Sunday, September 13, 2009

Multidimensional character of emergent perspective

This post is just a copy of few silly comments to ongoing discussion about concept of minimal length in quantum gravity and Lorentz symmetry violation. AWT enables to separate the subtleties of particular quantum field theories from general problem consisting in subconscious mixing of insintric and exsintric perspectives.

In AWT Lorentz symmetry(LS) is direct consequence of observational perspective. When we are observing low dimensional space (like 2D+1T water surface) from strictly 2D+1T perspective, LS is indeed maintained. When we are observing the same situation from higher dimensional perspective, LS can be violated and nothing very special is about it. AWT stance is, every space-time is completely homogeneous from its own perspective by definition and its LS cannot be violated. At the moment, when we are discussing some homogeneities in it, we are applying higher dimensional perspective, which enables LS to become violated. "An Outside View" is always of higher dimensionality, then insider's view, so its LS can be violated by definition. If it wouldn't, we couldn't distinguish it from inside view, after all.



In AWT concept of minimal length doesn't exist from global perspective, because even the tiniest density fluctuations can be formed by some more smaller ones without apparent constrains. But there exist limit in observability of smallest density fluctuations from perspective of larger density fluctuations (like humans) or instrumentation, which was used for their detection. Aether fluctuation at particular dimensional scale cannot interact with fluctuations at all remaining dimensional scales directly in accordance to principle "Simillia simillibus observatur". If we would use more sensitive/large apparatus, the limit of fluctuations on both sides of dimensional scale will increase accordingly and we would observe our Universe larger and quantum fluctuations smaller - but some general limit still persists here.

The philosophical question is, if such dimensional scale is real for people, because it's always interpreted by apparatus. Science answered such question positively already from the time of Galilei and van Leeuwenhoek. The main gnoseologic problem is, outside perspective remains undetectable from insiders, so we are always talking about somehow abstract phenomena, which can be proven by higher dimensional emergent approach only, i.e. by coincidence of two or more indirect evidences - but not by direct observation. Whole evidence of emergent Aether concept is about it, after all.

It should be pointed out, the existence of space-time at sub-Planck scale (i.e. existence of "subminimal length") lies outside of observational perspective scope of insiders too, so we are relating existence of one unprovable phenomena (Lorentz symmetry violation) by existence of another one (sub-Planck length).

Proclamativelly rigorous people, who are working with insintric perspective preferably can say easily, both ideas are BS - whereas other people, who knows, that more is different and really is different and how emergent phenomena are working, can expect, combination of two or more undetectable phenomena (assumption) could still lead to new observable (i.e. testable) predictions, thus fulfilling utilitarian perspective of further evolution. After all, renormalization procedure is quite similar approach based on emergence, because its extrapolating singular function by pair of their derivations from both sides of divergence. In this way, modern physicists just replaced wide-scale philosophical extrapolations by these less-visible formalized ones.

35 comments:

El Cid said...

Andromeda is 2.5 million light-years away. But this distance between the Sun and Andromeda is measured by an observer who is in rest with respect to the Sun (or with respect to the Earth, because we can despise the speed of the Earth with respect to the Sun in this case).

Let's suppose that a spacial ship which is moving with a speed of 0.9 ... 9c (one hundred and fifteen nines) with respect to the Sun. The spacial ship is headed to Andromeda. What's the distance between the Sun and Andromeda measured by the pilots of the spacial ship?

Well this problem is very easy and it can be solved using special relativity: It's enough applying the formula:

L = L0 * (1 - v^2/c^2)^(1/2)

where:

c - is the speed of light
v - is the speed of the spacial ship with respect to the Sun
L0 - is the distance between the Sun and Andromeda.

In the S.I. units L0 = 2.5 * 10^6 * 365 * 24 * 60 * 60 * 3 * 10^8 m = 2.3652 * 10^22 m (aprox.)
(1- 0.9 ... 9c/c)^(1/2) = 3.1622 * 10^(-58) (aprox.)

