Whenever I hear about quantum mechanics It reminds me about how I used to strip mine in Minecraft and would think there is always a chance there’s diamonds after this block😂
1. Information and Local Realism: To prove that information is locally real, we need to define what we mean by "information" in this context. Let's consider a definition: Definition: Information is a measure of the state of a system that can be transmitted and received within the constraints of special relativity. Theorem: Information, as defined above, is locally real. Proof: a) Consider two spatially separated events, A and B. b) Let I_A be the information content at A, and I_B be the information content at B. c) By the principle of causality and special relativity, any change in I_B due to A cannot occur faster than the speed of light. d) Therefore, information respects locality. e) The state of the system carrying the information (e.g., particles, fields) has definite values before measurement, satisfying realism. f) Thus, information, as we've defined it, is locally real. 2. Dimensionality and Entropy: Hypothesis: 0D (dimensionless) entities are associated with perfect negentropy, while higher dimensions allow for the interplay of entropy and negentropy. Mathematically: In 0D: S = 0, N = maximum In R^n, n > 0: S > 0, N < maximum 3. Proving 0D is Non-Natural: Theorem: 0D entities are non-natural in the context of classical physics. Proof: a) Define "natural" as observable and measurable in classical physics. b) Classical physics operates in 3D space + 1D time (4D spacetime). c) 0D entities have no extension in space or time. d) Therefore, 0D entities are not observable or measurable in classical physics. e) Thus, 0D entities are non-natural in the classical physics framework. 4. Information in 0D vs. Higher Dimensions: In 0D: I = constant (perfect information preservation) In R^n, n > 0: dI/dt ≤ 0 (Second Law of Thermodynamics) Where I represents information content.
That's a caricature of one extreme interpretation of quantum mechanics. No serious physicists actual believe a macroscopic object maintains a superposition for more than an instant.
The speed of light is not a constant as once thought, and this has now been proved by Electrodynamic theory and by Experiments done by many independent researchers. The results clearly show that light propagates instantaneously when it is created by a source, and reduces to approximately the speed of light in the farfield, about one wavelength from the source, and never becomes equal to exactly c. This corresponds the phase speed, group speed, and information speed. Any theory assuming the speed of light is a constant, such as Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong, and it has implications to Quantum theories as well. So this fact about the speed of light affects all of Modern Physics. Often it is stated that Relativity has been verified by so many experiments, how can it be wrong. Well no experiment can prove a theory, and can only provide evidence that a theory is correct. But one experiment can absolutely disprove a theory, and the new speed of light experiments proving the speed of light is not a constant is such a proof. So what does it mean? Well a derivation of Relativity using instantaneous nearfield light yields Galilean Relativity. This can easily seen by inserting c=infinity into the Lorentz Transform, yielding the GalileanTransform, where time is the same in all inertial frames. So a moving object observed with instantaneous nearfield light will yield no Relativistic effects, whereas by changing the frequency of the light such that farfield light is used will observe Relativistic effects. But since time and space are real and independent of the frequency of light used to measure its effects, then one must conclude the effects of Relativity are just an optical illusion. Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, then it has the same problem. A better theory of Gravity is Gravitoelectromagnetism which assumes gravity can be mathematically described by 4 Maxwell equations, similar to to those of electromagnetic theory. It is well known that General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism for weak fields, which is all that we observe. Using this theory, analysis of an oscillating mass yields a wave equation set equal to a source term. Analysis of this equation shows that the phase speed, group speed, and information speed are instantaneous in the nearfield and reduce to the speed of light in the farfield. This theory then accounts for all the observed gravitational effects including instantaneous nearfield and the speed of light farfield. The main difference is that this theory is a field theory, and not a geometrical theory like General Relativity. Because it is a field theory, Gravity can be then be