Use a scissor to have an idea. Look at the intersection between the two blades, that intersection moves, even though it appears that no particle is associated with it (the relationship moves), but in particle physics, particles being waves, an imaginary intersection or angle becomes a real particle.
Take 2 sheets of paper and slide them across each other (over each other) at a constant velocity “V1”, if the angles “A” at the borders of the sheets is 90 degrees, the intersection between the 2 borders, the intersection itself “S” has a velocity of zero. If you change the angle between the 2 sheets and make it different from 90 degrees, the intersection will move as the 2 sheets slide across each other; in other words the intersection will move at a related but different constant velocity “V2”. The faster the 2 sheets of paper move, slide across each other, the faster the velocity of the the intersection “S” between the 2 sheets moves.
So if you move the 2 sheets at a fast enough velocity “V1” but less than the velocity of light and the angle “A” between the 2 sheets is small enough, the velocity “V2” of the intersection “S” will move faster than light.
Since the neutrino is probably just the intersection between 2 wave fronts colliding at a given angle (or something similar), hence the neutrino goes faster than light.
---------------- | ----- /
---------------- | ---- /
— V1 -------> | — /
---------------- | – /
---------------- | - /
---------------- | /
S is here -----> S
V2 is the velocity of S as it moves up.
So the neutrino speed is faster than light, it is solved.
Great explanation. =D> So basically, it is an artifact of the system, rather than an outright contradiction…? I mean - “no single object can move faster than light” still stands.
Wrong tab, the single object called the Neutrino does go faster than light, it is the intersection between 2 wave fronts, and this intersection becomes a real object, a real particle in particle physics. It is not an artifact, it is the discovery that faster than light particles do exist, and in fact by changing the angle between the pieces of paper (akin to the blades of a scissor) and the speed the two pieces of paper slide across each other, you can have in infinite number of possible velocities faster than light, nay, you can have any velocity, just make the papers slide very fast and the angle between them very small and follow the intersection.
So this intersection is a geometrical relationship, but this becomes real matter since in quantum mechanics and particle physics, particles are both waves and point like, they are both real and virtual, and most of all, the “it is the bit”, only the information is real, the relationships are real, the particles and mass and all else are just a proxy, a description of ghosts, only the Information is Matter, Mass Energy is Information revealed, observed, condensed into real entities.
Only Information and Information Relationships exist, all else is a fairy tale.
And more so, it is not limited to neutrinos only but to all particles and all wave fields: any collision between two wavefronts creates a “soliton”, or a standing wave that can go faster than light by any degree. Heck just think of all of the electromagnetic waves that are colliding all at different angles, all the wavefronts at different angles, all creating solitons and standing waves and crest waves as in the two waves adding up at certain points and traveling along the intersection and go faster than light, nay, even much faster.
So hence, the doors into time travel, both into the past and into the future are also open. Have a nice trip.
So, as with all correct and elegant theories, this discovery also Solves the Time Travel Problem, as it is 100 % possible now with this discovery.
I remember a while ago I posited basically the same idea concerning particle duality (it was in one of the threads on Relativity) and I see you took it a step further… Congrats!
However, i fail to see how it solves the problem of Time Travel?
Also, i would like to know your thoughts on how exactly the composing waves’ properties influence the properties of the resulting particle? Is it just two waves or more?
I won’t develop a full theory (who on earth is capable anyways ?), but you can imagine that the sliding pieces of paper could also be sliding monolithic slabs of geometry in space creating particles. Time travel through the relativity theories I guess. Anyways some good physicist could create a full blown coherent theory maybe…
Western Civilization is not collapsing, we are geting richer and richer everyday, every new car produced, every new house built, every new of hundreds of products produced (sofas, beds, movies, books, blogs, techno music, etc.) creates a richer and richer society. We are going forward and getting richer everday, suck it up dude and stop the doomster crap. We will enter an infinite resource society.
