My Math Forum  

Go Back   My Math Forum > Science Forums > Physics

Physics Physics Forum


Thanks Tree35Thanks
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
October 18th, 2019, 03:08 PM   #1
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Aug 2019
From: Pittsburgh

Posts: 90
Thanks: 5

Exclamation GR deals with what is Real.

Somewhere around 1 x 10-18g in a vacuum is a new constant.

The diffraction grating gets too small to identify fringes. It's a natural size for the object to be physical and to never be in superposition.

Uncollapsed(stateless | unphysical) Quantum Waves + State(Matter Field or wave collapse or decoherence) + zero Diffraction = Physical Matter (Real)

If an object is too large to display fringes, it is automatically physical. The question now is if auto-physical objects have a physical state or maybe being naturally physical doesn't require it.

Do I need to claim there is a physical state in the first place for even quantum sized objects if it is the same thing as: wave collapse, decoherence, and zero diffraction?

There has to be something that causes a particle to be physical or not before it even starts moving. If it is to only be a wave in flight, duality doesn't apply. But if physical, duality is allowed. Maybe I need a different term for "physical state".

If I started using "Real" instead of "physical state" would that get physicists off my back about mass meaning a physical property?

GR deals with what is Real.
Wave Collapse, Decoherence, and Zero Diffraction cause something to be Real.

We just need GR to handle duality for Unification.
GR for reality
QM wave function for unreal

Does this mean Diffraction is directly related to Superposition?
scifimath is offline  
 
October 18th, 2019, 04:52 PM   #2
Math Team
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2013
From: The Astral plane

Posts: 2,340
Thanks: 983

Math Focus: Wibbly wobbly timey-wimey stuff.
This is a duplicate of the response I wrote on PHF.

Where are you getting this stuff from?

Mass is a physical property and is going to remain categorized as such unless you have actual proof (not theory) that it is not. Even when we talk about the spontaneous symmetry breaking in Electroweak theory and we "relax" the definition of a mass and make it imaginary, the higgs still has a physical mass. The imaginary mass is simply an artifact of the phase change, so the mass is still real in the end.

Something that may interest you if you haven't run across it: We've been doing x-ray diffraction for decades using a crystal lattice as a diffraction grating. I don't know exactly what the spacing of the grating would be but I imagine it's in the ball park of a couple of Angstsroms. That would be about as small as we can get for the spacing in a diffracton grating and we can still get good patterns out of it.

You seem to be trying to "glue" a bunch of little bits of unrelated theory together into a whole. My recommendation would be to study these things separately and then come back to it later on.

Quote:
Uncollapsed(stateless | unphysical) Quantum Waves + State(Matter Field or wave collapse or decoherence) + zero Diffraction = Physical Matter (Real)
Physical particles are physical particles and virtual particles are virtual particles. That's just the way it is. You are making a mountain out of a mole hill.

-Dan
topsquark is offline  
October 18th, 2019, 05:04 PM   #3
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Aug 2019
From: Pittsburgh

Posts: 90
Thanks: 5

I already addressed mass being a physical property. F it, the question is if the object is real or not. Diffraction turns out to be a big deal.

Yes the mountain being a theory of everything if you can pull your head from your @SS
scifimath is offline  
October 18th, 2019, 05:05 PM   #4
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Aug 2019
From: Pittsburgh

Posts: 90
Thanks: 5

Higgs is a lie.
scifimath is offline  
October 18th, 2019, 11:36 PM   #5
Math Team
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2013
From: The Astral plane

Posts: 2,340
Thanks: 983

Math Focus: Wibbly wobbly timey-wimey stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scifimath View Post
Higgs is a lie.
Ah. Well that clears it up.

Just a comment. All the apochryphal stories of Einstein sitting in the patent office with little to do dreaming his thought experiements has really done some damage to the process of studying and creating new Physics. The story has left the impression that all you need is a simple idea and you can change the world! It's a nice thought, and it occasionally does happen, but it really doesn't work out all that well most of the time.

So. To be more direct: You are seriously oversimplifying. I have to wonder if you know much of anything about QM or GR, much less about trying to combine the two.

Come back when you have learned something, and ask questions instead of trying to teach topics that you don't understand to the people that do.

Have fun trolling!

-Dan
Thanks from Joppy
topsquark is offline  
October 19th, 2019, 07:20 AM   #6
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Aug 2019
From: Pittsburgh

Posts: 90
Thanks: 5

Are you telling me I can replace "Uncollapsed(stateless | unphysical) Quantum Waves"
with "virtual particles"? That doesn't break my idea. It sounds like I could just add that to it.

Uncollapsed(stateless | unphysical | virtual) Quantum Waves

thanks!
scifimath is offline  
October 19th, 2019, 10:16 AM   #7
SDK
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2016
From: USA

Posts: 683
Thanks: 456

Math Focus: Dynamical systems, analytic function theory, numerics
This isn't physics or math or even science. Its word salad and nonsense. Nobody can argue with you or discuss your "theory" because it isn't coherent in any way. You don't know what most of those words mean and you aren't using them in a manner consistent with how everyone else uses them.

For example, I don't know how to discuss your claim that:

"Wave Collapse, Decoherence, and Zero Diffraction cause something to be Real."

Because I don't know what that means. It looks like something written by a neural network which was trained to write essays using only the glossaries of old physics books.
SDK is offline  
October 19th, 2019, 10:49 AM   #8
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Aug 2019
From: Pittsburgh

Posts: 90
Thanks: 5

You are asking for descriptive words that don't exist yet.

I do need to request that everyone pretend I didn't use the word "grating" in the op.
scifimath is offline  
October 19th, 2019, 11:04 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
romsek's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2015
From: USA

Posts: 2,638
Thanks: 1473

Quote:
Originally Posted by scifimath View Post
You are asking for descriptive words that don't exist yet.

I do need to request that everyone pretend I didn't use the word "grating" in the op.
What SDK said.

Here's an idea. Why don't you start somewhere with established physics and identify what you think is in error and why. We already know there is a disagreement between QM and GR. Folks have been working that problem for over 50 years. Some of the latest theoretical results concerning the apparently relationship between quantum gravity and quantum computing are unexpected.

I watched a video the other day on Loop Quantum Gravity and it included speculation on the nature of spacetime at the Planck scale. So even if your word salad does in fact relate back to something with meaning it's unlikely you're describing anything new.
romsek is offline  
October 19th, 2019, 11:07 AM   #10
Banned Camp
 
Joined: Aug 2019
From: Pittsburgh

Posts: 90
Thanks: 5

so you didn't read the end?

Quote:
We just need GR to handle duality for Unification.
GR for reality
QM wave function for unreal
scifimath is offline  
Closed Thread

  My Math Forum > Science Forums > Physics

Tags
deals, real



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
p(x) for real x when p(p(x))+p(x)=x^4+3x^2+3 oscar3 Algebra 15 July 20th, 2017 07:01 PM
what this mean in real? MMath Trigonometry 7 June 6th, 2016 01:33 AM
What topic in math deals with reverse numbers? sivela Algebra 2 January 31st, 2011 07:52 AM
real x and y such that: luiseduardo Applied Math 1 June 28th, 2009 04:37 PM





Copyright © 2019 My Math Forum. All rights reserved.