Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley

manofsan@xxxxxxxxx:
>Saying that you can have spooky action at a distance but that it just
>can't communicate, is like claiming that we can time travel to the
>distant past but just can't do anything to alter the future. In other
>words, it doesn't sound plausible or rational.

Then, I guess it's a good thing that we don't have theories with
either of those things.

>
>One can reasonably conclude that such speculations are based on
>abstract book-keeping terms that have no tangible meaning,
>significance, or use, and whose existence are thus inherently
>misleading. Being "correlated to randomness" is a meaningless phrase
>which has no practical weight at all. "Action that does not
>communicate" is also a meaningless idea. These notions are arising from
>the flawed premise of quantum indeterminacy. The contrived solution of
>"probability function" then forces the further contrived notion of
>"spooky action at a distance" which according to the calcite paper can
>then force the notion of "non-locality", etc, etc, error building upon
>error, ad infinitum, ad nauseum.
>
>Quantum indeterminacy of the photon should therefore not be
>real/absolute but only *apparent*. The wave-particle duality idea
>should be scrapped, and we should simply see the discrete quantum
>particle as only having wave behavior imparted to it by the much much
>finer sub-planck scale of the quantum vacuum.
>
>We need to then visualize things more easily using analogies like
>Brownian Motion. Like the speck of dust jiggling in the water drop
>because the unseen water molecules are battering it, we need to see the
>photons and other small particles in the same way. Their apparent
>indeterminacy is only due to the constant perturbation from the
>surrounding medium.
>
>I was reading up on Michelson-Morley, trying to see why its conclusions
>totally oppose and contradict what I've just stated above. I wonder if
>there may be flaws in the Michelson-Morley model which are alluded to
>in my title phrase "Schrodinger's Aether"
>
>Schrodinger's Cat fans like to point out that so-called quantum
>indeterminacy doesn't scale up to macroscopic objects like cats, etc.
>Well, consider the fact that Michelson's idea for his aether-wind
>experiment is based on the notion of swimmers crossing a stream.
>
>http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/lectures/michelson.html
>
>So, conversely to the Schrodinger's Cat example, I'm forced to wonder
>if the Michelson-Morley premise of macroscopic swimmers in a stream can
>really scale down to the quantum level of the photon. Is this premise
>of the Michelson Morley aether wind experiment fundamentally flawed?
>
>Consider that a photon in space is going to suffer perturbation effects
>from the quantum vacuum, analogous to the way a speck of dust in water
>is going to jiggle from Brownian motion. Michelson-Morley is based on
>the analogy of macro-sized swimmers in the stream, which doesn't take
>into account any apparent effects from Brownian motion like the speck
>of dust would experience in water, or that the photon would experience
>in aether. If the Michelson-Morley premise then doesn't take into
>account this "Brownian motion" effect on the photons actually used in
>the experiment for measurement purposes, then there's a possibility of
>it yielding erroneous results and conclusions because of this.
>
>How can one then re-phrase the Michelson-Morley experimental parameters
>to take into account this "Schrodinger's Aether" -- ie. the
>quantum-level perturbational effects by the dynamic vacuum on the
>Michelson-Morley photons which is not accounted for in the macroscopic
>swimmers-in-a-stream model?
>
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
    ... > the flawed premise of quantum indeterminacy. ... > "spooky action at a distance" which according to the calcite paper can ... > I was reading up on Michelson-Morley, trying to see why its conclusions ... > really scale down to the quantum level of the photon. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
    ... Saying that you can have spooky action at a distance but that it just ... Quantum indeterminacy of the photon should therefore not be ... I was reading up on Michelson-Morley, trying to see why its conclusions ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
    ... Saying that you can have spooky action at a distance but that it just ... Quantum indeterminacy of the photon should therefore not be ... I was reading up on Michelson-Morley, trying to see why its conclusions ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Schrodinger Aether vs Michelson-Morley
    ... >>the flawed premise of quantum indeterminacy. ... Like the speck of dust jiggling in the water drop ... >>I was reading up on Michelson-Morley, trying to see why its conclusions ... >>really scale down to the quantum level of the photon. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Why physicists should pay attention to the mind
    ... are physicists using quantum mechanics. ... As an example take a maximally entangled photon pair in the Bell state ... uncertainty about the polarization, i.e., setting a polarization filter ...
    (sci.physics.research)
Quantcast