On science:
"Vacuum fluctuations are virtual particles that arise from NOTHING and whose purpose in nature is to keep a vacuum at an average energy of ZERO. "
And why should nature have that purpose ?
"8ball said, as I was making motorboat sounds between my girlfriend’s magnificent boobs: “if everything is a brain (a processor), then even any event itself is a brain, even any sequence of events, a 2 hour movie is a brain…”
Do you understand reductio ad absurdum?
Multi-billion dollar projects notwithstanding, I think the Large Hadron Collider is a bunch of bullshit that will reveal nothing of interest or use for the general public. But, I am not a physicist. Neutrinos are of zero consequence until someone can show me why I should care."
But the entire point of Metaphysics is that of having as much no consequence as possible, that to be totally void of any social usefulness, that to be no solution to anything, to be outside of any possible “Intentionality of Use”: people always present technical, cause and effect, logical replies to metaphysical entities, they debate (which is not the goal of metaphysics, since it has no problem to solve, it has no necessity to be right, therefore true and false and right or wrong are meaningless from the outset, nay, be as false as possible, lie as hard as possible, the more its entities do not exist and are pure fantasy the better, etc.) always inserting the meatphysical entity in a predetermined system of logical consequences, logical systems always reflected by our language thought and experience of the world through our design, as a particular Man Brain. So if I tell you that the new brain composed of the set of waves in a given point on the jersey shore in march 13 1978 between 2.04 and 2.07 AM plus (or multiply or any other possible relationship) a chunk of the the nucleus of Jupiter in the year 3,012 AD and another chunk in the year 3,500 BC plus a few pebbles on a mountain in Peru are a new brain that exists (notice, no more connections and coherence between time and space, all points can be used, past, present, far away, close) and has existed and will exist and observed a new universe with a new experience and new laws of physics, you reply inserting that new brain observer in something that is familiar to you, or some system of logic, or some true and false game, or some usefullness or language scheme. But that is the error, it is outside of your range or any range, and that is what makes it more true than anything possible. You are not going to repair your car engine with this stuff, or solve “society’s problems” with this stuff, society’s problems are puny insignifcant crap compared to new universes with new laws of physics.
As far as time travelling and warps, etc. These are not necessary, it is much much easier, just make believe, pretend, fool your mind into believing that you are time travelling and you have achieved the equvialent mathematically, as time travel is just an experience for our mind, is just an Information Relationship. Just like we are fooling our mind that we are alive, and that our memories are real, etc.
"It doesn’t contradict the apparent nature of a concrete, physical universe with universal laws and and existence independent of the observer. "
In fact the observer is the universe. The universe is the observer; there are no external laws and existence independent of the observer; there is no external reality, no space, no time, no extension, all is simply an Information Relationship, nothing else. And I am using exactly the extreme consequences of our scientific - logical reasoning to arrive at this conclusion. Aside from the fact that already the “official” quantum mechanics stuff has issues with observers, and aside from the fact that my parallel universes have nothing to do with those imagined by other quantum physicists, every observation, every event is the result of an interaction between something measuring (the Observer), “observing” signals and inputs (External Reality), processing those inputs (observer’s thought process) and executing outputs accordingly (Observer’s decision to output signals according to some mental model, to repetitive patterns discovered) (the brain, the neural network), therefore by using logic, if you change the observer, the design of the observer, you change all, you change the univere, you enter another parallel universe. Or you enter something unknown. And where does the external universe start and end and the observer start or end, where is the boundary, the delimitation ? And all of the other ideas I explained in the past…
We are just one chance configuration designed in a certain way to perceive and interact and experience the universe accordingly, change the design you get something different. Prove me wrong: shove a jet engine in your brain and see what happens; the most you can say is, given this stable configuration of observer that our Man Brain is along with our culture, society,etc. and we are forced to live in a very specific universe with very specific laws based on pain/pleasure and the stability of the observer (you can’t throw yourslf in fire, etc.). But this is just one particular universe amongst an infinite array of possibilities…
What I am saying is much simpler than what you think: you can’t see that I am looking at it all from a higher abstraction level, that’s all. I don’t deny any science, any reality, I don’t deny the external world “model” we have, etc., I don’t believe in magic, the mind bends matter, etc. I am 100 % convinced most of science, technology and engineering are correct, perfect for our uses, etc.