So, we have L = 2.3652 * 10^22 * 3.162277660·10^(-56) = 7.48 ·10 ^ (-36) m

Namely, the distance between the Sun and Andromeda is less than Planck Length (=1.62*10^(-35) m) for the pilots of the spacial ship. And nobody say something about this result. What do you think?

Zephir said...

Well, this is a good insight. It would mean, relative speed cannot exceed certain limit, or it would violate quantum mechanics. It's evident, such observer cannot see a lotta details from our world due the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. We can find a similar paradox for collapse of black hole into "pin-point" singularity.

On the evening of October 15, 1991, an ultra-high energy particle was observed over Salt Lake City, Utah. It was estimated to have an energy of approximately 3 × 10^20 eV, equivalent to 50 joules—in other words, it was comparable to that of a fastball.

El Cid said...

It's evident, such observer cannot see a lotta details from our world due the Heisenberg uncertainty principle

Exactly, that is. Let's suppose that there are two observers R1(at rest with respect to Earth) and R2. Let's suppose that R2 is moving with a constant velocity v (|v| very high but less than c) with respect to R1. Consider an object, at rest with respect to R1, with a width equal to D = (X2-X1) in the same direction of v. If this object is sufficiently large then R1 can use special relativity to study its dynamics, because the object is macroscopic.

But, what does R2 see?

For R2 the width of the object is D' = (X2'-X1'), D' << D. If D' is small enough, i.e., |v| is large enough, then R2 can't ignore the uncertainty principle:
(X2'-X1').(PX2'-PX1')>= h/(4PI)
So, R2 can't only use special relativity to study the behaviour of the object. R2 must use special Relativity + quantum mechanics to describe the dynamics of the object.

Summarising:
1) R1 and R2 are inertial reference frames.
2) R1 describes the dynamic of the object using special relativity only.
3) R2 describes the dynamic of the object using relativistic quantum mechanics.

Remember the first postulate of the special relativity:

The laws by which the states of physical systems undergo change are not affected, whether these changes of state be referred to the one or the other of two systems in uniform translatory motion relative to each other

And this physics is accepted today. WTF?

Anonymous said...

El Cid made a stupid mistake...
L = L0 * (1 - v^2/c^2)^(1/2). ..O.K.
L0 = 2.3652 * 10^22 m ... O.K.
(1- 0.9 ... 9c/c)^(1/2) = 3.1622 * 10^(-58) ...it`s WRONG !
because correct: (1- (0.9c)^2/c^2)^(1/2) = (1- 0.9^2)^(1/2) = 0.434
then correct L = 2.3652 * 10^22 * 0.434 = 1.026*10^22 m
NOT 7.48 ·10 ^ (-36) m as El Cid !!

Zephir said...

Thanx for correction.

El Cid said...

Anonymous, yes, I'm wrong, I've replaced bad in the formula. If the speed of the space ship is 0.9c then you're right. But I said that the speed of space ship is much higher than 0.9c.

El Cid said...

If the speed of the space ship is:

0.9 ... 9c with ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTEEN NINES

we have:

(1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2) = (1-(0.9...9c)^2/c^2)^(1/2) = (1-(0.9...9)^2)^(1/2) = 4.4721·10^-58 (aprox.)

As L0 = 2.3652 * 10^22 m (aprox.) is the distance between the Sun and Andromeda measured by an observer at rest with respect to the Sun.

Applying the formula that can easily be deduced from the Lorentz transformations:

L = L0 * (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2) = (2.3652·10^22 m) · 4.4721·10^(-58) = 1.058·10^(-35) m is the distance between the Sun and Andromeda measured by the pilots in the space ship

Namely,

L < Planck Length

Now is right.

Anonymous said...

For approx L ~ Planck Length... speed of the ship v ~ c... the ship must be ~massles (?aetheral ;-)

Zephir said...

This limits energy of photons at GUT scale: the size (wavelength) of photon decreases with energy, until it becomes comparable to Planck length - after then the photon cannot shrink anymore - or it would become a graviton.

