tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post5384918310867679758..comments2021-08-22T06:05:44.372-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: When gravity breaks downSabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger88125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-80519205938172489712019-05-01T07:41:20.407-04:002019-05-01T07:41:20.407-04:00Peter,
Here a recent nice account of your algorit...Peter,<br /><br /><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvTqbM5Dq4Q&t=2m35s" rel="nofollow">Here a recent nice account of your algorithm</a>.<br />Reimondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04669340425105889539noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-44790760792885873082019-03-26T12:45:35.605-04:002019-03-26T12:45:35.605-04:00The Mandelbrot set is famous for its limitless fra...The Mandelbrot set is famous for its limitless fractal beauty, since no matter how detailed your last iteration of it was, you can always reuse it as the seed for a new one to reveal still more complexity. In contrast to the limitless details of the set, the defining equation for Mandelbrot is very compact: fc(z)=z^2+c. You iterate this equation from z=0, and if the resulting values do not Terry Bollingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915136249111338024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-10636554412424828552019-03-26T08:48:18.305-04:002019-03-26T08:48:18.305-04:00Perhaps this is too simplistic, but if all current...Perhaps this is too simplistic, but if all current descriptions of space time (such as GR) boil down to equations in xyzt and xyzt are presumed to be Real Numbers, then we are automatically making the assumption that space time is infinitely divisible. Which cannot be true. So any "differential equation" approach to space time is fundamentally wrong at some level.Ken Abbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07654085244823197611noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-59325576825013826532019-03-17T20:02:22.891-04:002019-03-17T20:02:22.891-04:00@Axil
Your comments are interesting but difficult...@Axil<br /><br />Your comments are interesting but difficult to assess without more details on the nature of your quasiparticles. Are you proposing some form of dark matter?<br /><br />I certainly agree that multi-particle entanglement, particularly between fermions and bosons, is a critical component of taking the big leap from simple Pauli exclusion to emergence of the full properties of both Terry Bollingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915136249111338024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-81733295039475172872019-03-17T03:17:37.432-04:002019-03-17T03:17:37.432-04:00@Terry Bollinger
As I noted in the post that you...@Terry Bollinger<br /><br /><br />As I noted in the post that you have responded to, there is a loophole in that prescription for abc space that you describe and that is entanglement. Entanglement with all sorts of bosons enable large ensembles of fermions to become free of Pauli exclusion and become just like xyz in "open source" space where adding distance is free (no energy cost). Axilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07190120527431077518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-85496608228247403972019-03-16T22:48:27.240-04:002019-03-16T22:48:27.240-04:00@Axil: "…revolutionary ideas have emerged fro...@Axil: "…revolutionary ideas have emerged from…condensed [m]atter… Maybe… reductionist methods… are not the proper tool [for] nested complex interactions…"<br /><br />Xyz space has of course a curious conjugate called momentum space, call it abc, that is accessible via Fourier transform. Quantum wave functions can be expressed as easily in abc as in xyz. Abc is also the basis for Terry Bollingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915136249111338024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-32148987749337132822019-03-15T03:43:00.393-04:002019-03-15T03:43:00.393-04:00I just read that a chemist has come up with a way ...I just read that a chemist has come up with a way to produce tri-hydrogen H3+ in large amounts. Why can't LHC use H3+ as feed-stock as opposed to protons. Using tri-hydrogen H3+ will increase the energy available at collision at least 6 times over protons.Axilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07190120527431077518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1525030821138706352019-03-15T03:28:04.134-04:002019-03-15T03:28:04.134-04:00@Andrew Palfreyman
System A will have all the par...@Andrew Palfreyman<br /><br />System A will have all the particles in it ensemble stabilized at their lowest energy state or ground state to meet the entanglement requirement. Whereas System B be will have all particles with energies above the ground state with all energy states different from any other particle. This is assumed to insure that all particles in System B's are not entangled.<brAxilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07190120527431077518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-44001935782981764752019-03-14T21:31:10.063-04:002019-03-14T21:31:10.063-04:00@Lawrence Crowell
Regarding: “We might think of t...@Lawrence Crowell<br /><br />Regarding: “We might think of the extremization of a geodesic length as a statement that the quantum state of the particle in motion is in some maximal entanglement with spacetime.”<br /><br />I get the impression that particle physics and the people who practice within it for a living discount entanglement as a major part of what a particle is and can become. For Axilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07190120527431077518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-73320472937426752052019-03-08T12:08:09.523-05:002019-03-08T12:08:09.523-05:00Regarding the approach involving the superposition...Regarding the approach involving the superposition of "heavy" objects, I remember reading this criticism that might be of interest:<br /><br />https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.11315v1Sanderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02666502497605632869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-25098955580567431422019-02-28T09:10:06.082-05:002019-02-28T09:10:06.082-05:00For some reason I was looking here and found these...For some reason I was looking here and found these old replies. I could go into some depth on how dS and AdS are related to each other. I think it is similar to the momentum cones in the Haldane chain and symmetry protected topological states. Of course I would be theory mongering if I went into great depth. This is a part of my solid state physics view of some things.Lawrence Crowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12090839464038445335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-17909791977186726992019-02-22T02:37:50.905-05:002019-02-22T02:37:50.905-05:00Hi Lawrence,
Just yesterday I discovered a new ar...Hi Lawrence,<br /><br />Just yesterday I discovered a new article on Quantamagazine that deals exactly with this question: How to get from AdS to dS space. Here is the link: <br /><br />https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-our-universe-could-emerge-as-a-hologram-20190221/<br /><br />Best, PascalPascal Häußlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11396713612797829828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-17841629277755143372019-02-21T06:41:13.518-05:002019-02-21T06:41:13.518-05:00Peter Woit (“Not Even Wrong” blog) has a recent po...Peter Woit (“Not Even Wrong” blog) has a recent post on this, well worth reading, but I think of tangential relevance only, here.JeanTatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08737430572613792118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-22340825893938824842019-02-21T01:03:45.227-05:002019-02-21T01:03:45.227-05:00I think I'll drop this right here : )
https:/...I think I'll drop this right <i>here</i> : )<br /><br />https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/a-different-kind-of-theory-of-everything<br />R. Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10621243868815039607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-27689754511434634182019-02-19T22:57:30.116-05:002019-02-19T22:57:30.116-05:00Hi Sabine. !
