- Thank you received: 0
Quantum coherence and gravity
- tvanflandern
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
21 years 3 months ago #6452
by tvanflandern
Reply from Tom Van Flandern was created by tvanflandern
Have a look at the book <i>Pushing Gravity</i>. In some of the chapters therein, and in the Meta Model (featured at this web site), "gravitons" are a high-speed particle flux that directly pushes masses toward one another rather than a constituent of the space-time medium. The latter is called "elysium" in MM, and its constituents are called "elysons", which are the analog of the spin-2 "gravitons" of Penrose and QM. But so far, no one has shown a viable physical mechanism for getting gravitational force from spin-2 gravitons.
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[Rahul]: Podkletnov's experiment that created a repulsive gravitational field by a sharp current spike through a specific kind of high-temperature superconductor...<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
This has not been replicated, and is now a suspect experimental result. -|Tom|-
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[Rahul]: Podkletnov's experiment that created a repulsive gravitational field by a sharp current spike through a specific kind of high-temperature superconductor...<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
This has not been replicated, and is now a suspect experimental result. -|Tom|-
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 3 months ago #6536
by Rahul
Replied by Rahul on topic Reply from Rahul Jain
Ok, I haven't read <i>Pushing Gravity</i> yet, but I've read some more of your papers, Tom. It seems like there is a case to be made that <i>all</i> interactions have at least some superluminal aspect to them.
I've been thinking of a theory where virtual particles are a special case of coherent particles. When decoherence is imposed, only results which preserve conservation laws are allowed, and, of course, those results must travel instantly in order to force any subsequent decoherence to abide by the newly determined (determinate) state of the particles in the system.
Since the virtual particles are, like any other particles, constrained to travelling at <i>c</i>, they are unable to change the field <i>strength</i> at superluminal speed, as that aspect is based on the aggregate density of the virtual particle fields. However, the direction is involved in changing momentum and angular momentum, so that aspect propagates via coherence instantaneously.
Rahul Jain
Professional Computer Programmer
Amateur Theoretical Physicist
I've been thinking of a theory where virtual particles are a special case of coherent particles. When decoherence is imposed, only results which preserve conservation laws are allowed, and, of course, those results must travel instantly in order to force any subsequent decoherence to abide by the newly determined (determinate) state of the particles in the system.
Since the virtual particles are, like any other particles, constrained to travelling at <i>c</i>, they are unable to change the field <i>strength</i> at superluminal speed, as that aspect is based on the aggregate density of the virtual particle fields. However, the direction is involved in changing momentum and angular momentum, so that aspect propagates via coherence instantaneously.
Rahul Jain
Professional Computer Programmer
Amateur Theoretical Physicist
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- tvanflandern
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
21 years 3 months ago #6457
by tvanflandern
Replied by tvanflandern on topic Reply from Tom Van Flandern
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[Rahul]: Since the virtual particles are, like any other particles, constrained to travelling at <i>c</i><hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
If that were true, there would be no need to invent "virtual photons". Real photons would do. However, the as-yet-undiscovered virtual photons have no properties in common with real photons, most especially propagation speed. Virtual photons act instantaneously. If they did not, then all those aberration and propagation delay arguments would apply to them also. -|Tom|-
If that were true, there would be no need to invent "virtual photons". Real photons would do. However, the as-yet-undiscovered virtual photons have no properties in common with real photons, most especially propagation speed. Virtual photons act instantaneously. If they did not, then all those aberration and propagation delay arguments would apply to them also. -|Tom|-
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 3 months ago #6341
by Rahul
Replied by Rahul on topic Reply from Rahul Jain
I guess I need to explain what I meant a little more clearly. I'm not using the typical QM view of virtual particles. In my proposal, they are simply particles in a coherent state relative to their "source". Particles not in a coherent state relative to their "source" are similar to the real particles of QM.
However, particles are almost always coherent with <i>some</i> other particles, so the distinction is merely one of perspective. What is more important is the coherence and decoherence of the particle's state with the state of other particles.
My proposal simply takes the concept of a virtual particle and explains why it can exist in the context of a theory of coherence and decoherence as a non-opaque process. Decoherence hasn't happened yet, so conservation laws don't yet need to be enforced. A virtual particle can be defined as one which must no longer exist once decoherence occurs. Its fleeting existence is a result of Heisenberg uncertainty, which can be viewed as a constraint on the extent of a coherent structure.
Rahul Jain
Professional Computer Programmer
Amateur Theoretical Physicist
However, particles are almost always coherent with <i>some</i> other particles, so the distinction is merely one of perspective. What is more important is the coherence and decoherence of the particle's state with the state of other particles.
My proposal simply takes the concept of a virtual particle and explains why it can exist in the context of a theory of coherence and decoherence as a non-opaque process. Decoherence hasn't happened yet, so conservation laws don't yet need to be enforced. A virtual particle can be defined as one which must no longer exist once decoherence occurs. Its fleeting existence is a result of Heisenberg uncertainty, which can be viewed as a constraint on the extent of a coherent structure.
Rahul Jain
Professional Computer Programmer
Amateur Theoretical Physicist
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
21 years 3 months ago #6346
by Rahul
Replied by Rahul on topic Reply from Rahul Jain
Has anyone compared the conditions where coherence fails to Heisenberg's uncertainty principle?
Rahul Jain
Professional Computer Programmer
Amateur Theoretical Physicist
Rahul Jain
Professional Computer Programmer
Amateur Theoretical Physicist
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.237 seconds