Multiverse Theory Debunked. No Multiple Worlds Can Exist At The Same Time.

[esalla]

Somehow it looks like as if there is no spacetime between this particles.

That is a good observation. In a frame of reference at the speed of photons or light, the distance between emission and absorption goes to zero because of the Fitzgerald contraction. Try plugging in c for the velocity in his equation and you will see that it is zero.
.

LOL still babbling about Einsteins mistake that the universe is not expanding.......................

Sorry folks but the rest of have to move on now

This world is about used up, never fear as there are quadrillions more

 

[james bond]

Two (or more) entangled particles react as if they would be one particle. So if changes something in one of the entangled particles, which is millions of lightyears away, then changes the other particle. This happens not with light speed - this happens with the speed "oo". Somehow it looks like as if there is no spacetime between this particles.

We look at things differently as to what is happening, so will not agree.

There has to be some communication and that's why people think it's FTL. For example, if the the spin is up for our photon A, then we know photon B will be down even though it is many light years away. I don't think the spin in every direction exists in nature as it cannot be observed. All that which can exist is that which we observe or measure. No consciousness required. You may be able to describe the superpostion using mathematics, but I doubt that state exists in reality or in three dimensions. Having multidimensions also fit the mathematics, so that is what is happening. We think there is a fourth dimension. Most of the other popular theoretical physicists think there are more than four dimensions up to ten and strings help explain the spooky action at a distance.

 

[esalla]

Two (or more) entangled particles react as if they would be one particle. So if changes something in one of the entangled particles, which is millions of lightyears away, then changes the other particle. This happens not with light speed - this happens with the speed "oo". Somehow it looks like as if there is no spacetime between this particles.

We look at things differently as to what is happening, so will not agree.

There has to be some communication and that's why people think it's FTL. For example, if the the spin is up for our photon A, then we know photon B will be down even though it is many light years away. I don't think the spin in every direction exists in nature as it cannot be observed. All that which can exist is that which we observe or measure. No consciousness required. You may be able to describe the superpostion using mathematics, but I doubt that state exists in reality or in three dimensions. Having multidimensions also fit the mathematics, so that is what is happening. We think there is a fourth dimension. Most of the other popular theoretical physicists think there are more than four dimensions up to ten and strings help explain the spooky action at a distance.

You copy and paste wikipedia better than any knucklhead I know

Myself excepted naturally

 

[james bond]

As I said Youtube is a poor source for science understanding, so here is a reprint of Cramer's original paper in Review of Modern Physics. There are diagrams but very little math, since it's an interpretation:
https://www.researchgate.net/public...sactional_interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics

Look, I realize you are interested in one facet of QM using TIQM. I'm not interested in the same things you and zaangalewa are interested in regards to QM so there isn't any point to try and explain. I read what Cramer's TI is and wasn't interested. He's got too many weaknesses in his thesis imo. I rather study the Copenhagen Interpretation.

 

[james bond]

LOL have a nice quantum entanglement discussion with the local delusions of grandeur expert

Not I. I'm the one who likes creation science. You're the local delusions of grandeur expert. I bet you got at least two mirrors pointed towards you sticking out your neck like side view mirrors on a car.

 

[esalla]

LOL have a nice quantum entanglement discussion with the local delusions of grandeur expert

Not I. I'm the one who likes creation science. You're the local delusions of grandeur expert. I bet you got at least two mirrors pointed towards you sticking out your neck like side view mirrors on a car.

How exactly do you know about my mirrors?

 

[esalla]

For what do I (=all mankind?) have no evidence?

To convince anyone.

From what?

To convince me.

That's unimportant for me. I informed you about some things, that's all.

All it sounds like is personal opinion to me.

The atheist

Atheism is a spiritual belief. If you like to discuss about a belief you don't need physics to do so.

scientists start with something that a given, an assumption. For example, then big bang happened. Then they start making up stuff from there. With Darwin, he started with a cell already. Then afterward, added spontaneous generation which was debunked. Abiogenesis is just SG updated.

Big bang = the universe expands, so it was more little once before it started to expand => the universe was created once
Theory of evolution = Every living entity has with every other living entity a common ancestor => we are all sisters and brothers

Which is very easy realizable. You can take a real cat and do so and the result will not be any other result. But in this case some cats will have to die - without any reason to have to do so.

No. If you kill your cat, then it cannot come back to life.

That's what I said. If you make the experiment then cats will die.

If it's alive, I suppose it could run away before you can show everyone.

Really funny. Still the problem is in 50% the cat will be dead and only in 50% the cat wil be alive, when you measure. But before you measure the cat is in a superposision and it is as well 50% alive and 50% dead.