... love your work.Hi Sabine. !<br /> ... love your work.A.C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04994876510058676257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-61684730693643107132019-02-19T08:52:10.558-05:002019-02-19T08:52:10.558-05:00Eusa,
Your points are nicely stated and interesti...Eusa,<br /><br />Your points are nicely stated and interesting to contemplate. Robert Spekkens at PI has written persuasively about how quantum mechanics in particular enables a wide range of trade-offs between abstractions of state (kinematics) and evolution of states (dynamics), leading to seemingly very different theories that nonetheless end up making the same experimental predictions. What Terry Bollingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915136249111338024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-22027115817401778402019-02-19T06:33:41.373-05:002019-02-19T06:33:41.373-05:00Terry Bollinger,
No problem with Verlinde's m...Terry Bollinger,<br /><br />No problem with Verlinde's math - I have the same, but in my interpretation holografic principle emerges from the center/cause of an element particle field, not out of entanglement correlations. I see the information theory connects discrete inertia with continuous gravity just via that math. This is very compatible with energy tensor and principles in general Eusahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14114706429392111062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-86278398003511474692019-02-19T00:42:30.641-05:002019-02-19T00:42:30.641-05:00Hi Lawrence
Thanks for your elaboration on this. ...Hi Lawrence<br /><br />Thanks for your elaboration on this. So that would mean that it’s maybe not a question of „dS or AdS“ but it could be rather both „tied together“ in a very unique way. I wonder what testable predictions would be possible to check for that.<br /><br />Best, Pascal Pascal Häußlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11396713612797829828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-51555807516661829172019-02-18T18:40:20.283-05:002019-02-18T18:40:20.283-05:00Eusa, imagine an electronic fund of one million Eu...Eusa, imagine an electronic fund of one million Euros that can be dynamically distributed and redistributed among millions of people, with one restriction: No matter how complex and rapid those dynamic redistributions of the money become, the total sum must always remain precisely one million Euros. To do this, you will need some non-trivial universal rules and infrastructure, since otherwise youTerry Bollingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915136249111338024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-5815396607783139312019-02-18T05:58:04.887-05:002019-02-18T05:58:04.887-05:00It's little strange E. Verlinde propose entang...It's little strange E. Verlinde propose entanglement being a foundation for the emergent gravity. We can see interactions (observations) are momentum and energy in matter structures and hence foundation for gravitational curvature of spacetime. Maybe entanglement has correlation with gravitational changes and decoherence, maybe with Higgs mechanism too...Eusahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14114706429392111062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-655819344419549162019-02-18T05:46:12.634-05:002019-02-18T05:46:12.634-05:00Fixed that, thanks!Fixed that, thanks!Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-33595604606919560072019-02-18T04:22:54.934-05:002019-02-18T04:22:54.934-05:00typo
"Why don’t physicist study this case clo...typo<br />"Why don’t physicist study this case closer?"<br />what you probably meant to say<br />"Why don’t physicists study this case closer?"Mike Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02118687844610412581noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-70739770894346463242019-02-18T00:28:05.001-05:002019-02-18T00:28:05.001-05:00bud rap,
Yes, that's right, it's a conjec...bud rap,<br /><br />Yes, that's right, it's a conjecture. Alas, I was replying to a question that asked how to test quantum gravity, hence presupposing it does exist already. My point is simply if quantum gravity exists then strictly speaking all gravity is quantum gravity, it's just that sometimes the effects are so weak you can't tell. Is like strictly speaking all Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-5366362513319374912019-02-17T14:57:34.942-05:002019-02-17T14:57:34.942-05:00Andrew, picture the wave functions for the two cas...Andrew, picture the wave functions for the two cases. Entangled properties will have large, highly delocalized wave functions, while non-entangled (observed) properties will have more localized and thus "sharper" wave functions. Since sharper means more high-momentum components, the more localized wavefunctions will have a bit more energy. Thus if all other parameters at the same, the Terry Bollingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03915136249111338024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-26553920471289323952019-02-17T12:53:01.377-05:002019-02-17T12:53:01.377-05:00Sabine,
Well, strictly speaking all gravity is qu...Sabine,<br /><br /><i>Well, strictly speaking all gravity is quantum gravity.</i><br /><br />Strictly speaking, that is a conjecture masquerading as a statement of fact.bud raphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06948881286545517324noreply@blogger.com