I am saying something very simple: up until now we have always assumed the mind brain as a constant, as a given, as an invariant, and from there we developed all our correct science. That is ok, nothing wrong with that. I am saying that if you change the design of the mind brain, you will get something different, something else. What will you get ? anyone’s guess.
The problem lies in how will you change the mind brain ? what new circuits will you put in it, and who will change who’s brain to perform this new experiment ?
“All you are continually proving is that your subjective experience may be the limiting factor in realizing the truth of the way things are.”
No, there is no “truth the way things are”; things are not in any way, they are only in a certain way for us living according to a given design : everything must be compared to the state of death.
The subjectivity I talk about is the subjectivity of the constant, invariant design of the Man Brain as an Observer, as an Interactor, as the only Interactor we know and have reference to. In this sense all is subjectivity, we are only subjectivity.
How many different new designs of minds and brains are there ? who knows ? trillions ? and what kind of universe, life, experience do they live ? etc. Are there some constant invariants across all possible designs of minds brains ? I doubt very much, I think there are no invariants, all is subject to being defined and assigned differently and arbitrarily.
The only absolute, external reality you can imagine is that in which there is one invariant valid for all possible brains, but which brain will discover that invariant ? you would have to be all of them and even brains that lie and deny invariants, so as a logical demonstration, there are no invariants, there are no absolutes.
Am I wrong ? good, I want to be wrong, I like to “waste time”…
Now crack open your skull and stick wild stuff in it, tell me what new world you will visit…
Now, busty, be a good little boy, mommy tells you to go back to ilovephilosophy and study deeply all of nameta9’s posts, then you can go out and play in the backyard just like my mommy tells me, and then I go and play in the backyard with my toy cars and run around while mommy cooks in the kitchen (no fagots and lesbos and queers in my suburb, we are white traditional family with daddy at work in that crappy corporate job that always wants to hose him and mommy at home cooking…)
"I understand your view, and your argument. You are in essence saying that, because there is no way to observe the mind-state no such a priori state exists. You’re free to believe this post-structuralist bullshit and I’m free to deny it. I think I have a stronger position. "
“As a Norcal woman, I look down my nose at shallow, hedonistic, “looks are everything” in L.A.”
THE APE ANSWERS:
Hey baby, looks ARE everything… (at least the imagination of what looks suggest, then of course it is always a letdown) in fact, all our life we only look, look at things, look at our own thoughts… QUO VADIS, BABY ?
No, the correct criticism of my theory is simply that I am using logic, language and thought to describe and discover a new parallel universe: as if our universe has an “emergency exit” towards another one, exactly through logic. That is circular: I use logic to try to get out of this universe, but the new universe appears as a subset of this one always by its logical relationship to this one (change the processor and you get a new world). But a new parallel universe would be a closed one with no logical connection to this one or any other, but the abstraction levels get too far out, and I have difficulty following…and each universe is a logical Information Relationship akin to mathematical entities, but as such free from being confined by numbers, space or time or matter, but real…
It is not that you can’t observe the mind, it is useless to observe it, since you will observe it with the mind anyways, you are simply always observing the same thing, the mind - logic - language has already established once and for all how the universe is from the outset.
Change the mind, see what happens. But I am wrong and I am a 21st century schizoid man.
Hey San Jose Mommy, are you hot ? talk to me please, pretty please, I don’t always want to talk to Busty (and he has so much fun, I never have any fun, what a ripoff, I am a miserable loser, but I got my puny parallel universes to hope for (just like religion, go figure)).
Hey Busty did you build those trillions of 1966 oldsmobile 98s ?