The similar, just dual principle limits the rest mass of photon at large scale: photon of wavelength comparable to Universe diameter cannot move in it anymore, so its mass becomes rest mass effectively.

El Cid said...

I only care about the phenomenon that are observable by the humans or the measuring apparatus made by humans. So, using AWT, there is not violation of LS for us. Because, we are observers who are living in the hypersurface (i.e. the wave of aether, that is spreading in the hyperspace with more dimensions). According AWT, we are density fluctuations of aether that belong to a particular scale. But fluctuations in the wave, at the end. So, there is not LS Violation for us. According AWT, any theory that violates the LS and don't suppose the existence of hidden dimensions is wrong. As LQG violates LS, then LQG is wrong for AWT, at least 4D LQG.

El Cid said...

Do you know why I said that you're a string theory proponent, Zephir? Because, according AWT, LQG is wrong. And who is the founder of AWT? ;-)

Zephir said...

/..using AWT, there is not violation of LS for us..*/
LS in 3D+1T space-time cannot be violated only from 3D+1T space-time perspective (because presence of extra-dimensions would manifest just by violation of LS in 3D+1T perspective). I'm not expert in string theory and/or LQG theory (and my opinion is, even people, who are dealing with them all the time have no exact stance about it) - but I presume, both these theories are assuming LS for 3D+1T space-time (albeit not always quite explicitly).

With respect to the above principle, for example cosmic microwave background field should be considered as a violation of LS in 3D+1, but I never heard, string theorists are claiming CMB as LS violation or evidence of extra-dimensions. You should realize, these theories are quite complex and simple conceptual thinking is somewhat remote from way of thinking of these theorists - they cannot see forest through woods.

Zephir said...

/*..because, according AWT, LQG is wrong..*/
LQG is based on inconsistent postulate set in simmilar way, like string theory - but until it considers LS in just 3D space, I've no problem with this point in the same way, like with ST. The problems with explanation of gamma ray dispersion are problem of ST/LQG interpretations - not these theories as such.

It's not first case, when people poorly interpreted theories in the point, which appears quite clear from more general theory perspective, you know. They're mixing observational perspectives. Just try to read the discussion about question, whether assumption of minimal length violates LS or not (string theory supports minimal Planck length in the same way, like QLG theory).

Zephir said...

/*...according AWT, LQG is wrong..*/
According AWT all other theories are wrong in less or more distant perspective. This doesn't say, I'm proponent or denier of some particular theory. Usually it is more difficult to understand complexity of scientific theories, then the reality, which are trying to describe.

El Cid said...

From the first principles, both LQG and ST present LS. Because, ST, at least in its simplest form, is nothing but the quantum mechanics of classical relativistic strings, therefore, ST is Lorentz invariant. In the other hand, LQG exhibits general covariance, that is, the law of the physics are invariant under arbitrary differentiable coordinate transformations. In particular, the law of the physics are invariant under Lorentz transformations. I am not discussing that problem, rather, I wonder why there are physicists in the both sides saying that these theories can break the LS at very high energies. It seems to me that both theories allow a complex mechanism that breaks LS.

El Cid said...

Zephir, one question about AWT

How many dimensions have the hyperspace where the wave of aether is spreading? Is this hyperspace eternal?

Zephir said...

/*..how many dimensions have the hyperspace where the wave of aether is spreading? ..*/
AWT can be expressed like eternal harmonic wave in infinitely many dimensions. It's projection into 3D space appears like random noise, though.

Zephir said...

/*..these theories can break the LS at very high energies...*/
LS isn't violated in completely flat space-time only. Every curvature of 3D space introduces LS violation in 3D space, because such curvature introduces higher dimensional reference frame.

El Cid said...

