Search FQXi

If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the blogger are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help

Georgina Woodward: on 11/12/18 at 3:01am UTC, wrote Just shutting up and calculating won't do. The steps are; correctly...

Georgina Woodward: on 11/4/18 at 22:02pm UTC, wrote Specifically identifying and naming the issue is a significant advance. It...

Georgina Woodward: on 11/2/18 at 21:04pm UTC, wrote 'Category differentiation error' and 'category omission error' can come...

Georgina Woodward: on 11/2/18 at 20:07pm UTC, wrote These errors (identified in previous posts) could be called 'category...

Georgina Woodward: on 10/31/18 at 19:09pm UTC, wrote This problem is not exactly category error but is an error that involves...

Georgina Woodward: on 10/28/18 at 23:01pm UTC, wrote As an electron is only ever measured to have one location, under what...

Georgina Woodward: on 10/28/18 at 19:32pm UTC, wrote Steve, my aim is not to simplify the answer to why there is that stated...

Steve Agnew: on 10/28/18 at 17:19pm UTC, wrote Some things that you say seem to complexify instead of simplify. The...


Georgina Woodward: "Perhaps I can word that more clearly. The human observer's self generated..." in Breaking the Universe's...

Georgina Woodward: "The effective reference frame in perceptual judgments of motion direction...." in Breaking the Universe's...

Jonathan Dickau: "Sorry again... I should have read more of the linked attachment before..." in If the world ended...

Jonathan Dickau: "Sorry, Some of these arguments appear vacuous, or depend on hidden..." in If the world ended...

Joe Fisher: "Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this peculiar..." in Dissolving Quantum...

Joe Fisher: "Robert Lawrence Kuhn ℅ Closer To Truth November 17, 2018 Ref: Get out..." in Dissolving Quantum...

Zimmer man: "Excellent and useful information, thanks for the list. androdumpper apk..." in Neutrino mysteries,...

Edwin Knox: "The genuine Earth had a genuine VISIBLE surface for many years previously..." in Superhuman: Book Review...

click titles to read articles

Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.

Constructing a Theory of Life
An all-encompassing framework of physics could help to explain the evolution of consciousness, intelligence, and free will.

Usurping Quantum Theory
The search is on for a fundamental framework that allows for even stranger links between particles than quantum theory—which could lead us to a theory of everything.

Fuzzballs v Black Holes
A radical theory replaces the cosmic crunchers with fuzzy quantum spheres, potentially solving the black-hole information paradox and explaining away the Big Bang and the origin of time.

Whose Physics Is It Anyway? Q&A with Chanda Prescod-Weinstein
Why physics and astronomy communities must take diversity issues seriously in order to do good science.

November 20, 2018

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Space-time from Collapse of the Wave-function [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Blogger Tejinder Pal Singh wrote on Sep. 9, 2018 @ 18:40 GMT
The world of large things such as tables, planets, stars and galaxies, is extremely different from the world of small things such as electrons, protons, atoms, and photons. The most striking difference is that a table is never found in more than one place at the same time, whereas as electron or an atom can be in many places at the same time. Why should there be this difference? After all, a table...

view entire post

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the forum administrator

post approved

Steve Agnew wrote on Sep. 15, 2018 @ 15:06 GMT
Singh has a really good approach for resolving the measurement issues by localizing a wavefunction with new noise constants, rC and tC. By adding a teeny tiny bit of noise to physical reality, Singh shows that wavefunctions will collapse even without an observer and so continuous spontaneous collapse (CSL) is quite hot right now, especially with the Smolin group at Perimeter.

Of course, the universe is already full of noise even without a new operator and its two new constants. For example, the orbit of an electron around a proton in hydrogen means that there are both charge and gravity fluctuations outside of the atom even without a new operator and constants.

In fact, at the characteristic radius, rC = 70 nm, between two hydrogens, the dispersion force of charge attraction equals the gravity force between the two neutral hydrogens. This rC depends on existing universe constants and likewise, a characteristic time tC= 3.9Byrs, comes from the ratio of gravity to charge at the hydrogen orbit.