Some corrections so when you copy and paste it for your thesis it will be correct and show mommy, then we can go outside and play and run around in the backyard with our toy cars and the oldsmobile 98s, oh what fun while mommy cooks, that is comforting to know…
But a new parallel universe would be a closed one with no logical connection to this one or any other, but the abstraction levels get too far out, and I have difficulty following…and each universe is a logical Information Relationship akin to mathematical entities, but as such free from being confined by numbers, space or time or matter, but real…
Nameta you are talking about waves so no matter how they intersect (and they don’t in the way you mean as a simple intersection in particle form: angles no, many angles over the distance and density of the wave front) the phase velocity will at points be faster than light because of the wave fronts progress, as for the wave overall along it’s course at any given density it will average out to light speed or less over the whole wave through space, ie the group velocity or the average of the wave will be light speed or less as it meets any wave or indeed interacts with it, although it may well seem that the waves front is faster because of energy concerns at wave intersection. This doesn’t explain the neutrino results it’s just a natural consequence of the theory.
“” I am a 21st century schizoid man."
“I am a miserable loser.”
Well, your view of objective reality is all wrong, but at least you know the truth about yourself."
THE APE answers:
Funny that you said that: that is exactly what I am trying to do - obtain the most general form of objectivity possible, so objective that it is no longer dependent on any particular design of any mind, brain - processor. But obviously, this is destined to fail from the outset because I am using this particular mind structure (call it the Man Brain MB) with all of its quirk particulars (including the logic, language, culture, subjectivity, dependence on emotion, on pain/pleasure reactions, etc.) to describe, discover, relate, invent the possibility of new minds - “observers” different from the mind “inquiring” MB. A circularity, a limit. The most that can be achieved is the invention, construction, imagination or whatever of a class of minds - processors - observers that have some basic invariants in common with us, namely the identity principle (A is different from B) from which follows the principle of non contradiction, the discernability and elaboration of Information Relationships (through logic, language, etc. even if the logic and language is very loose, even wild), a model of interaction through some reference system analogous to time and space, etc.
Obviously any slightly different new brain - processor design may be so completely different from ours and from our possibility to decode it, that we cannot relate to it in any possible way, not even logically, it would be in a sense “infinitely different” from us by just changing one bit.
And of course a new mind - observer implies a completely new and different universe with radically different laws of physics, since the Observer IS the Universe, our denotation of an “external” reality is just a model our Man Brain uses to navigate experiences…
Some small correction for San Jose Mommy and Alexandra, so they can copy it for their thesis on[b] “Modifying the Fundamental Structure and Design of Minds and Brains and discovering the New Universes with new Laws of Physics that can be Perceived, Experienced and Invented”
by THE APE[/b]
It’s not that the Man Brain - the Mind - the Processor - the Observer ((the Inquirer ?) notice how many different terms must be used to just delimit what we are talking about) is an “Independent Variable” (although it can be), but it is the Only Variable, the only entity that seems to exist. You can create a model of Mind and an abstract external reality that exists independent of the mind, but at this point we are in pure fantasy, pure metaphysics. So if you believe in the reality of external reality, (along with space, time, matter, memories, other people, other minds), then why not believe in any other fantasy item ? why not in rocks being alive and thinking, etc. Then my theory of just inventing anything, create anything, be as contradictory and imaginative as possible is just as good.
Beware, the Man Brain as understood in my interpretation (what a joke of an interpretation! all attacks are welcome, don’t worry!) is the set of all Man Brains of a civilization considered as a single entity, a single instance of a given design of Man Brain. In fact our reality principle and the perception of external reality and the extension of reality immersed in an objective - external space time is completely due to apparently independent mind brains reciprocally confirming collectively the same interactions, creating a generalized consensus along with the memory and patterns discovered, giving the impression of a real objective reality: nothing further from the truth, just because our particular Man Brain design is designed in such a way as to be repeated millions of times and occupying different points in space and time, different experiences of each Man Brain, and the communications amongst them doesn’t make that design any more real then a single Man Brain design that doesn’t need communication with other instances of itself. It is just Matter (matter talking to itself, interacting with itself) organized and subdivided in any number of possible ways, divided in trillions of mind brains communicating and independent, not divided at all, disjoint, large, trillions of very different Man Brains communicating some bits and some not, small, etc. you can imagine a Man Brain that is just a gas (but information transfers amongst the cells or atoms or transistors or circuits is present), etc.