quantized as the Graviton. Lastly it should be mentioned that this research shows that the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics can no longer be criticized for requiring instantaneous interaction of the pilot wave, thereby violating Relativity. It should also be noted that nearfield electromagnetic fields can be explained by quantum mechanics using the Pilot Wave interpretation of quantum mechanics and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (HUP), where Δx and Δp are interpreted as averages, and not the uncertainty in the values as in other interpretations of quantum mechanics. So in HUP: Δx Δp = h, where Δp=mΔv, and m is an effective mass due to momentum, thus HUP becomes: Δx Δv = h/m. In the nearfield where the field is created, Δx=0, therefore Δv=infinity. In the farfield, HUP: Δx Δp = h, where p = h/λ. HUP then becomes: Δx h/λ = h, or Δx=λ. Also in the farfield HUP becomes: λmΔv=h, thus Δv=h/(mλ). Since p=h/λ, then Δv=p/m. Also since p=mc, then Δv=c. So in summary, in the nearfield Δv=infinity, and in the farfield Δv=c, where Δv is the average velocity of the photon according to Pilot Wave theory. Consequently the Pilot wave interpretation should become the preferred interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. It should also be noted that this argument can be applied to all fields, including the graviton. Hence all fields should exhibit instantaneous nearfield and speed c farfield behavior, and this can explain the non-local effects observed in quantum entangled particles. *TH-cam presentation of above arguments: th-cam.com/video/sePdJ7vSQvQ/w-d-xo.html *More extensive paper for the above arguments: William D. Walker and Dag Stranneby, A New Interpretation of Relativity, 2023: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145 *Electromagnetic pulse experiment paper: www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.36227/techrxiv.170862178.82175798/v1 Dr. William Walker - PhD in physics from ETH Zurich, 1997
Was going to watch your video, but instant i heard you swearing i left. I wanted hear knowledge not obsenity. I know this is normal and come natural to you, but not me.
all of these are still tip of the iceberg.
i truly want to live in the future just to see the new achievements humankind made in the next centuries
Yeah, I specialized in applied physics bachelor level and most of these I'm familiar with
Whenever I hear about quantum mechanics It reminds me about how I used to strip mine in Minecraft and would think there is always a chance there’s diamonds after this block😂
Really nice compilation! Nice narration 👍
I don't know so much about all the Portal footage. Seemed super unrelated most of the time :/
Great content, keep em up
This was such a good video thank you
nice video,never give up man
1. Information and Local Realism:
To prove that information is locally real, we need to define what we mean by "information" in this context. Let's consider a definition:
Definition: Information is a measure of the state of a system that can be transmitted and received within the constraints of special relativity.
Theorem: Information, as defined above, is locally real.
Proof:
a) Consider two spatially separated events, A and B.
b) Let I_A be the information content at A, and I_B be the information content at B.
c) By the principle of causality and special relativity, any change in I_B due to A cannot occur faster than the speed of light.
d) Therefore, information respects locality.
e) The state of the system carrying the information (e.g., particles, fields) has definite values before measurement, satisfying realism.
f) Thus, information, as we've defined it, is locally real.
2. Dimensionality and Entropy:
Hypothesis: 0D (dimensionless) entities are associated with perfect negentropy, while higher dimensions allow for the interplay of entropy and negentropy.
Mathematically:
In 0D: S = 0, N = maximum
In R^n, n > 0: S > 0, N < maximum
3. Proving 0D is Non-Natural:
Theorem: 0D entities are non-natural in the context of classical physics.
Proof:
a) Define "natural" as observable and measurable in classical physics.
b) Classical physics operates in 3D space + 1D time (4D spacetime).
c) 0D entities have no extension in space or time.
d) Therefore, 0D entities are not observable or measurable in classical physics.
e) Thus, 0D entities are non-natural in the classical physics framework.
4. Information in 0D vs. Higher Dimensions:
In 0D: I = constant (perfect information preservation)
In R^n, n > 0: dI/dt ≤ 0 (Second Law of Thermodynamics)
Where I represents information content.
I wholeheartedly think you should seek help, for your own good
That's a caricature of one extreme interpretation of quantum mechanics. No serious physicists actual believe a macroscopic object maintains a superposition for more than an instant.
