The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 17, 2019, 02:45:47 am
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Paul & Fred have reached a settlement with Stardock!

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  Starbase Café (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  Temporal information assymtery
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print
Author Topic: Temporal information assymtery  (Read 3739 times)
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3827


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Temporal information assymtery
« Reply #30 on: August 25, 2018, 04:19:33 am »

Because the math is identically the same whether you have one kind of stuff going forward and backward in time or two kinds of stuff only moving forwards in time.
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 928



View Profile
Re: Temporal information assymtery
« Reply #31 on: August 25, 2018, 09:53:07 am »

Because the math is identically the same whether you have one kind of stuff going forward and backward in time or two kinds of stuff only moving forwards in time.

The Friedmann equation also describes the universe pretty well, if you include a number for the amount of dark matter and a number for the amount of dark energy in the universe, but it doesn't explain what dark matter and dark energy is.

Similarly, the math might work out well by just doubling the g-factor you would expect from the magnetic moment of the electron and all possible virtual forward time interactions, but it doesn't necessarily explain why you need to double it. This isn't obvious. They really thought the g-factor should be around 1 before the Dirac equation.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2018, 11:31:32 am by Zanthius » Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3827


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Temporal information assymtery
« Reply #32 on: August 26, 2018, 06:37:57 am »

… what?

the consequences of Feynman diagrams being valid are far-reaching and affect waaaay more than the exact value of the g-factor. Moreover, I am not disputing their accuracy! Just, interpreting them does not require introducing backwards-propagation in time. There is a very good - preferred, even - physical interpretation of Feynman diagrams which does not change the predictions even one tiny bit from what you're talking about, yet also does not have any particles going back in time at all. You can include backwards-traveling particles if you want, and if you're only looking at the microscopic level. But when you zoom out to the point where entropy gets to be a consideration, you lose that option. That's just not compatible with what time means to us in our world.
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 928



View Profile
Re: Temporal information assymtery
« Reply #33 on: August 27, 2018, 02:06:54 pm »

But if we have multiple possible futures, I don't quite understand why we don't have alternate histories:



Couldn't it be that we come from different configurations of the universes, that for some reason converged into the configuration of the universe we have today?

« Last Edit: August 27, 2018, 02:38:00 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3827


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Temporal information assymtery
« Reply #34 on: August 29, 2018, 05:18:21 pm »

1) Whether we have multiple pasts is one of those cases where it's not entirely clear. We definitely have multiple intermediary pasts (in a similar way to how we have multiple futures) in simple cases like a two-slit experiment, but the distant past looks so much like a low-entropy initial condition that in order for us to have multiple terminal pasts, its being low-entropy would have to be an illusion.

2) You've zoomed out to the level where backwards time travel makes less sense. Like, how would the universe fill in those dots? Would it start in the past and work its way forward, except when it has antimatter it puts… just… that backwards? But each of these is a total configuration of all particles in the universe. How would you send just part of it back? How do you even get 'ahead' of antimatter? Does there need to be a path to the future that doesn't involve any antimatter and then you get to fill it in from the other end? But due to the whole thing with the anomalous dipole moment as you've seen and the renormalization group in general, every regular particle carries a very small amount of antimatter around with it (and vice versa).

If you don't take the 'flow of time is flow of information' route and everything is moving forwards, then you end up in contradictions and not knowing where information comes from. It ends up worse than IRS forms where they tell you to put numbers down on lines you've already filled out, because in that case it means you misread the instructions; if antimatter travels back in time, that's actually baked into the rules.
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 928



View Profile
Re: Temporal information assymtery
« Reply #35 on: August 27, 2019, 10:29:33 am »

If space is 3 dimensional, and spacetime is 4 dimensional, couldn't we regard scale as a 5th dimension?

Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3827


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Temporal information assymtery
« Reply #36 on: August 29, 2019, 02:25:20 pm »

No. Scale is firmly on the 'map' side of the 'map vs territory' distinction.

Even if there were a physical effect, it would be a property of the contents, not an independent dimension. ''Dimension' has a specific meaning, and scale doesn't fit it any better than temperature or magnetic field, neither of which are dimensions (if you are making a model, there is a specific way you can use a different kind of dimension to handle those quantities, but it's not what is meant by 'dimension' in the sense of physical dimensions).
« Last Edit: August 30, 2019, 07:26:03 pm by Death 999 » Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 928



View Profile
Re: Temporal information assymtery
« Reply #37 on: August 29, 2019, 09:23:13 pm »

Ok. What about this?

Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3827


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Temporal information assymtery
« Reply #38 on: August 30, 2019, 07:27:15 pm »

Ok. What about this?



A) Bosons don't stack. You're thinking of Fermions. 
B) GR predicts black holes without reference to QM. 
C) the scaling is wrong. That is, if it were stacking, then energy would be proportional to volume. It's proportional to radius.
Logged
Zanthius
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 928



View Profile
Re: Temporal information assymtery
« Reply #39 on: August 30, 2019, 10:01:20 pm »

A) Bosons don't stack. You're thinking of Fermions.  

We might not see any stacking of bosons in our 4 dimensional perspective of spacetime. But can't bosons be stacked in another 5th dimension that is hidden to us, and still appear to have the same location in our 4-dimensional perspective?

Also, how can the singularity in black holes be composed of fermions, when they cannot have the same location due to the Pauli exclusion principle? White dwarfs and neutron stars might be composed of stacked fermions, but they are much less dense than black holes. Are you sure it is possible to stack fermions well enough to make a black hole?



B) GR predicts black holes without reference to QM.  

General relativity might predict that spacetime can be curved enough to trap light, but I think you need quantum mechanics and particle physics to predict what material(s) black holes are composed of.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2019, 10:12:15 pm by Zanthius » Logged
Death 999
Global Moderator
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3827


We did. You did. Yes we can. No.


View Profile
Re: Temporal information assymtery
« Reply #40 on: September 03, 2019, 03:56:00 pm »

A) Bosons don't stack. You're thinking of Fermions.  

We might not see any stacking of bosons in our 4 dimensional perspective of spacetime. But can't bosons be stacked in another 5th dimension that is hidden to us, and still appear to have the same location in our 4-dimensional perspective?

This is a very interesting question. The answer is, we can tell.

Suppose you have two identical bosons trapped in an infinitely deep square well; we'll label the two dimensions of this system X and Y. The state can be summarized by two quantum numbers - the number of half-wavelengths in the X direction, and the number of half-wavelengths in the Y direction. Suppose we can only actually see the first of these - we can only measure the number of half-wavelengths in the X direction.

The interesting bit is, even if we can't tell how many half-wavelengths the two bosons have in the Y direction, if they have the same number of half-wavelengths in the X direction, we can tell if they also have the same number of half-wavelengths in the Y direction - if they're in the exact same state in every dimension, that changes the statistics of any interactions.

So, adding a new dimension doesn't let you hide stacking where we can't see it. You might be able to go out of your way to create a janky theory which reproduces the effect at the cost of being much more complicated and not explaining anything new.
« Last Edit: September 03, 2019, 07:07:28 pm by Death 999 » Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!