I can't be the only one who sees it, but those who come later and want to see it. You would be famous having a cat that is alive and dead at the same time. Are you famous?

No. It exists in all thougts of all people, who like to think about the problems in context around "Schrödingers's cat".

Prove it.

You said it is only in my imaginations and I answered this. You should perhaps slowly start to learn how to think.

The guy who made the video eliminated the cat and superposition. I already stated Hugh Everett was mocked and laughed at so hard, he quit his job and went into another industry. He was a better mathematician than physicist. He continued drinking and died early.

No. Not any way. This is for example a way Erwin Schrödinger showed:

In general: The way is physical research. The ideas of Schröderinger are taken serios, because he is an excellent scientist.

So was Everett. Schrodinger and Schrodinger's equation is on my side, remember? I said I liked his thought experiment. The wave exists as potential energy like the electron can be everywhere it can be. It is realized or the energy is realized when it is measured. Now, Everett, he took Schrodinger's equation and manipulated it with his mathematics to fit his wacky idea. You and Everett are on the same side.

Is it? Why?

I can only explain it using Schrodinger's thought experiment; It exists in our thoughts. It is potential energy that is there, i.e. the photon energy. We just don't know where it goes through the right or left slit until it is observed. Then the energy is real; It is released and we see it. What if you had a light reading device? It would record it. That is observable and demonstrable.

You don't read what someone says to you, isn't it? Otherwise you would know now that potential energy is a real energy.

Prove it.

You can't even measure the energy; That's such a lame argument because it proves my point . Now, you're being mocked like Everett .

It is "spooky" because something is wrong with our perception of space and time.

Go on explain more. What's wrong with our perception of space and time?

I have to know nothing about the person Mr. Hugh Everett and your totally mad psychological structure in context of your attacks against this person. The idea "multiverse" is a mathematical plausible idea. The problem is it is not provable. So some people call it meta-physics. And physics is not meta-physics. So physicists don't know what to do with this idea now. A similar problem exists in case of the string theory. But for sure both concepts are interesting for physicists.

You didn't read about Everett, did you? I'm entitled to my scientific opinion if I'm peer reviewing his work. His theory didn't pass peer review; did you know that? It was only in more modern times that Schrodinger (who came before Everett (!)) was taken more seriously. Everett is the one who came up with the many worlds interpretation. No one likes to be associated with that mad man. That's why the newer version was called Multiverse.

Moreover, the creationists have Kalam Cosmological Argument. The multiverse side has no logical argument. They couldn't find anything in the past light in the expanding universe as evidence. Thus, you have nothing anymore. I can explain the wave and it's collapse.

Basically, we have the same facts of the expanding universe. The differences between your view and mine are age of the universe, around 6000 years, vs 13.7 billion years, .

I have to know nothing about the person Mr. Hugh Everett and your totally mad psychological structure in context of your attacks against this person. The idea "multiverse" is a mathematical plausible idea. The problem is it is not provable. So some people call it meta-physics. And physics is not meta-physics. So physicists don't know what to do with this idea now. A similar problem exists in case of the string theory. But for sure both concepts are interesting for physicists.

I give up.

Okay.

I presented scientific evidence, a valid argument, and Schrodinger, his equation, and thought experiment backing me up. I can show you an experiment where no human consciousness is necessary to see the wave collapse. All we have to do is measure the energy released, for example.

What about the partridge in the pear tree

As far as I know Lord Ribbeck on Ribbeck in Havelland had engaged a partridge after his death to tell children the story of Lord Ribbeck on Ribbeck in Havelland. And still today sometimes a child sits around, eats one of his pears, and sings about Lord Ribbeck, who had lived once on Ribbeck, in Havelland.

You would know

What would I know? ... The pear tree on the grave of Lord Ribbeck says he is Lord Ribbeck. But you are not a pear tree, aren't you? Do you speak pear? Or do you speak only nationalistic megalomania?

Take your pills...........................please

Anti-German: I never drink alcohol, I never use drugs - and I use only medicaments if it is really necessary to do so. But I have hobbies. When you will hear a soft "ssswshwshhhh" behind you, then you could perhaps hear a good old German tomahawk.

Well find a good doctor and start using..........................

People who never use drugs are retarded

Just like people who let drugs use them are retarded

Look, I realize you are interested in one facet of QM using TIQM. I'm not interested in the same things you and zaangalewa are interested in regards to QM so there isn't any point to try and explain. I read what Cramer's TI is and wasn't interested. He's got too many weaknesses in his thesis imo. I rather study the Copenhagen Interpretation.

Dude you are living in the past, QE is happening now, oddly there is no real interpretation of what is happening as no one knows what is happening, all we can do is observe the results. Pretty scary that we could build a communications system and not know exactly how it works.

