Re: Quantum Gravity 220.8: An Anti-Anthropic Principle Called c and h
- From: OsherD <mdoctorow@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 23:28:36 -0800 (PST)
On Dec 31, 12:32 pm, "biggus" <dd...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
WRONG. "c" has been measured by Humans many many times.
[Next is Reply By Me, Osher Doctorow.]
I can "feel" Troll/Graffiti Artist "biggus" fixating on finding a
"wrong word" somewhat like a lunatic. My own opinion is that he/she/
it has an agenda, including possibly Iranian propaganda, Iranian dope
(the profile is somewhat similar to an Iranian dope peddler who kept
attacking my posts not too long ago), MoveOn.Org type political
smearing (attack the credibility of Anti-Terrorist people), or simply
hatred of the Incompetent for the Competent (compare Salieri's hatred
of Mozart or Descartes' hatred of Pierre de Fermat who kept upstaging
him).
Rush Limbaugh defined a Liberal as a person for whom words have no
meaning (in other words, they emote but they can't argue), which
interestingly enough is somewhat like the idea of Magic for which
scientific laws have no meaning.
The whole content of my posting which "biggus" attempts as usual to
smear with a one-liner "Wrong. c has been measured by humans many
times," is that human beings have not consciously travelled at the
speed of light or at multiples of light years and similarly for h and
the Planck length/distance, and therefore that they are in a position
similar to that of the Ancient Athenians who thought that 2 lines that
look parallel in a small region will, if indefinitely exended on
Earth, remain parallel.
I never said that c hasn't been "measured" by humans. The concept of
"measurement" doesn't qualify for one-liners, whatever else it
qualifies for. There's no question that "light travels at the speed
of light" in vacuum or that human beings can figure out how long it
takes for light emitted from a source to be detected somewhere else
and how far it has travelled (detected by human beings or humanly
constructed instruments whose ultimate "readings" are on the human
macroscopic level). The difficulty is that Einstein's SR and GR and
by the way QFT which uses SR, don't just say the above - they "outlaw"
material objects reaching light speed, they outlaw superluminal
travel, etc. They also assume that there's nothing more to light than
what we measure in our "phase", our macroscopic human phase and
instruments that we construct in our phase. This is very close to
the Ancient Athenian mistake.
When you accept a "legal outlawing of light" as almost literally
occurs in the above theories, both in reaching light speed by massive
objects and in exceeding light speed as well as assuming the
properties of light even though it is arguably a phase that we're not
"in", then you leave Science and enter Magic. You leave Inflation,
or you create artificial categories like "the superluminally expanding
Inflation geometrically" versus everything else "not superluminal",
and you actually create a pseudo-religion that you can't question.
Well, Creative Geniuses do question everything, while Ingenious
Imitators and Mediocre people don't (in fact, the latter two question
very, very little within their fixated or perseverated domain).
Could the speed of light actually be infinite even though it is
measured as finite in our human macroscopic phase? Ask the same
question for geometric expansion during Inflation. Would a human
observer during Inflation (if one existed) have measured superluminal
expansion? No. He/she would have measured either nothing or possibly
some "luminal" or energy/material "shock wave" lower than superluminal
under the best of all possible measurement worlds.
But even if the speed of light were finite, has any human being
actually even remotely approached such a "light barrier" in speed,
from which to confidently argue that a phase transition would be
impossible at or near light speed? That phase transition, if it
occurred. would mean that GR and SR and QFT are phase-restricted
theories, which in modern times is just like saying that one Universe
is only a small part of many Universes comprising a Multiverse or that
not everything that you see or hear on one side of a wall is like
everything on the other side, or that a physical theory applies in
some conditions but not others.
Osher Doctorow
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Prev by Date: Fourier Series Tutorial
- Next by Date: LATEST INFO ON MAD COW DISEASE
- Previous by thread: Fourier Series Tutorial
- Next by thread: Re: Quantum Gravity 220.8: An Anti-Anthropic Principle Called c and h
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
