiotemporal relationships constituted by sizes, shapes, positions, and changes thereof, is too incomplete, too hollow, as it were, to constitute an ultimately real thing or substance. It is a framework that, by its very nature, needs to be filled in by something less purely formal. It can only be a structure of something of some not merely structural sort. Formally, rich as such a structure may be, it lacks too much of the reality of material thinghood. By itself, it participates in the incompleteness of abstractions. . . . [T]he reality of a substance must include something intrinsic and qualitativeover and above any formal or structural features it may possess.117 When we consider the fact that the structure of reality in fundamental physical theory is merely phenomenological and that this structure itself is hollow and non-qualitative, whereas our experience is not, the metaphysical objectivity and epistemic intersubjectivity of the enstructured qualitative reality of our experience can be seen to be best explained by an occasionalist idealism of the sort advocated by George Berkeley (1685-1753) or Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758). In the metaphysical context of this kind of theistic immaterialism, the vera causa that brings coherent closure to the phenomenological reality we inhabit is always and only agent causation. The necessity of causal sufficiency is met by divine action, for as Plantinga emphasizes: [T]he connection between God’s willing that there be light and there being light is necessary in the broadly logical sense: it is necessary in that sense that if God wills that p, p occurs. Insofar as we have a grasp of necessity (and we do have a grasp of necessity), we also have a grasp of causality when it is divine causality that is at issue. I take it this is a point in favor of occasionalism, and in fact it constitutes a very powerful advantage of occasionalism. 118 http://jbtsonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/JBTS-2.2-Article-7.compressed.pdf
bornagain77_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
10:16 AM
10
10
16
AM
PDT}

A more salient question: Are PeterA and Jawa the same person? Edit: ninja'd by Jawa himself!daveS_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
10:12 AM
10
10
12
AM
PDT}

Peter @11: Are you saying that Hazel and you are the same person? What are you going to say next? That you and I are the same person too? Scary, isn’t it?jawa_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
10:11 AM
10
10
11
AM
PDT}

Peter @9: Wow!!! WJM and KF the same person with two aliases or avatars? Now you really hit it out of the stadium buddy. Maybe you should take some time off to rest?jawa_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
10:07 AM
10
10
07
AM
PDT}

Hazel @10: WJM wrote: “there would be a limit as to how deep one could examine their experience and still get results that correspond to the idea that there are separable parts with intrinsic, distinct qualities.” Doesn’t that imply that WJM and KF are the same person deep down there at the end of the day? Their apparent differences are just illusionary?PeterA_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
10:00 AM
10
10
00
AM
PDT}

re 9: Why do you think that? Wjm writes, "KF and I ...": they are without a doubt different people! :-)hazel_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
09:49 AM
9
09
49
AM
PDT}

WJM @7: Maybe I don’t understand your comment well. Are you saying that KF and you are the same person? You just have two separate aliases or avatars? Did I get this right? Thanks.PeterA_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
09:42 AM
9
09
42
AM
PDT}

Very good post, wjm.hazel_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
07:08 AM
7
07
08
AM
PDT}

Hazel @6, I agree, which is why I think "counting" and distinguishable locations & characteristics break down at the fundamental levels of experimentation. As KF points out, those things are embedded in the world we experience, but where KF and I disagree is what "that world" really is, and what "experience" is and how it works. To exist as an individuated identity, there must appear to be distinction and separation (which directly implies countability) which is fundamentally orchestrated by logical principles, which IMO reflect the necessary aspects of the perception of individuated identity. While these are necessary perceptual, ordered constructs for individuated experience, IF the nature of our existence is fundamentally unitary and whole (metaphorically, "beneath the illusion), there would be a limit as to how deep one could examine their experience and still get results that correspond to the idea that there are separable parts with intrinsic, distinct qualities. But, this is nothing new. Quantum experimentation has been providing support for a deep unity ever since non-local, instantaneous entanglement was discovered, indicating a profound entanglement of everything in the entire universe.William J Murray_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
06:52 AM
6
06
52
AM
PDT}

Yes, but counting is dependent on "distinctly separable parts", so at the level and in the circumstances in which the world doesn't act as if it were made of distinctly separable parts, counting won't work.hazel_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
06:30 AM
6
06
30
AM
PDT}

DaveS @1: I don't think it violates a self-evident truth. Upon reading the non-paywall experiment, it seems to me that what is being violated is fundamental premise that the results of many quantum experiments have also violated: the premise that we are living in material/physical world that is has distinctly separable qualities and parts, and is distinctly separable from consciousness/mind. We keep expecting it to fundamentally behave in a material-physical way even though it keeps refusing to do so. It has been apparent for decades that we need an entirely different premise, but the stranglehold of metaphysical materialism on physics refuses to accept this.William J Murray_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
06:14 AM
6
06
14
AM
PDT}

Hazel, Yes, that is an unfortunate use of language which will be confusing to students of combinatorics.daveS_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
05:54 AM
5
05
54
AM
PDT}

The experimental violation of pigeonhole principle presents a challenge to the fundamental counting principle of nature
hazel_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
05:44 AM
5
05
44
AM
PDT}

Probably a follow-up to this previous work that showed similarly paradoxical experimental results (with no paywall).William J Murray_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
05:41 AM
5
05
41
AM
PDT}

Since there were three photons and two polarizations, standard math would suggest that at least two must have had the same polarization. When the scientists compared the particles’ polarizations, the team found that no two particles matched, verifying that the quantum pigeonhole effect is real.
This is very strange, seemingly violating a self-evident truth. Namely that if there are only two possible states, it is impossible for three particles to all have different states. I would guess that those in the know find this phenomenon less paradoxical than I do ...daveS_{February 19, 2019
February
02
Feb
19
19
2019
05:24 AM
5
05
24
AM
PDT}

Prev 1 2 3

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply