Folding space. How to?
LoopyByteloose
Posts: 12,537
In science fiction, much has been made of the idea that space can be folded. The concept is used to explain teleportation.
Today, I was reading an interesting Martin Gardener article about the two 'other' non-Euclidian geometries and the impression I get is that all three geometries exist at the same time in our physical world, but Newton relied only on the Euclidian model to create what has been the foundations of our modern physics.
There has been an interesting hang up in Euclid's geometry, generally known as the Fifth Axiom that demands that parallel lines never meet or only may meet at infinity. The results have concluded that there are two alternative models.
The hyperbolic model, in which many parallel lines can easily go through one point on a plane that has a straight line not going through that said point.
The Euclidian model, in which one and only one parallel line can go through that one point on a plane that has a straight line not going through that said point.
And the elliptical model, in which no parallel lines can can through one point under similar definition.
With all three models included, the mathematics of geometry is supposedly complete and consistent.
And so....
The implications are that there may be three alternative models of physics. By studying the translation of a physical entity from Euclidian model to the hyperbolic model, one may achieve something similar to the dream of folding space.
I suspect that if one could translate existing Physics into the other two geometries, one might find away to teleport matter intact into distant places or exploit anti-gravity. We might even have three Periodic Tables to properly explain matter and discover previously unknown attributes of matter and life forms.
Go for it! I am too old to start now and get a Nobel Prize. My initial impression is that the elliptical model may support electronics and weak physical forces; while the hyperbolic model may support gravity and inter-galactic forces.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Ain't gadgetry a wonderful thing?
aka G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse] 黃鶴 ] in Taiwan
Post Edited (Loopy Byteloose) : 6/22/2009 2:55:55 PM GMT
Today, I was reading an interesting Martin Gardener article about the two 'other' non-Euclidian geometries and the impression I get is that all three geometries exist at the same time in our physical world, but Newton relied only on the Euclidian model to create what has been the foundations of our modern physics.
There has been an interesting hang up in Euclid's geometry, generally known as the Fifth Axiom that demands that parallel lines never meet or only may meet at infinity. The results have concluded that there are two alternative models.
The hyperbolic model, in which many parallel lines can easily go through one point on a plane that has a straight line not going through that said point.
The Euclidian model, in which one and only one parallel line can go through that one point on a plane that has a straight line not going through that said point.
And the elliptical model, in which no parallel lines can can through one point under similar definition.
With all three models included, the mathematics of geometry is supposedly complete and consistent.
And so....
The implications are that there may be three alternative models of physics. By studying the translation of a physical entity from Euclidian model to the hyperbolic model, one may achieve something similar to the dream of folding space.
I suspect that if one could translate existing Physics into the other two geometries, one might find away to teleport matter intact into distant places or exploit anti-gravity. We might even have three Periodic Tables to properly explain matter and discover previously unknown attributes of matter and life forms.
Go for it! I am too old to start now and get a Nobel Prize. My initial impression is that the elliptical model may support electronics and weak physical forces; while the hyperbolic model may support gravity and inter-galactic forces.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Ain't gadgetry a wonderful thing?
aka G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse] 黃鶴 ] in Taiwan
Post Edited (Loopy Byteloose) : 6/22/2009 2:55:55 PM GMT
Comments
www.newzleech.com/?p=6385274
I saw a great movie with Denzel Washington called Deja Vu.
Very cool, all about folding space and time with a contraption
that looked like a linear accelerator.
Loopy,
You're on to something ... you're certainly not the first to think about this, of course. For over 100 years, "Projective Geometry" has been an area of intense research in mathematical physics. However, some of the other geometries have received a lot less attention than the others. (This happens to be one of my personal interests - I've spent 30 years off and on studying this subject.)