So BRANIUM simply defines everything and anything a new Man Brain, nay, a Mind Brain (as Man is just one design of trillions of possible designs), a new processor, everything is a possible brain.
So as you see the abstraction levels can increase, it becomes difficult to explore…
(Anyone understand anything of all of that insanity above ? just wondering…)
I can’t believe it, the way you look sometimes
Like a trampled flag on a city street, oh yeah
And I don’t want it, the things you’re offering me
Symbolized bar code, quick ID, oh yeah
[Chorus:]
See I’m a 21st century digital boy
I don’t know how to read but I’ve got a lot of toys
My daddy’s a lazy middle class intellectual
My mommy’s on Valium, so ineffectual
Ain’t life a mystery?
I can’t explain it, the things you’re saying to me
It’s going yayayayayayaya, oh yeah
[Chorus]
Tried to tell you about no control
But now I really don’t know
And then you told me how bad you had to suffer
Is that really all you have to offer?
[Chorus]
[outro]
Cat’s foot, iron claw
Neurosurgeon, scream for more
Innocence raped with napalm fire
Everything I want, I really need.
[fade out]
21st century schizoid boy
21st century video boy
21st century digital boy…
“Modifying the Fundamental Structure and Design of Minds and Brains and discovering the New Universes with new Laws of Physics that can be Perceived, Experienced and Invented”
Alexandra and San Jose Mommy (and her hot teenage chick who will present it to her science class in high school) are working on, you may need to insert the following:
Beware, the Man Brain as understood in my interpretation (what a joke of an interpretation! all attacks are welcome, don’t worry!) is the set of all Man Brains of a civilization considered as a single entity, a single instance of a given design of Man Brain. In fact our reality principle and the perception of external reality and the extension of reality immersed in an objective - external space time is completely due to apparently independent mind brains reciprocally confirming collectively the same interactions, creating a generalized consensus along with the memory and patterns discovered, giving the impression of a real objective reality: nothing further from the truth, just because our particular Man Brain design is designed in such a way as to be repeated millions of times and occupying different points in space and time, different experiences of each Man Brain, and the communications amongst them doesn’t make that design any more real then a single Man Brain design that doesn’t need communication with other instances of itself. It is just Matter (matter talking to itself, interacting with itself) organized and subdivided in any number of possible ways, divided in trillions of mind brains communicating and independent, not divided at all, disjoint, large, trillions of very different Man Brains communicating some bits and some not, small, etc. you can imagine a Man Brain that is just a gas (but information transfers amongst the cells or atoms or transistors or circuits is present), etc.
Matter talks to itself, Matter interacts with itself, or simply interacts, self communicates: but if it is itself why should it communicate to itself ? it has zero extension in space and time, and Matter knows itself already…hm…oh, I see it is a joke upon itself, Matter is a joke on itself, so it subdivides itself in many make believe independent parts that then talk to each other (other brains ? minds) that make believe that they can communicate something new to another part of itself, but it is just a joke on itself, there is nothing new to communicate to itself…
You can copy it for your thesis, free information, free research…
If the intersection idea is correct, it means that the apparent faster than light effect should diminish over distance. Also, the farther the two wave sources are from each other, the faster the neutrino will appear to move. Neutrinos from deep space have previously been reported to move at light speed. I personally feel that particles can’t represent anything besides intersecting data, so I’d be happy to see this one pan out. Let’s hope that they use multiple distances in a future test!