I just like playing cowboys and injuns with woo woo

 

[james bond]

MIT Technology review

A quantum experiment suggests there’s no such thing as objective reality

Physicists have long suspected that quantum mechanics allows two observers to experience different, conflicting realities. Now they’ve performed the first experiment that proves it.

www.technologyreview.com

"But Proietti and co’s result suggests that objective reality does not exist. In other words, the experiment suggests that one or more of the assumptions—the idea that there is a reality we can agree on, the idea that we have freedom of choice, or the idea of locality—must be wrong."

The conclusion is that one must not hold fast to locality. Entanglement already shows that it is hard to get around locality.
In the paper Proietti does not refer to multiverses anywhere. His paper and an MIT review refer to the idea that locality could be wrong .

The math is Quantum Mechanics. Most interpretations don't agree with each other, but they all are consistent with the math. For a colorful chart of all interpretations see, Interpretations of quantum mechanics - Wikipedia. It shows the major differences of around a dozen interpretations.

It's not locality math that I'm interested in, but multidimensions math. That is explained very nicely by string theory. You're just using locality to argue no objective reality as two conscious observers see different things. Consciousness is not required as demonstrated in the video so it doesn't matter two observers do not see the same thing inside the Schrodinger's cat box or outside.

 

[esalla]

MIT Technology review

A quantum experiment suggests there’s no such thing as objective reality

Physicists have long suspected that quantum mechanics allows two observers to experience different, conflicting realities. Now they’ve performed the first experiment that proves it.

www.technologyreview.com

"But Proietti and co’s result suggests that objective reality does not exist. In other words, the experiment suggests that one or more of the assumptions—the idea that there is a reality we can agree on, the idea that we have freedom of choice, or the idea of locality—must be wrong."

The conclusion is that one must not hold fast to locality. Entanglement already shows that it is hard to get around locality.
In the paper Proietti does not refer to multiverses anywhere. His paper and an MIT review refer to the idea that locality could be wrong .

The math is Quantum Mechanics. Most interpretations don't agree with each other, but they all are consistent with the math. For a colorful chart of all interpretations see, Interpretations of quantum mechanics - Wikipedia. It shows the major differences of around a dozen interpretations.

It's not locality math that I'm interested in, but multidimensions math. That is explained very nicely by string theory. You're just using locality to argue no objective reality as two conscious observers see different things. Consciousness is not required as demonstrated in the video so it doesn't matter two observers do not see the same thing inside the Schrodinger's cat box or outside.

Well if the video says so it must be true

 

[Wuwei]

It's not locality math that I'm interested in, but multidimensions math. That is explained very nicely by string theory.

The 6 extra dimensions are closed cylinders of infinitesimal radius. Are you sure you are interested than that? Those dimensions are far far different than space time dimensions and are extremely complex. Look up Calabi Yau manifolds.

String theory doesn't "explain them nicely". String theory defines them.

You're just using locality to argue no objective reality as two conscious observers see different things. Consciousness is not required as demonstrated in the video so it doesn't matter two observers do not see the same thing inside the Schrodinger's cat box or outside.

You don't know what I'm arguing. I am arguing taking the mystery out of entanglement. And I am arguing the case for counterfactual definiteness, CD That certainly means there is no observer role. However the Copenhagen interpretation does not support CD and does support an observer role. I would have thought you would be against that.
.

 

[zaangalewa]

Two (or more) entangled particles react as if they would be one particle. So if changes something in one of the entangled particles, which is millions of lightyears away, then changes the other particle. This happens not with light speed - this happens with the speed "oo". Somehow it looks like as if there is no spacetime between this particles.

We look at things differently ...

 

[esalla]

It's not locality math that I'm interested in, but multidimensions math. That is explained very nicely by string theory.

The 6 extra dimensions are closed cylinders of infinitesimal radius. Are you sure you are interested than that? Those dimensions are far far different than space time dimensions and are extremely complex. Look up Calabi Yau manifolds.

String theory doesn't "explain them nicely". String theory defines them.

You're just using locality to argue no objective reality as two conscious observers see different things. Consciousness is not required as demonstrated in the video so it doesn't matter two observers do not see the same thing inside the Schrodinger's cat box or outside.

You don't know what I'm arguing. I am arguing taking the mystery out of entanglement. And I am arguing the case for counterfactual definiteness, CD That certainly means there is no observer role. However the Copenhagen interpretation does not support CD and does support an observer role. I would have thought you would be against that.
.

Yo woo woo, no one knows what you are arguing, however certain people know what drug therapy to initiate............

I recommend Thorazine, grain alcohol and postage stamps authorized by the Gerry Garcia fan club

 

[james bond]

First, I showed that there were no multiverses.