Gardner's a good mathematician, but in that article he might be using the traditional, simplified presentation of non-Euclidean geometries - there really are a multiplicity of projective geometries ... it depends on how you define the underlying parameters. The Wikipeadia article on this is pretty good, showing the basic three, but hinting at the Riemannian aspect, giving links to the sub-categories:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Euclidean_geometry
Those of us here who work under the hood with computer graphics are familiar with the math transforms of projective geometry. We often do 4-d equations, but don't necessarily think of it that way. One example is the use of quaternions to avoid gimble lock in camera and object moves. These 4-d like formulas are reduced versions of much more sophisticated tensor calculations, which is what Einstein used, in essence, to build theories based on Minkowsky's discovery/invention of 4-d space. Einstein's space is a subset of a greater, generic 'space' called a manifold. A manifold could be thought of as meaning Many Fold, or Many Of, or Multiplicity. Think of a car manifold ! That weird shape can be modelled with math. Tensor equations can flex any multi-dimensional shape into almost any form you'd like. That's basically what Einstein says mass does to 4-d space-time - and gravity is an indirect effect of this flexing/bending/molding of the space. (To purists, this is pretty loosly put, of course.)
There has been a lot of work in projective geometry. A great deal of work has been done on non-Euclidean geometry for alternative explanations of 'reality'.
Following your suggestion of how things might map out in these various geometries, here is one of the most profound versions I've seen in all these years --- and, even though this site mentions things "spiritual" it's decidedly not some new-age mumbo jumbo --- this is some of the most worked through, serious maths you can find anywhere:
http://www.nct.anth.org.uk/
cheers,
-Howard
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Russell Targ was involved in research at Stanford into clairvoyance years ago and was the lead author on the only paper I'm aware of in a mainstream peer-reviewed journal on psychic phenomena. He dropped out of sight a couple of years later and, as it turns out, was working for the CIA for years continuing this research. Some years ago, this whole area was declassified and he's been able to tell his story (www.espresearch.com). He occasionally gives workshops, has published some books, etc.
His background is in laser physics. Interestingly, he treated clairvoyance as just another ill-defined communications system and applied information theory to it to find that it conforms to many of the properties of an otherwise well-understood noisy, low data rate communications channel.
One of his observations is that time and space as we usually think of them are not as separated as they seem, that next week is not as far away as we believe and that distances half way around the world are as close as next door as far as perceptions are concerned.
Leon
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Suzuki SV1000S motorcycle
For example, I see that the www.espresearch.com site has a link to a page labeled "evidence". On that page are four purported "hits" by "remote viewer" psychics. There is no reference whatsoever on that page to the total number of trials required to gather those four hits, which of course renders this "evidence" utterly meaningless. Yet there they are, up on the page apparently on the assumption that they represent evidence for "remote viewing". I think it's safe to assume that the person who created that page honestly believed that he was posting real evidence.
Post Edited (sylvie369) : 6/22/2009 5:05:32 PM GMT
I hadn't considered psychic phenomena in the above. Merely, the application of physics in a different way. I'll take a look at the maths and certainly do find it interesting how computer graphics is exploiting rather exotic math to present 'realistic' visual images. Mostly, I have been trying to visualize the three geometries and I find in doing so that they seem alternative explanations of how occupied space is referenced.
One of the things I love best about Parallax's Forums is the Sandbox as just about anything can be explored and shared with rather intelligent replies.
My premise is that geometry {in some advanced form} will be required to advance any new model of space and dimension. The straight line just appears to be a curve with a prejudiced 'attitude'. We are comfortable with it as it minimizes choices. so we live in a world of little boxes and little squares; thus taking the square as the only 'realistic' approach to definition of infinite space.
I wish there was a successor to Martin Gardener in the area of making math a recreational pursuit.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Ain't gadetry a wonderful thing?
aka G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse] 黃鶴 ] in Taiwan
My memory is a bit fuzzy but I though "in search of" had an episode where they had hooked in up to oscilloscopes and meters and actually saw a huge increase in heat and electrical energy???? Oh and wasn't he was filmed with Kirlian photography and it was off the chart?