I thought the wave of aether is a 3D surface who is spreading in a higher dimensional space. The number of spacial dimensions of this hyperspace should be finite. For example, the hyperspace could have 12 dimensions. While the arrow of time arises from the movement of the aether trough the hyperspace. As this movement is through an infinite number of directions there will be an infinite number of arrows of time. But one thing is a dimension and other is a direction. For example a 3D space has 3 dimensions and an infinite number of directions. Zephir, I'm sorry but the hyperspace is not full of aether, yet. When the aether filled the whole hyperspace, then it will be the end of the time and the Universe will be over.

El Cid said...

"The people who believe in inequalities that constrain coordinate distances are doing the very same mistake as the defenders of the luminiferous aether - against relativity - were doing 100 years ago. They have made no progress in their understanding of spacetime whatsoever, and the new ambitious term, "quantum gravity", doesn't change anything about the fact that their thinking is stuck in the very same kind of aether that prevented the 19th century physicists from discovering relativity."

Lubos Motl, September 16, 2009

Zephir said...

/***..hey have made no progress in their understanding of spacetime whatsoeve..**/

The true is, aetherists (like Voigt, Fitzgerald and Lorentz) derived Lorentz transform from Aether model a fifteen years BEFORE Einstein has even started to think about it. The second truth is, even fundamental aetherists (like T.J.J.See) never considered dense Aether concept of AWT in its entirety.

Zephir said...

/*...the hyperspace is not full of aether...*/
It's not full of Aether, it's formed by it, instead - or at least appears so.

AWT isn't based on some mysticism at all - on the contrary. AWT is based on Boltzmann gas model - it's a basic system for definition of thermodynamical energy, instead. Furthermore, this model isn't ad-hoce at all. It's based on the understanding, from sufficiently distant perspective every object appears like pin-point particle. And every complex interactions in such system can be modeled by system of colliding particles.

For example, people are complex objects, but if we would observe them from sufficient altitude, they would appear and behave like chaotic 2D gas composed of colliding particles. It means, AWT is natural and logical simplification of supposedly every physical system.

Zephir said...

/*..I thought the wave of aether is a 3D surface who is spreading in a higher dimensional space....*/

Aether in AWT has no particular number of dimensions built in - after all, why it should have? Such number would become an additional independent postulate of AWT, which would make it inconsistent in less or more distant perspective.

El Cid said...

It's not full of Aether, it's formed by it, instead - or at least appears so
...
Aether in AWT has no particular number of dimensions built in


Foolishness. How do you allowed this garbage here? Do you think I'm a fool?

Your knowledge of AWT is very limited. When you try to deepen through the aether concept I realise that you don't know what you're talking about. AWT is not what you are writing. Please think a little about it before to start to write the pack of nonsense. AWT doesn't deserve to be what you say it's.
It's clear that you are only looking for the glory at any price and I'm sure that you sleep through all nights soundly without remorse, like an ass. Enough for today. Goodnight.

Zephir said...

/*...Foolishness. How do you allowed this garbage here? ..*/

Of course not. Particles in AWT are colliding hyperspheres with no predefined number of dimensions. But the most compact hypersphere packing (diameter/surface ratio) can be achieved just for 3D hyperspheres. This criterion defines the number of space dimensions in our observable Universe.

Zephir said...

/**AWT is not what you are writing**/
It's indeed possible, but irrelevant without detailed logical explanation.

El Cid said...