The speed of light is not a constant as once thought, and this has now been proved by Electrodynamic theory and by Experiments done by many independent researchers. The results clearly show that light propagates instantaneously when it is created by a source, and reduces to approximately the speed of light in the farfield, about one wavelength from the source, and never becomes equal to exactly c. This corresponds the phase speed, group speed, and information speed. Any theory assuming the speed of light is a constant, such as Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong, and it has implications to Quantum theories as well. So this fact about the speed of light affects all of Modern Physics. Often it is stated that Relativity has been verified by so many experiments, how can it be wrong. Well no experiment can prove a theory, and can only provide evidence that a theory is correct. But one experiment can absolutely disprove a theory, and the new speed of light experiments proving the speed of light is not a constant is such a proof. So what does it mean? Well a derivation of Relativity using instantaneous nearfield light yields Galilean Relativity. This can easily seen by inserting c=infinity into the Lorentz Transform, yielding the GalileanTransform, where time is the same in all inertial frames. So a moving object observed with instantaneous nearfield light will yield no Relativistic effects, whereas by changing the frequency of the light such that farfield light is used will observe Relativistic effects. But since time and space are real and independent of the frequency of light used to measure its effects, then one must conclude the effects of Relativity are just an optical illusion.
Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, then it has the same problem. A better theory of Gravity is Gravitoelectromagnetism which assumes gravity can be mathematically described by 4 Maxwell equations, similar to to those of electromagnetic theory. It is well known that General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism for weak fields, which is all that we observe. Using this theory, analysis of an oscillating mass yields a wave equation set equal to a source term. Analysis of this equation shows that the phase speed, group speed, and information speed are instantaneous in the nearfield and reduce to the speed of light in the farfield. This theory then accounts for all the observed gravitational effects including instantaneous nearfield and the speed of light farfield. The main difference is that this theory is a field theory, and not a geometrical theory like General Relativity. Because it is a field theory, Gravity can be then be quantized as the Graviton.
Lastly it should be mentioned that this research shows that the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics can no longer be criticized for requiring instantaneous interaction of the pilot wave, thereby violating Relativity. It should also be noted that nearfield electromagnetic fields can be explained by quantum mechanics using the Pilot Wave interpretation of quantum mechanics and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (HUP), where Δx and Δp are interpreted as averages, and not the uncertainty in the values as in other interpretations of quantum mechanics. So in HUP: Δx Δp = h, where Δp=mΔv, and m is an effective mass due to momentum, thus HUP becomes: Δx Δv = h/m. In the nearfield where the field is created, Δx=0, therefore Δv=infinity. In the farfield, HUP: Δx Δp = h, where p = h/λ. HUP then becomes: Δx h/λ = h, or Δx=λ. Also in the farfield HUP becomes: λmΔv=h, thus Δv=h/(mλ). Since p=h/λ, then Δv=p/m. Also since p=mc, then Δv=c. So in summary, in the nearfield Δv=infinity, and in the farfield Δv=c, where Δv is the average velocity of the photon according to Pilot Wave theory. Consequently the Pilot wave interpretation should become the preferred interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. It should also be noted that this argument can be applied to all fields, including the graviton. Hence all fields should exhibit instantaneous nearfield and speed c farfield behavior, and this can explain the non-local effects observed in quantum entangled particles.
*TH-cam presentation of above arguments: th-cam.com/video/sePdJ7vSQvQ/w-d-xo.html
*More extensive paper for the above arguments: William D. Walker and Dag Stranneby, A New Interpretation of Relativity, 2023: vixra.org/abs/2309.0145
*Electromagnetic pulse experiment paper: www.techrxiv.org/doi/full/10.36227/techrxiv.170862178.82175798/v1
Dr. William Walker - PhD in physics from ETH Zurich, 1997
Awesome video, i thought it had 100k+ views
This seems like it would be nice video, but the portal footage is just distracting and annoying.
Was going to watch your video, but instant i heard you swearing i left. I wanted hear knowledge not obsenity. I know this is normal and come natural to you, but not me.