Anyway also of interested to fellow time travelers/researchers anyone really interested should read about the Z-Machine I have always been fascinated by Albert Einsteins rules of magnetism as applied to time travel
My big plan is to got back in time and get the lottery power ball numbers well that and to never have gotten married to the EX
Most research involving human beings and probably a lot of research involving animals is flawed as well. I do acupuncture and am well acquainted with a lot of the published research. Often the results are tainted by what the researcher is interested in proving, pro or con. The research methodology used is often constrained to be double-blinded "placebo-controlled" studies even though no one really has any idea of whether there's such a thing as a placebo in procedural medicine (like placebo surgery! ... only been done in one study long ago). Current research methodology is very poor at studying things that are grey, that have some uncertainty associated with the outcomes. The tendency is to count the "grey" outcomes as false and claim that they don't exist or need "further study". There's little accounting for the research funding bias where outcomes that some groups may want to prove are funded while other (perhaps more controversial) outcomes are not funded and thus "proven false". This is not a simple issue in that it's a legitimate question how much public funding should be spent for things that the "establishment" doesn't believe has any truth to it. On the other hand, the history of science is littered with ideas that were radical at the time that are now considered doctrine. In medicine the idea that an infectious agent could cause ulcers was ridiculed and the researchers who proposed this were ostracized. Now it's considered the primary cause of ulcers (H. Pylori) and its diagnosis and treatment is the standard of care.
Think about it, if Geller really *could* bend spoons, he would have had no problem being in the physics lab, or doing so in front of psychologists. Probably %99.999 of this stuff that's out in the public is B.S. --- but there continues to be a small percentage that defies ordinary scientific explanation --- not because it's B.S., but because science has not advanced far enough to have observation methods to analyze this. We still haven't even graduated past the 'subjective - objective' problem, the scientific method doesn't know yet how do deal with the scientist him/herself - who IS really part of the picture.
Of course my brain-waves (or whatever) aren't going to have much effect on spoons, electrons, or whatnot --- but at the quantum mechanical level, instruments (which ARE extensions of OUR senses) *affect* the outcome of the experiment. This has been known for 80 years, but we have barely begun to understand.
And then look closely at Einstein's field equations --- there is no limit to how far you can resolve and approximate them. In other words, every single electron in the universe is IN and is affected by every other electron's field. We just truncate the calculations because other effects are so much stronger .... but the relationships exist nontheless. We all know that a magnet can be stronger than gravity. But how many of us know, or have experienced, that the stars shine in day light? The dispersed sunlight is much stronger than the stars' light. But go down in a deep well, or down into a straight mine shaft during the day --- if it's not noon and you look up, you'll see the stars.
Before this thread devolves into fruitless arguments about the existence of God or not - or it's your opinion, or your subjectivity - I suggest we ponder this fact:
Science is still very young and understands only a small slice of "reality" --- if nothing else, ask a cosmologist about "dark matter" and "dark energy" --- they have barely a clue why we don't know what some large fraction of the universe is made of.
No this is isn't a subtle form of the argument that "because it's so vast and wonderful, it must have been made by God." Thinking like an engineer, I see the "cosmic system" as a very complex, self-modifying code --- problem is, we only know a few pieces of its syntax!
cheers
-Howard
[noparse][[/noparse]EDIT - Dr. Mike Green posted while I was posting --- I have to second his example from medicine... have had many discussions about how H. Pylori research was handled.]
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Post Edited (CounterRotatingProps) : 6/24/2009 2:19:46 AM GMT
, these boxes contain a quantum noise source (I think it's a noisy diode) that is monitored by a controller. The devices plug into routers and
send data about fluctuations outside normal chance back to a central location where it is analyzed. They claim statistically significant deviations
from pure chance in the hours leading up to dramatic world events such as 9/11.
