This is reminiscent of the one-electron universe postulate. It's an idea that John Wheeler proposed to Richard Feynman via telephone wherein all electrons and positrons (the antimatter equivalent of the electron) are manifestations of the exact same particle traveling back and forth through spacetime. It seemed plausible because while antimatter is typically described as charge-reversed matter, for all mathematical intents and purposes, this is the exact same thing as being ordinary matter traveling backward through time.
Antimatter might very well still turn out to be just that, but the one-electron universe postulate itself has been all but disproven. It's one of my favorite ideas all the same.
Are you referencing the big bang? Since all of existence was once coalesced into one lump of energy, and everything that exists now is an extension of that once unified energy, everything is connected?
What Tommythecaty seems to referring to is the one-electron universe postulate, which I explained in greater depth in a reply to them. See that reply for more information.
They might also be suggesting that what we perceive as two quantumly entangled particles is in fact one particle in a quantum superposition, that is, existing in two places simultaneously.
Counterintuitively, this is very possible in the quantum realm, but no, it's a separate phenomenon from quantum entanglement.
Yes but Vanta, my man, why fight the central limit theorem of statistics? The second law of thermodynamics is a one directional phenomenon. Schrödinger's cat would never be entangled with another kitty, so to speak, on a relative Lagragian point inside CERN's doughnut.
Isn't string theory our best hope for the graceful unification we are looking for here? Hoping you will reply, because your VIP presence is an honor for our humble website of high aptitude fuck ups (myself included).
What, so like we have double slit experiment which shows that the particle will behave, based on how it's observed and what the observer thinks as it's starting seem, as both a particle and a wave
But there's also the possibility that there can be two physically separate parts based on the same(?) underlying principle?
Hey Doc, instead of entangling your brain, do a quick check on Wikipedia of the Pauli Exclusion principle. It frames the problem nicely before you would decide to enter the cathedral of mathematical zealotry espoused by theoretical physicists. Anyway, medical vigilance is what Tasmania is banking on. You da man.
pfffft Schrödinger was a kook, Tommy’s cat is where it’s at.
There’s only one and that’s why the thing reacts regardless of distance, because it’s the same one. Slit experiment was right but observed all wrong and there ain’t no spooky action like caty action.
No, but quantum superpositions (the description of things existing in multiple places simultaneously) /are/ possible, as counterintuitive as that may be to our brains, which needed only evolve so as to loosely intuitively understand the macroscopic world and some of the aspects of classical physics so as to evade predators and catch prey.
The rules of the macroscopic world are just as determined by mathematics as those of the quantum world, but evolution needed only give us a way to somewhat intuitively understand the macroscopic realm. Therefore much of quantum mechanics is completely counterintuitive, but when the mathematics checks out, it is reality.
If you have a difficult time wrapping your head around it, don't worry; Albert Einstein died intensely struggling with all of this.
Quantum Entanglement Time Travel Hypothesis
← View full post
Or they appear to communicate because there’s only one particle in the first place, they’re both the same one, everywhere, all times
--
Vanta_White
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
[Old Memory]
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
thepuppet
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
This is reminiscent of the one-electron universe postulate. It's an idea that John Wheeler proposed to Richard Feynman via telephone wherein all electrons and positrons (the antimatter equivalent of the electron) are manifestations of the exact same particle traveling back and forth through spacetime. It seemed plausible because while antimatter is typically described as charge-reversed matter, for all mathematical intents and purposes, this is the exact same thing as being ordinary matter traveling backward through time.
Antimatter might very well still turn out to be just that, but the one-electron universe postulate itself has been all but disproven. It's one of my favorite ideas all the same.
--
Tommythecaty
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
May well be what I was thinking of, just remember hearing something like it and thinking it was interesting
Are you referencing the big bang? Since all of existence was once coalesced into one lump of energy, and everything that exists now is an extension of that once unified energy, everything is connected?
I feel like that has a name, but I forget
--
Vanta_White
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
Tommythecaty
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
What Tommythecaty seems to referring to is the one-electron universe postulate, which I explained in greater depth in a reply to them. See that reply for more information.
They might also be suggesting that what we perceive as two quantumly entangled particles is in fact one particle in a quantum superposition, that is, existing in two places simultaneously.
Counterintuitively, this is very possible in the quantum realm, but no, it's a separate phenomenon from quantum entanglement.
--
Bazinga
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
[Old Memory]
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Yes but Vanta, my man, why fight the central limit theorem of statistics? The second law of thermodynamics is a one directional phenomenon. Schrödinger's cat would never be entangled with another kitty, so to speak, on a relative Lagragian point inside CERN's doughnut.
Isn't string theory our best hope for the graceful unification we are looking for here? Hoping you will reply, because your VIP presence is an honor for our humble website of high aptitude fuck ups (myself included).
--
Vanta_White
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Of course. I'm swamped with sudden tasks required of me at the moment but I'll definitely reply. I'm here to stay. I'm fond of you as well by the way.
--
Bazinga
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Please be assured that the feeling is mutual.
--
[Old Memory]
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Who is he?
What, so like we have double slit experiment which shows that the particle will behave, based on how it's observed and what the observer thinks as it's starting seem, as both a particle and a wave
But there's also the possibility that there can be two physically separate parts based on the same(?) underlying principle?
Yeah I heard some theory that there’s only one and it’s our observation that’s wrong. Goes over my head
--
Bazinga
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
[Old Memory]
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Hey Doc, instead of entangling your brain, do a quick check on Wikipedia of the Pauli Exclusion principle. It frames the problem nicely before you would decide to enter the cathedral of mathematical zealotry espoused by theoretical physicists. Anyway, medical vigilance is what Tasmania is banking on. You da man.
--
Tommythecaty
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
pfffft Schrödinger was a kook, Tommy’s cat is where it’s at.
There’s only one and that’s why the thing reacts regardless of distance, because it’s the same one. Slit experiment was right but observed all wrong and there ain’t no spooky action like caty action.
--
Bazinga
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Make Physics Great Again (MPGA) - Listen to the cat.
--
Tommythecaty
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Lol This Bazinga is fake news, *points, you yes you.
Oh, like the ratio of matter to anti matter? My physics teacher explained -1, 0, and 1
What about the observation? Like it'll indicate as one thing but function as another?
wait really?
--
Vanta_White
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No, but quantum superpositions (the description of things existing in multiple places simultaneously) /are/ possible, as counterintuitive as that may be to our brains, which needed only evolve so as to loosely intuitively understand the macroscopic world and some of the aspects of classical physics so as to evade predators and catch prey.
The rules of the macroscopic world are just as determined by mathematics as those of the quantum world, but evolution needed only give us a way to somewhat intuitively understand the macroscopic realm. Therefore much of quantum mechanics is completely counterintuitive, but when the mathematics checks out, it is reality.
If you have a difficult time wrapping your head around it, don't worry; Albert Einstein died intensely struggling with all of this.
--
[Old Memory]
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I think this is delving into the ratio of matter to anti matter, right?