Liar.

You get hung up on fake science and can't figure things out for yourself like planetary motion when I provided the creation science link(s). How does a multiverse get created now? Can you answer the question? Do you have any evidence? You won't, so it means you have nothing like zaangalewa.

Another reason for no multiverse is you can't go backward in time. You can only go forward in time. God set it up this way so you can't change someone going to the Lake of Fire. For example, we know the rich man who was so cruel to Lazarus is already feeling some of the heat and is thirsty all the time already.

 

[james bond]

Two (or more) entangled particles react as if they would be one particle. So if changes something in one of the entangled particles, which is millions of lightyears away, then changes the other particle. This happens not with light speed - this happens with the speed "oo". Somehow it looks like as if there is no spacetime between this particles.

We look at things differently ...

Before I waste my time watching a youtube, can you explain what it's about in your own words? You had plenty of chances, but didn't. Maybe you don't understand it well enough to explain? In that case, I don't want to waste my time.

 

[esalla]

First, I showed that there were no multiverses.

Liar.

You get hung up on fake science and can't figure things out for yourself like planetary motion when I provided the creation science link(s). How does a multiverse get created now? Can you answer the question? Do you have any evidence? You won't, so it means you have nothing like zaangalewa.

Another reason for no multiverse is you can't go backward in time. You can only go forward in time. God set it up this way so you can't change someone going to the Lake of Fire. For example, we know the rich man who was so cruel to Lazarus is already feeling some of the heat and is thirsty all the time already.

There is no science that can either prove or disprove another universe just as there is no science yet that can explain the universe we are in.

But the creation link says different

Time for your pills son

 

[james bond]

There is no science that can either prove or disprove another universe just as there is no science yet that can explain the universe we are in.

You are too big dumb aka stupid af to even read my post correctly. I never mentioned prove or disprove.

 

[zaangalewa]

Two (or more) entangled particles react as if they would be one particle. So if changes something in one of the entangled particles, which is millions of lightyears away, then changes the other particle. This happens not with light speed - this happens with the speed "oo". Somehow it looks like as if there is no spacetime between this particles.

We look at things differently ...

Before I waste my time watching a youtube, can you explain what it's about in your own words?

It makes no sense to do so. You don't listen what others say to you. This video is by the way very short and very clear.

You had plenty of chances, but didn't. Maybe you don't understand it well enough to explain? In that case, I don't want to waste my time.

It's nonsense, what you say here. Evilwilling nonsense.

 

[zaangalewa]

First, I showed that there were no multiverses.

Liar.

You get hung up on fake science and can't figure things out for yourself like planetary motion when I provided the creation science link(s). How does a multiverse get created now? Can you answer the question? Do you have any evidence? You won't, so it means you have nothing like zaangalewa.

I don't have any idea what you like to say with this. Why and what for do you need an evidence? For your misunderstanding of my textes, which you did not read?

Another reason for no multiverse is you can't go backward in time. You can only go forward in time. God set it up this way

Stop it to try to speak furthermore in the name of god. You have as less a correct idea about the Christian religion as you have a correct idea about natural science.

can't change someone going to the Lake of Fire. For example, we know the rich man who was so cruel to Lazarus is already feeling some of the heat and is thirsty all the time already.

 

[zaangalewa]

By the way. Could be interesting to read this book:

Daniel M. Greenberger, Michael A. Horne, Abner Shimony, Anton Zeilinger: Bell's theorem without inequalities.

 

[Bleipriester]

People who like quantum mechanics should get a kick out of this.

We have an experiment now that shows that multiverses cannot exist. The many worlds theory that a majority of scientists believe today is just illusion. It only exists when the quantum particles are measure (observed) and consciousness does not have to be present.

To put it in terms of the Shrodinger's Cat thought experiment, we cannot have the cat existing in two states at the same time or superposition. It is either alive or dead when we observe it.

How this was shown was in 2011 when two scientists. Shan Yu and Danko Nikolic of the Max Planck Institute, Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, in their paper Annalen der Physik, showed that consciousness was not necessary and only measurement. It means through measurement that the reality of one state or another exists. For example, with Shrodinger's cat, it can either be dead or alive, but can't be both at the same time. That is just illusion even though we can map the illusion with light particles. As per the double slit experiment, the reality exists when it is measured. What we see is just the potential probablilities when things are not measured (observed).





What does it mean in practical terms? For one, you can't go backward in time. The majority of atheist scientists who believed and still believe in multiverses are wrong. I don't know what other silly things they believed, so I'll stop here .

With that, there is still one more experiment to deal with the future MAYBE affecting the past.

A multiverse does not require parallel universes, just other universes.