Strife in your SpaceTimes

[Kai]

QUANTUM!

No, seriously, isn't this covered under the decoherence, 'many worlds' postulate?

I think so.  Based on the link I previously provided, which ties the Many Worlds postulate in with timeless physics.

I have read that Timeless Physics page several times over the last 2 years, and I still do not understand it. Maybe time to use Feynmen self-teaching to get through to my brain.

I think I get it, on a conceptual level, but I want to go over the maths a bit more, because, statistics aside, I'm working with essentially high school level stuff, which is not ideal.

How did Feynman teach himself calculus, by the way?  I'm aware that he did, but I've never seen anything on how he went about it.

http://www.amazon.com/Calculus-Practical-Mathematics-Self-Study-Series/dp/0442284896 He mentions that book in The Pleasure of Finding Things Out.

[Kai]

Seriously?  Dang, you guys just don't have any sense of faith at all, do you?  It's easy.  The photons know what's going to happen, so they adjust themselves accordingly.  Then Santa gets diabeetus, and Christmas gets cancelled.  It's simple!

Sure. But the thing is is that my brain is screaming "BUT FUCKING HOW?!?!?!"

I mean, times supposed to be linear, right? I think I read about other experiments, recently, that suggested it was impossible to affect the past. Though, that said, it may have involved particles not on the quantum level.

Unless you adhere to Timeless Physics, yes.

Reading through it again, and if I understand correctly, the time element is unnecessary, it simply labels a unique configuration which will not be repeated. It is shorthand. It's not actually real. There is no 'outside' the system from which to observe the system, therefore, from the inside it feels as if things are directional as these unique, non-repeating configurations occur.

Now, in reference to the OP, there are these unique configurations. And photons of a given wavelength are identical, not this photon here and this photon there, but a photon here and a photon there. They are essentially the same photon, removed in space. And since every aspect of the experiment, including the measurement, the measurers, the equipment, the "decider", all exist in this configuration, not outside of it, they are all explicitly entangled. So, while I don't quite understand at a deep level how all events are superimposed, I can't visualize this, that the entanglement between all the components would have interactions of this sort does not set off alarm bells in my head, beyond that inability to visualize.

[minuspace]

Placing "block-models" of time asdide, I think the idea of inverse causality is essentially very difficult to understand.  With entanglement I tend to imagine some form of lateral or "sideways" causal direction.  The mental block preventing my understanding of "simultaneous change" due to entanglement is already overtaken by my (insufficient) understanding of relativity.  A photon under space/time Lorentzian contraction will always be both beyond and prior to my comprehension, purportedly.

[Kai]

Placing "block-models" of time asdide, I think the idea of inverse causality is essentially very difficult to understand.  With entanglement I tend to imagine some form of lateral or "sideways" causal direction.  The mental block preventing my understanding of "simultaneous change" due to entanglement is already overtaken by my (insufficient) understanding of relativity.  A photon under space/time Lorentzian contraction will always be both beyond and prior to my comprehension, purportedly.

It's about as difficult to understand as why amplitudes alternate in a sine wave. In other words, though it's predicted and the observations seem to support it, no one understands it. And I mean, no one.

[Triple Zero]

It's about as difficult to understand as why amplitudes alternate in a sine wave. In other words, though it's predicted and the observations seem to support it, no one understands it. And I mean, no one.

Huh? What's this about sine waves? I might not know the details about Quantum theory, but are we talking about the mathematical function? Why it alternates? You mean like sin(x) is odd and cos(x) is even? In what sense do we not understand this?

[Kai]

It's about as difficult to understand as why amplitudes alternate in a sine wave. In other words, though it's predicted and the observations seem to support it, no one understands it. And I mean, no one.

Huh? What's this about sine waves? I might not know the details about Quantum theory, but are we talking about the mathematical function? Why it alternates? You mean like sin(x) is odd and cos(x) is even? In what sense do we not understand this?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1501838765715417418

As the thickness of a transparent piece of glass increases, the probability of photon reflection increases and decreases in a sine wave like pattern. In that video, Feynman explains what things look like, as well as that he doesn't understand why the universe works this way.

[Triple Zero]

oooh amplitudes of light, I thought the amplitude of a sinewave itself, I already thought that was weird. will watch the video later.

[Cain]

Google Video still exists?  Sorry, but I find that rather surprising.

[Kai]

Google Video still exists?  Sorry, but I find that rather surprising.

I googled it, and that was the first thing that came up. Here's the Youtube equivalent. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdZMXWmlp9g

[minuspace]

Posting here because

It's about as difficult to understand as why amplitudes alternate in a sine wave. In other words, though it's predicted and the observations seem to support it, no one understands it. And I mean, no one.

There is something very interesting about that question, and, given I have the monopoly on ALL of them,  I wanted to make sure it did not slip through the cracks.  Difficult, but not impossible?