Why is time? - A Daring Post of Oliver Thewalt Part II
Autor: Física Discutida | Publicado: 2012-06-03T21:59:00-07:00


More one post by Oliver. So thank very much my friend!

I know that you cannot expect that the following text will show space-time reality. So do NOT consider this approach as literally true. But as you know that there is always a CNOT (and Hadamard Operator :-)
I assume that there might be some truth at its core. It is an approach to make progress in a dialectic way. If you can show me that this is wrong and give a good foundation to that, then this is (nearly) as appreciated as if you say that this is all right and give a good foundation. For me, the discussion is important, not if I am right or wrong. As I know this, I have written it because I assume that it has potential to think in this direction.


The universe will reveal soon his MIN-MAX world correlation by physics and also it's correlation to consciousness.


If in principle, matter = energy = information = consciousness = maths = physics, then we will be able to map and analyse and deduce it. This will not change anything in principle but we become aware that we are the xenomorph in THIS parallel universe WITHIN a black hole.

If there is QED-Computing (consciousness pattern mapping in fact), can there will be n-dimensional-gravity computing? Gravity is to be understood as a result of particle interaction AND a dimensional effect (fractal dimensions, differential toplogy and warped space time).


A black hole is hence to be understood as a gigantic information processing unit. Compressed Space and an EM-Wave Holofunction?


Conventional (npn-transistor) computing is also based on that implicitly, but not until QED-Computing (a pre-step to Matter-Antimatter particle computing) and black hole computing, this knowledge was used explicitely.


Furthermore I assume that there is no time as such. I assume that time is a result of both particle interaction and the MIN-MAX world correlation (as I have explained) to put it short. Duration rather than a dimension of space time. GR states that time is to be set into relation to mass and gravity and the velocity of the inertial system, the reference frame. I assume that, what we measure if we measure 'time', is not really duration but rather cause and effect of particle interactions.


That is why v MAX for a photon is C in space - time, this QED-medium has cause and effect by its very complex inner structure!


For v &gt; c in the QED medium, the Matter-Antimatter annihilation process would induce another kind of universe with different constants and a different 2nd law, a second law which is varying towards entropy and other factors.

Furthermore the photon is interacting with space-time and there are interdependencies with it's medium (vacuum).


Therefore we can assume, that there are superluminal particles if there is:

1. no need to use vacuum of space time as medium


2. if there is no need that QM and GR coexist so that a locality loophole comes into existance.


GR and QM do coexist, Copenhagen and MWI are, both valid or both false.

Within a black hole there is the possibility that the medium space-time or vacuum has changed it's geometric dimensional structure when we are measuring or observing from 'outside', this is, in fact, inside!


Appendix:


A pre-condition of the violation of the Bell's inequality is that there are no superluminal particles!


Thus, SRT and QM can coexist. If there would be superluminal particles we would have a locality loophole.

The implications for metaphysics and consciousness (free-will debate) are also important.


QM is independent form any observer. According to recent research, the EM-wavefunction is real and exists for itself. Heisenberg's uncertainty is valid even if no observer is measuring.


In QM an observer does not measure but 'creates' a state (quantum state).


Schroedingers cat is both dead and alive at two different localities in the universe. The universe is parallel to itself with data redundancy.


Copenhagen and MWI are both valid or both false. Oliver Thewalt

Post by:&nbsp;Oliver Thewalt&nbsp;;&nbsp;@Hixgrid