Re: A question of discrete space-time.
- From: Ed Hanna <stq50@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 08:53:00 +0000 (UTC)
robert bristow-johnson wrote:
<snip>
> yup. this is why, when i speculate about the CA model, that i think
> that there is something more than mere dimensional analysis, to the
> concept of Natural Units or Planck Units (the version i like the best is
> the "rationalized" Planck Units where 4*pi*G is normalized to 1 instead
> of just G, and epsilon_0 is normalized to 1 instead of the Coulomb Force
> Constant). if the dimensions of these cells are the Natural Units, then
> when these pretty primitive laws of nature (differential equations) are
> discretized in space and time, there are NO extraneous scaling factors
> that nature has to toss in there. and, if you toss in the restriction
> that only adjacent cells may affect any particular cell, then you
> naturally get these limits on the velocity of propagation of anything.
> nothing can move faster than one Natural unit of length per Natural unit
> of time which happens to be "c".
People reading this thread might say it is overly speculative at this
point to associate a space-time quantum (if one exists) with Planck
units, even though this might seem rather satisfying and/or intuitive.
What we would need is some logical connection between the two.
<snip>
> anyway, of course, this is just the speculations of an electrical
> engineer, not physics. perhaps there is nothing special about Natural
> Units (what i might attribute to "rationalized" Planck units), but it
> sure as hell seems to me that Nature (if i may anthropomorphize) is
> trying to tell us something that if we express quantities in terms of
> these Natural Units, these laws of nature, whether expressed in discrete
> or continuous form, have no scaling factors; saving us from having to
> answer the question: why would nature bother to take these quantities
> such as electric flux or gravitational flux (or the change of these
> quantities in time) and multiply by some extraneous factor to get some
> other physical quantity.
I agree that nature is trying to tell us something, but we can't yet
make it out clearly enough to agree amongst ourselves on what it is.
Regards,
Ed Hanna
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Why physicists should pay attention to the mind
- Next by Date: Re: please help my confusion about particles and irreps.
- Previous by thread: Re: A question of discrete space-time.
- Next by thread: Re: A question of discrete space-time.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