A small company is making commercial versions of these noisy diodes in a box with a controller.
www.psyleron.com
Cheap small signal transistors and a few parts can generate a quantum level random bit stream that a
controller can easily monitor.
They use almost identical circuits to generate random bit streams for cryptography, because pseudo-random
numbers and strong crypto don't mix well.
Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research--> www.princeton.edu/~pear/
there are actually a large number of interesting experiments like this, that rarely get attention because the discussions are so often brutally close minded and fractious. (I'm happy we're not that kind of bunch here!)
- H
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
That's called the "experimenter effect". We were taught all about it, and how to avoid it.
The wife of a friend of mine is a Chinese medical practitioner practicing in Paris (she is Chinese and qualified in Western medicine as well as the traditional Chinese variety. When I visited them once I had very painful arthritis in one of my knees, and she offered to treat me with acupuncture. I declined the offer and the knee got better by itself in a couple of weeks. She treated her husband with acupuncture for several weeks for a painful shoulder the last time I was with them. He didn't get any better, got some NSAID tablets from his doctor, and was OK in a few days.
Leon
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Suzuki SV1000S motorcycle
Post Edited (Leon) : 6/22/2009 6:46:27 PM GMT
I'm a complete sceptic about the paranormal and alternative medicine, and a devout atheist as well.
Leon
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Suzuki SV1000S motorcycle
Post Edited (Leon) : 6/22/2009 6:47:43 PM GMT
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Then everyone could run them 24/7 and log the time when statistical deviations
occur....might be spooky and fun
Maybe if you built one you could learn to somehow cause a deviation in the bit stream??
The propeller could create a very nice graphical representation on a vga monitor showing
in real time the state of the bit stream.
They say there are some people who cause experiments to act up simply by being around.
There was one well known physicist who was notorious for this effect...can't remember his name.
The thing that strikes fear into the hearts and minds of physicists... The Measurement Problem!
wavicles and "spooky action at a distance" and Does God play dice??
Does every possible outcome occur "somewhere" ?
Is Shrodinger's cat alive and dead at the same time?
Would the jitter of the PLL actually be a quantum level event like diode noise or radioactive decay (ala Shrodinger's cat experiment)?
I'm not enough of an electronics geek to discern if it is or not.
Of course, I'll be the same person!
An interesting thought experiment I've played with on James Randi's forum is to ask: if you could be teleported from one location to another by quantum teleportation, and the teleportation involved your simultaneous destruction (as is required by quantum theory), would you use the system? If not, why? Quantum teleportation has been achieved, BTW, for single particles.
Leon
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Suzuki SV1000S motorcycle
Not really, it isn't based on individual quantum events. The only true quantum random number generators use things like radioactive decay and this sort of system:
www.idquantique.com/products/quantis.htm
which uses the quantum properties of single photons.
I once asked the PEAR people why they didn't use this sort of system, instead of their crude electrical noise-based systems, and they were very vague about their reasons, which makes me quite sure that there is something wrong with their methodology.
Leon
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Suzuki SV1000S motorcycle
Post Edited (Leon) : 6/22/2009 7:14:25 PM GMT
No, you'd be you, and your replicate would be a replicate - not occupying the same space-time. Your replicate's quantum states would have diverged ... in fact, your replicate *as it was being made* would have serious *unpreditable* quantum shifts on all levels. In other words, your replicate would not be a replicate.
The "replication" of scientific experiments is valid in realms where quantum effects do not factor in. And on the other end of the scale, we can't do some necessary relativistic experiments because the power would require accelerators with galatic dimensions.
> if you could be teleported from one location to another by quantum teleportation, and the teleportation involved your simultaneous destruction (as is required by quantum theory),
> would you use the system? If not, why?
That though experiment, like Schrodinger's Cat experiment, is flawed. Let's do a Platonic dialog here a second, Leon, can you guess why I think this?
thanks
Howard
(a devout agnositic [noparse]:)[/noparse]
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
That is one of the reasons why the original has to be destroyed.
