Unobserved(stateless/unphysical) Quantum Waves + State (physicality) = Spacetime (GR)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aug 2019
58
1
Unobserved waves are unphysical, but ones with state change experience duality and get spacetime involved. Observation doesn't always mean Quantum Observation. What matters is if a state change happens. State is a binary physicality variable. I'm now questioning if it's even necessary to declare observation is involved in the double slit. It's accepted that observation means measurement ..but all the experiment cares about is a waves state change while its moving (and is allowed to continue moving). Observation would just be something that occurred after the experiment was over. It didn't influence the outcome. A wave would never reach something able to change its state ..unless there were two instances of state changes in its path (which-way eraser).

I found a new quantum trick the unobservable is able to achieve. While a new wave formulates, it is able to know if its state will change during its journey ..before it even starts to move. The unobservable is all time, all the time for a physicality variables. Unobserved quantum waves not having spacetime is a very big deal. Without time from spacetime, its life is instantaneous. The delayed choice quantum eraser demonstrates this. The only way the first entangled particle knows if the partner will ever be observed is if the state is known for the life of both entangled particles.

Is quantum which-way information the real cause?
Which-way has nothing to do with it. The final panel is wave collapse and doesn't effect the outcome like a state change does.
I figured out what is happening in an experiment that is "erasing" the "which-way" (with a polarizer). A Double slit with opposite polarizers ..and then an extra polarizer down the line acting as a "eraser";
State (physicality) of a particle is decided while it's being created. State changes are detected preemptively. When two detectors are in its path, its state would be changing twice. In this case, the particle is sent as an unobserved wave. What we are witnessing is what happens when a quantum wave actually goes through double slits and do not interact with polarizers. Proving that a polarizer only effects physical photon light because a single state change would have sent a physical photon at the double slits to go through a single slit.

I asked the forbidden question in physics and found a bridge to reality.
or should I say it's a bridge to the simulation? Spacetime may be an analog simulation built on the quantum field. It doesn't make any sense for light to have a speed limit. Spacetime must have a frame rate. If Spacetime is a simulation, State is the object being added to the program. Perhaps the frame rate is based off the speed something can be observed. Somewhere around 0.3 μm (micrometers) naturally gives a object a physical state. This is the distance light can travel in a femtosecond. This would mean spacetime has a frame rate of 1,000,000,000,000,000 frames per second. Don't bring up Planck, it isn't the size that determines if something is automatically physical.

The Higgs Field is nothing special. It's just another field in the Quantum Field that interacts with Spacetime when the object needs to be physical.

Black holes spaghettify matter and turn its physicality state off. Dark matter is matter that doesn't have the ability to have a physical state.
Black holes are not deleting information, it's just making it unobservable. The holographic principle sounded like a long shot anyways.
 

topsquark

Forum Staff
Apr 2008
2,973
630
On the dance floor, baby!
Observation doesn't always mean Quantum Observation.
Properly addressing the misconceptions here would probably fill a book. I'll stick with this comment for now.

What is the difference between quantum observation and observation?

-Dan
 
Aug 2019
58
1
Quantum observation doesn't count if it doesn't change the state of the particle in flight. The final panel in a quantum experiment rarely counts as quantum observation. That is wave collapse.
 
Sep 2019
33
3
CN GX WZ
I'm also learning to write novels.

For reference only

Combining the reviewing experience of some science fiction editors

Good writers don't usually come up with all their ideas at once.

They will slowly unfold a profound idea in the book.

Instead of using it all at once.
 

topsquark

Forum Staff
Apr 2008
2,973
630
On the dance floor, baby!
To start off with I had a debate with myself about posting this because I'm the Ad for this site and I really need to be supportive of the community even when I disagree with them. Everyone has a right to be heard and I try to maintain that policy as best I can.

But then again I'm a person in my own right so perhaps I can give myself some leeway as well. So here's my response to the second paragraph. I have cut if off where I feel I was getting out of line.

==============================================

Quantum observation doesn't count if it doesn't change the state of the particle in flight. The final panel in a quantum experiment rarely counts as quantum observation. That is wave collapse.
I've never heard of the phrase "state of the particle in flight." I presume you mean a particle that has not had some measurement made on it? That would be called a "virtual particle." And, yes, any measurement on the system creates a "wave collapse." This is true of any particle state before a measurement is made so how can any measurement not be a "quantum observation?"

I'll take it easy on you and assume you mean that there is a difference between a "classical observation" and "quantum observation."

I found a new quantum trick the unobservable is able to achieve. While a new wave formulates, it is able to know if its state will change during its journey ..before it even starts to move. The unobservable is all time, all the time for a physicality variables. Unobserved quantum waves not having spacetime is a very big deal. Without time from spacetime, its life is instantaneous. The delayed choice quantum eraser demonstrates this. The only way the first entangled particle knows if the partner will ever be observed is if the state is known for the life of both entangled particles.
The first two sentences are a desciption of time evolution of a state. Which means, yes, the time evolved state can't be known as it affects the probability nature of a moving particle but we can use it to predict the probablity of which states are more likely than others to be detected.

This next one is so surprising I'm going to requote it.
Unobserved quantum waves not having spacetime is a very big deal.
The only response I have here is, frankly, "What are you smoking and can I have some?" No, I'm not very PC. I'm just going to let this statement be and hope that it'll undergo time evolution and evolve into a more sensible state.
==============================================

And with that I say...

Thead closed.

-Dan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.