AETHER WAVE THEORY POSTULATES by EL CID

Postulate 1: There are two basic things that make up the whole Universe, the hyperspace and the aether.
Postulate 2: The hyperspace is a 12D-space. The hyperspace shows an Euclidean Geometry. The hyperspace is void with an energy density equal to zero.
Postulate 3: The aether is a superfluid. The energy density of the aether is not zero. The aether moves along the hyperspace forming a wave of three dimensions. The wave of aether shows a curved geometry (pseudo-riemannian geometry).
Postulate 4: The hyperspace doesn't interact with the aether.
Postulate 5: The aether can occur in two different phases. Each phase has a characteristic energy density. The change of one phase of aether to another is allowed.
Postulate 6: The first phase of aether is the gaseous phase. This phase is also called dark energy.
Postulate 7: The second phase of aether is the solid phase. This phase is also called matter. The energy density of solid phase is larger than the energy density of gaseous phase.
Postulate 8: The particles are tiny clusters of the second phase of aether. The tiny clusters of the second phase of aether are wave packets of aether. The wave packets have all physical properties of the particles. For example, a wave packet can show a vortex, then the particle has a spin not equal to zero. When the flux velocity that forms the vortex is higher than the speed of light then the particle has a spin equal to 1/2, i.e. a fermion.When the flux velocity that forms the vortex is lower than speed of light then the particle has a spin equal to 1 or 2, i.e. a boson.
Postulate 9: The wavefront is spreading through all directions of the hyperspace, the velocity of the wavefront through a direction is measured by the local entropy by an observer who lives in the wave of aether. This entropy can increase or decrease.
Postulate 10: The average velocity of advance of the aether through the hyperspace is the time.

Zephir said...

/*..Postulate 1: There are two basic things that make up the whole Universe, the hyperspace and the aether...*/
In AWT each level of space-time is formed by density gradient of another Aether environment. The problem of your postulate 1 is, it separates these two things.

/*Postulate 2: The hyperspace is a 12D-space. The hyperspace shows an Euclidean Geometry...*/
Our space-time is apparently much higher-dimensional. 12 dimensions is relevant for particle world (graviton-Higgs boson-quark-pion hierarchy). But for example electrons in atom nuclei is another level of hidden dimensions, atoms in molecules and molecules in droplets another one. Human creatures itself are very high dimensional objects (organelles in cells in tissue in bodies in social groups). Here are many additional levels of hierarchy in planets, stars, galaxies and galactic clusters.

Zephir said...

/*...Postulate 3: The aether is a superfluid...*/
Aether forms all phases of space-time from vacuum quantum foam over rocks and water in oceans to core of black holes.

/*..the energy density of the aether is not zero...*/
It's infinite by Aether definition of AWT.

/*..The aether moves along the hyperspace forming a wave of three dimensions...*/
You're stucked on ancient model of Aether penetrating space. But luminiferous Aether is forming the space instead.

/*... wave of aether shows a curved geometry...*/
How phrase "wave geometry" is defined? AWT distinguishes longitudinal and transversal waves in duality.

Zephir said...

/*...Postulate 4: The hyperspace doesn't interact with the aether...*/
AWT doesn't recognize hyperspace concept, everything is just an Aether phase. After all, for compacted space-times inside of atoms outer space is hyperspace too - the hyperspace concept is apparently relative. And as we know, internal motion inside of composite particles is often influenced by their environment through phase interface separating exsintric space from insintric one.

Zephir said...

/*...Postulate 5: The aether can occur in two different phases...*/
Number of Aether phases is given by number of space-time hiearchy levels, which is virtually unlimited.

/*..each phase has a characteristic energy density....*/
With respect to neigbouring space only. The absolute measure doesn't exist here simply because I don't know, how to define it.

Zephir said...

/*..Postulate 6: The first phase of aether is the gaseous phase. This phase is also called dark energy...*/
You told in Postulate 3, Aether is superfluid. Now you're talking about gas and solid phase. If you overparametrize your theory, it will become inconsistent easily.

El Cid said...

I've only read nonsenses in your responses.
How many nonsenses can you write in a day?
Maybe, you already have the world record guiness.

Zephir said...

/*...how many nonsenses can you write in a day?...*/
For silly dog everything, what people are saying around him it's nonsense - so your feeling can be simply a result of informational barrier (effect of total reflection for information spreading).

So you should prove, it's a nonsense first. You can for example derive, how two my sentences lead to different conclusions by sequence of logical steps.

Zephir said...

If the wave function is real, it is a very weird kind of real. According to the mathematics, Schrödinger's wave function encodes everything there is to know about a single
particle in three dimensions. But things get more complicated very quickly. The wave function for two particles exists in an abstract six-dimensional space and for three particles,
it exists in nine dimensions, and so on. (1, 2,
3)