Re: Time is the paper on which the pen of the aether writes.


"EL" <hemetis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1117932535.470859.249550@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Bill Hobba wrote:
> > "Curious" <anthonyroseuk-curious@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1117909887.302021.65040@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > At any instant in time, matter and energy occupy a specific frozen
> > > position.
> >
> > For a poster who posts under the name of curious you seem to be more
> > dogmatic than curious.
> > QM has cast extreme doubt on the idea of objects
> > having a specific position.
> [EL]
> Which does not mean that nothing can be anywhere, or that everything
> are not where they are at any event.

But that is not what the poster said. He specifically claimed matter
occupied a position at any instant in time. QM says objects do not have the
propriety of position independent of measurement. We simply can not speak
of such.

> Uncertainty, concerns the impossible case of determining the
> coordinates of a measured momentum of a particle.
> If you revise the physics you preach Bill, you shall notice that
> Momentum is the product of Force and a Time Interval.

Errrrr - EL classically force is the time derivative of momentum ie dp =
Fdt - if that is what you are trying to say then I agree - but according to
QM this does not apply except in the classical limit and according to
Ehrenfest's theorem.

> The physics of
> measuring momentum demands "passing" the wave that carries the force to
> the measuring device.

Then banging a particle into another particle as per the photoelectric
effect would not count I suppose.

> A wave cycle, by definition, cannot be a single
> point coordinate, hence the impossibility of finding a single spatial
> coordinate to express what occupies an interval rather than a point.

Like the above I have no idea what you are trying to say. The wave particle
duality says QM stuff sometimes acts like a wave (in which case it has no
definite position) and sometimes like a particle - in which case it does -
but in reality it is neither.

> On
> the other hand, the centre of the quantum position can be determined
> within a coordinate system if its momentum was not being measured
> concurrently.

But not independent of measurement. QM clearly says such properties do not
exist unless they are being measured.

> Therefore, what "Curious" seems to be saying is that at
> any event everything must be somewhere, regardless of "where" is that.

I can not speak for what Curious might be trying to say - I can only speak
to what he wrote.

> You most certainly knew what he meant, but there is older feelings
> involved that I neither know or care to know about. Let no emotions
> cloud your honest judgement.

When you wish to discuss what is written and not some pop psychology
assessment of me then we can proceed.

Bill

>
>
> > May I suggest you actually study physics rather
> > than indulge in obvious armchair philosophizing?
> >
> > Bill
> >
> > > It requires the lapse of time for matter and energy to alter
> > > their form and location. There is no real 'direction' of *time*
> > > involved, so much as there is a direction of the transformations of
> > > matter and energy from one state (old) to another (new). Time itself
is
> > > a neutral dimension, a backdrop which allows existence to be painted
on
> > > it. Each and every instant is a new painting on time.
> > > Yes, there is a direction of old to new, which implies the possibility
> > > of new to old, but it is not time itself which holds the direction. It
> > > is really the arrangements of matter and energy.
> > > So even if you *could* go back in time, the entire universe would
> > > simply rewind with you.
> > >
> > > Furthermore time travel is logically not possible because the atoms
> > > which you would hope to take back in time would increase the net mass
> > > of the universe and would disrupt the flow of the universe
immediately,
> > > making it impossible for the same sequence of events to happen, making
> > > it impossible for you to have left just as you did in the first place.
> > > Don't be silly.
> > >
> > > Anthony Rose
> > >
>


.

Relevant Pages