"Spooky action at a distance" What did he mean?

By a slightly modified version of that argument, entanglement (also limited by HUP) always wins over anything that needs to traverse any distance over infinitely divisible time, basically because the tortoise is "already there" before the race even begins, relatively speaking.

In a sense, matter (the tortoise) always wins over energy (the hare) as well, for matter such as a proton is stable for at least as long as the age of the known universe, whereas photons have a predicted finite lifetime because they must traverse space and thereby eventually decay and/or dissipate.

Perhaps it is because a significant portion of matter (in the forms of bound electrons entangled as described by Pauli's exclusion principle) ALONG WITH HUP that makes motion for matter possible in the first place. Energy appears to us as if it actually moves relative to matter, but because it is traveling at c, and any observer which travels at c cannot actually be an "observer" in any real sense, it is the hare that is, for all intents and purposes, unable to actually run a race of infinitely divisible time.

Well, that just explains how matter can actually 'move' in the first place, doesn't it? How could physics have possibly missed anything as important as this? Because the math that supports it was too wrapped up in Euclid and Pythagoras, that's why.

This might be the pseudoscience forum, QQ, but you're on a roll here. Ancient Greece definitely had its moments, and it wasn't just Euclid by a long shot.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

A good question and one worth serious consideration. IMO
The birth of formal logic, scientific method, formal mathematics leading to the birth of calculus, formal philosophy, (inc. epistemology, metaphysics), the inevitable maturation of religious theosophy ( polytheism towards monotheism) all happened around the times of Plato and the the formal establishment of the world's first Western University ( academy ) in Athens all add up to being pretty solid and impressive list of accomplishments. (given this all happened a few hundred years BC)

So I guess Plato and Aristotle had plenty on their plate at the time and it would have been easy for them to miss the deeper meaning of Zeno's ( and Parmenides) work.
However once indelibly interpreted and stamped as a "non-paradox" by Plato, science would naturally take Plato's word for it I guess and looked no further.

Just simply stating "if Delta t=0 then distance = 0" here on sciforums caused an enormous amount of flak and is a pretty strong indication of what happens when someone seriously threatens the convention and the comfort zone of what appears to be on the surface at least, a logical mind.

Example thread:
Intriguing question about time, physics and SRT.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/intriguing-question-about-time-physics-and-srt-in-general

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I noticed quite a few ruffled feathers here when I began to probe whether the Higgs discovery was going to have an impact on physics or not. I can understand why someone like you might have reservations about the discovery. Great thing is, this year the idea will either go away or we will understand more about the new particle's coupling to other particles. Which means physics may be poised for its biggest earthquake since relativity and the beginnings of the atomic age.

If the Higgs place in the SM and Peter's theory are correct, a reintroduction of time as a variable will need to occur at some point, as an inevitable consequence of the idea that it imparts inertia to other particles and to itself. How a particle can cause itself to be bound, I have no idea, but apparently photons can do it with the help of a bound electron. So, coupling of Higgs with the electron is very important. This may be a tough measurement to make with a machine designed to accelerate protons and hadrons as opposed to electrons.

Apparently, you can go a long way in physics without having to deal with a variable that is infinitely divisible by means of pretending the universe is one consisting of only probabilities (because probabilities always evaluate to numbers between 0 and 1, like those fields we have had so much fun discussing), but I somehow doubt it will be possible to consolidate equally successful theories like relativity. They use e=mc^2 intensively every day the LHC operates. But to consolidate the two domains means filling in the rather large missing pieces of a mathematical puzzle that has no resolution without recasting a large portion of the mathematics so that it has actual bindings to a physical reality never completely captured in the solid geometry of ancient Greece or coordinate systems locked into absolute time and space as though the vacuum itself possessed inertia. Time has both a present instant that is an absolute universal origin and a rate that is variable everywhere. It is space that is the illusion. Only that origin and quantum entanglements are ever simultaneous for more than an instant, which is too short a period even to qualify as an 'event', due to uncertainty principle limits on actually observing it.

My original love for all things physics has been rekindled here. Thanks to good folks I have met here and chatted with, I feel I will be better able to understand and appreciate whatever comes next. As I said, I really can't thank you enough.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.