Leon
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Suzuki SV1000S motorcycle
Regarding medical science,..
My dad and grandfather were doctors and I would prefer to say it is Medical Arts with rigorous exploitation of sciences. This is just the same at Fine Arts,which exploit many sciences in determining how best to get results.
One of the more interesting aspects of medicine is that it attempts to use statistics to predict outcomes. I find that reading the medical examples of statistical application to be far more revealing of the usefulness of the math than more industrial examples.
Holly is looking for disturbances in the force. Maybe a job for 64 cogs on 8 Propellers. With 50 or so cogs creating random data and the others making sure it is random, I might make a fortune in the stock market. But now the I Ching is working well for me. It is a lot like the old IBM motto - think, think, think.
Ignore me and have fun anyway.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Ain't gadetry a wonderful thing?
aka G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse] 黃鶴 ] in Taiwan
I was talking about non-Euclidean geometries, but I dropped the "God-Bomb" into the thread :-P
> That is one of the reasons why the original has to be destroyed.
@Leon,
interesting... we're on the same page here. When you post that on the forum you mentioned, how do the answers break out?
- H
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
"Holly is looking for disturbances in the force."
Hahaha.. yes, that's me alright.
Actually I AM a disturbance in The Force.
Here is the thread:
forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=118451
Leon
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Suzuki SV1000S motorcycle
Post Edited (Leon) : 6/22/2009 7:42:03 PM GMT
Read Chip's thread on the random number generator. It may be in the comments in the ObEx archive for it. I think he discussed his underlying assumptions in creating the generator. Since he designed the PLL as well, he would have some basis for his opinions.
Leon,
As we develop new tools for "peering into" the workings of the body, particularly the brain, we're finding that things like acupuncture do "work" and there are mechanisms, usually involving brain function, that are affected and can explain partially how things like acupuncture work. As your story illustrates, there's a lot of individual variation. NSAID medications make some people very sick and acupuncture is known to have little effect on a significant minority of people. That's why it's poor medicine to have only one kind of treatment available, particularly for chronic conditions. Our main medical model works very poorly for chronic disease and it's dangerous to extrapolate short term benefits of anything (as substantial as they may be) to a long term situation.
The second link - in the UK - is dead. I really wanted to see what you found there. Wikipedia is great, but you have gotten me curious.
@hollyMinkowski
A very attractive disturbance.....
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Ain't gadetry a wonderful thing?
aka G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse] 黃鶴 ] in Taiwan
Wow - just a quick glance at that thread is pretty amazing. At the least, seems like it's not a superficial discussion... gads, I can well understand why you don't want to 'go there' again! [noparse]:)[/noparse])
When these discussions come up, I'm surprised by how certain everyone is about what they think they understand. Don't get me wrong, it's certainly better to *have* an opinion than not, better to be certain of the validity of observation. However, I think modern humanity is pretty lazy in their thinking, so it's easier to hold an opinion than question it. On both sides of a discussion.
One thing I think we can always agree on is that Humanity has an insatiable curiousity.
cheers,
Howard
(PS. I'm staying out of that randi place!)
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Post Edited (CounterRotatingProps) : 6/22/2009 7:50:01 PM GMT
@Loopy, I tried it before posting...and just now... it's ok from here. (? Maybe the "Internet is broken" again [noparse]:)[/noparse])
- H
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
I've suffered from one of the nastier chronic ailments (Crohn's disease) for about 45 years. It's always responded to medical and surgical treatment, although I've nearly died from it on a couple of occasions. My brother did die of it, because he refused the surgery he was offered. I can't see acupuncture doing anything for that affliction.
Howard:
Randi's forum is the place to go if you like arguments. There are some very bright people to be found there, as well as a lot of nutters.
Leon
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Amateur radio callsign: G1HSM
Suzuki SV1000S motorcycle