New Evidence Could Overthrow the Standard View of Quantum Mechanics

This link is a good place to begin a discussion on virtual particles. At some point when I get to it.

Postpocelipse said:

New Evidence Could Overthrow the Standard View of Quantum Mechanics

This link is a good place to begin a discussion on virtual particles. At some point when I get to it.

A QI article, although, unavoidably, their summaries of the various hypotheses must be over-simplistic.

Something that I don’t understand in the way these things are invariably discussed is that the speed of light is always treated as being an absolute and unquestionable limit. Why is the possibility of some other much faster information transfer mechanism always dismissed as being not even worth considering?

The Rev Dodgson said:

Postpocelipse said:

New Evidence Could Overthrow the Standard View of Quantum Mechanics

This link is a good place to begin a discussion on virtual particles. At some point when I get to it.

A QI article, although, unavoidably, their summaries of the various hypotheses must be over-simplistic.

Something that I don’t understand in the way these things are invariably discussed is that the speed of light is always treated as being an absolute and unquestionable limit. Why is the possibility of some other much faster information transfer mechanism always dismissed as being not even worth considering?

c is a limit enforced by the energy level of the vaccum……

Postpocelipse said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Postpocelipse said:

New Evidence Could Overthrow the Standard View of Quantum Mechanics

This link is a good place to begin a discussion on virtual particles. At some point when I get to it.

A QI article, although, unavoidably, their summaries of the various hypotheses must be over-simplistic.

Something that I don’t understand in the way these things are invariably discussed is that the speed of light is always treated as being an absolute and unquestionable limit. Why is the possibility of some other much faster information transfer mechanism always dismissed as being not even worth considering?

c is a limit enforced by the energy level of the vaccum……

Particle mass imposes tension on the vacuum.

Postpocelipse said:

Postpocelipse said:

c is a limit enforced by the energy level of the vaccum……

Particle mass imposes tension on the vacuum.

Even if those phrases somehow can be tied into accepted theories of the relationship between fundamental particles and the speed of light, you should allow for the possibility that these theories may be wrong.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Postpocelipse said:

Postpocelipse said:

c is a limit enforced by the energy level of the vaccum……

Particle mass imposes tension on the vacuum.

Even if those phrases somehow can be tied into accepted theories of the relationship between fundamental particles and the speed of light, you should allow for the possibility that these theories may be wrong.

Those phrases are a short summary of my understanding of current theory on vacuum-zero-energy fundamentals. I don’t discount anything that doesn’t significantly discount itself.

the speed of massless particles is governed by the permittivity and permeability of free space. seeing as you can’t go lighter than massless this leads us to the conclusion that this is a “speed limit”. to exchange information some sort of particle is needed or how else is this information going to be transfered? quantum tunneling is known about and so far no means to transfer information has been discovered.

ChrispenEvan said:

to exchange information some sort of particle is needed or how else is this information going to be transfered?

I don’t know, but to work on the basis that information can only be transferred by particles that we know about, as seems to be an underlying assumption in almost all discussions of these things, seems to me to be just plain silly.

but to work on the basis that information can only be transferred by particles that we know about

well, there is always tachyons.

The Rev Dodgson said:

ChrispenEvan said:

to exchange information some sort of particle is needed or how else is this information going to be transfered?

I don’t know, but to work on the basis that information can only be transferred by particles that we know about, as seems to be an underlying assumption in almost all discussions of these things, seems to me to be just plain silly.

If that hypothesised particle is not a substantial one but the potential in a virtual particle things might make a little less silly……..

Postpocelipse said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

ChrispenEvan said:

to exchange information some sort of particle is needed or how else is this information going to be transfered?

I don’t know, but to work on the basis that information can only be transferred by particles that we know about, as seems to be an underlying assumption in almost all discussions of these things, seems to me to be just plain silly.

If that hypothesised particle is not a substantial one but the potential in a virtual particle things might make a little less silly……..

String theory also makes better sense under this analysis…

Postpocelipse said:

New Evidence Could Overthrow the Standard View of Quantum Mechanics

This link is a good place to begin a discussion on virtual particles. At some point when I get to it.

Ho hum,

“Could … if … may … “
All wild speculation. And I’ve heard all this before at least six times. Wake me if anything is actually discovered.

This is appropriate here….

Physicists just found a link between dark energy and the arrow of time

It’s all just guff to fink aboot. Going to develop some riff coordination muscle memory for an bit or so..

Pilot-wave theory has always struck me as contrived.

KJW said:

Pilot-wave theory has always struck me as contrived.

You don’t consider vacuum zero energy a pilot wave regulator?

Postpocelipse said:

KJW said:

Pilot-wave theory has always struck me as contrived.

You don’t consider vacuum zero energy a pilot wave regulator?

bump……

Postpocelipse said:

KJW said:

Pilot-wave theory has always struck me as contrived.

You don’t consider vacuum zero energy a pilot wave regulator?

Not at all. I’m a many-worlds person.

KJW said:

Postpocelipse said:

KJW said:

Pilot-wave theory has always struck me as contrived.

You don’t consider vacuum zero energy a pilot wave regulator?

Not at all. I’m a many-worlds person.

Well that is the first time I’ve found us on opposite sides of a physics question……

What Is the Great Attractor And Its Pull On Our Galaxy?

Should be useful here….