So without any new constants, existing gravity noise in the universe is sufficient to collapse quantum wavefunctions without further ado. In fact, these values are consistent with the present state of CSL and show that future measurements will actually measure these fluctuations. However, the present physics already predicts that they exist and so measurement will simply be a confirmation and not any new physics...

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Marcel-Marie LeBel replied on Oct. 23, 2018 @ 04:15 GMT
Georgina, Steve,

Every bit out there exists and interacts with its own immediate vicinity. The notion of "table" or "universe" is an integration resulting from our own perceptual and mental fabrication. It is the conscious observer's privilege. There is no Big thing, just a "Big Picture". As with any picture, there is a camera, and we are it.

Please consider that in most cases, QM describes how the universe works (small scale), and GR describes how the universe appears to work (large scale).


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward wrote on Oct. 1, 2018 @ 00:59 GMT
Hi Tejinder, Steve,

there is a category issue with the introductory comparison of the electron particle and table.For the electron to be in a location it must be a be-able rather than a probability distribution of states/values prior to selection of the singular defining measurement, For the table to be in a certain location it too must be a be-able, (which is constituted of be-able particles). However if talking of the object seen in space-time it is not a be-able but the product of processing of received EM radiation. It is not made of be-able particles, like the be-able table. What precisely is being compared is important.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward replied on Oct. 1, 2018 @ 01:41 GMT
If the location of a particular table in a conference room was mapped over several years a probability distribution for the table could be obtained. When the question is asked, 'where is the table?' One could refer to the probability distribution and say it doesn't have a singular location (Compare to electron). Or One could say, as a be-able is being considered ( not an EM radiation processing product or a probability distribution) it must be in a location but it is as yet undetermined by direct (interaction with) measurement.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward replied on Oct. 1, 2018 @ 02:14 GMT
Measurement by interaction with the object will give a space location and time when that was true (local, to table and measurer, clock time, which is very close to the -Now due to the extreme speed of light). Rather than spacetime generated from signal receipt and processing.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Georgina Woodward replied on Oct. 1, 2018 @ 07:46 GMT
If the tables are pushed to the sides of the room between conferences and occupy the body of the room during conferences, there will be oscillation between the side locations and main body locations for the individual tables. If the conferences happen on a regular basis the oscillation will be regular. What will decide between most likely getting a side of room location or a main body of room location when a measurement is made is the choice of how that measurement is to be made. If it will coincide with maximum number of people present in the building or minimum number of people, for example. The addition of conference attendees will add slightly to the uncertainty of exact location that will be found as they may nudge or rearrange the tables slightly but are not the cause of the main body or side location (as the tables will likely have been arranged before their arrival and re-arranged after they leave).

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on Oct. 2, 2018 @ 22:27 GMT
The precision about the actual position of the table can never be

greater than the actual size of the table, because everywhere on the table is 'table'.

This is why we have the uncertainty principle. We are dealing with particles whose sizes include both the particle and its associated wave,

i.e. their intrinsic motion.

For comparison, it is like estimating the position of a boat from its

actual size plus its wake.

Also, it goes without saying, that position and momentum (speed) are two conceptually opposite concepts. But if you insist, you have to accept this uncertainty.


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Lorraine Ford replied on Oct. 3, 2018 @ 08:26 GMT
Re "The precision about the actual position of the table can never be greater than the actual size of the table, because everywhere on the table is 'table'. This is why we have the uncertainty principle.":

Marcel, this is not what the uncertainty principle is about.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Marcel-Marie LeBel wrote on Oct. 5, 2018 @ 00:23 GMT

Thanks for the update. You are right. I typed up a big text ... but it wasn't convincing... even to me. I Wikied the uncertainty Principle (UP). .. And got some answers.

The UP describe an intrinsic property of nature which reflect into our measurements. The source of this uncertainty is my question.

1. you have the mathematical nature of waves and wave function

2. you have the constant turmoil of vacuum which create uncertainty

3. you have the temporary transformation of a probability distribution into wave function by the constraint produced by measurement...

I am trying to see more clearly into this...


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.