Friday, June 24, 2016

Why Quantum?

There are simple ways to think about the mysteries of our quantum reality, but first of all, it is necessary to have some kind of quantum gravity. Without a quantum gravity to complement quantum charge force, a schizophrenia results from the jumps between the two worlds of charge and gravity.

A quantum gravity does exist as a biphoton exchange between two neutral particles and biphoton exchange and this provides a simple way of understanding quantum gravity in the context of quantum charge. Just as each pair of charged particles bonds with the exchange of a photon, each pair of neutral particles then bonds with the exchange photon pairs called biphotons. While the exchange of a single photon between charges represents dipole force, the exchange of a biphoton between neutral particles represents a quadrupole force. This simple model of quantum gravity simplifies the complexities of many quantum measurements

The GHZ (Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger) experiment is a variation of the simple crossed polarizer experiment that illustrates quantum entanglement and nonlocality. However, unless you can read the papers and understand the math, why go there?

There are even more complex measurements of atom spin in magnetic fields with oscillating electric fields that are photon-echo effects that are even more mysterious examples of entanglement. There are also very sophisticated measurements of photon echo decay that also illustrate the effects of entanglement. Fortunately, people do not argue endlessly about what photon-echo measurements mean, they just use them and MRI is a prime example of the utility of such photon-echo decay magic.

Tim Maudlin has many valid intuitive arguments that often confuse GR and QM logic and science well knows that GR logic inherently contradicts QM and vice versa. While Maudlin therefore makes some very good points, he really is just pointing out the same contradictions between GR and quantum over and over again in many different ways. Without a unified gravity and charge, this discourse is endless, confusing, and not that fruitful.

By jumping back and forth between quantum and GR logic, Maudlin has managed to befuddle even Tegmark and Davies in a discourse about time. Tegmark and Davies asked Maudlin for a theory to support his back and forth arguments so that they could test it. Maudlin replied that he does not have a math theory, just a feeling and intuition about reality.

That did not go over well...

A simple device avoids the befuddled hand-waving and measures a single dipole photon that shows entanglement and nonlocality without a lot of fuss and muss. A simple device comprising a source, quantum photon, beamsplitter, and observer has a mirror to further direct both paths onto the same stationary observer or detector with a variable time delay. Then compare measurements of a determinate photon and a quantum photon with respect to time delay.
For a determinate and classical single photon, the photon path is always completely knowable. A beam splitter routes a classical photon from a source onto either of two possible paths or futures and a classical observer sees that determinate photon along one of paths A or B, but with different time delays that can reveal the path. The CMB creation determined the classical photon path and its geodesic shows that destiny and that destiny does not depend on the other path.

A determinate classical photon cannot exist as a superposition of two paths or futures and there is no interference of a single determinate photon with itself. A determinate photon spectrum does not retain any information about the beamsplitter or paths and is just a record of the source matter spectrum. A determinate classical photon therefore has an independent existence from either the source or observer and does not bond the source and observer in any way. Therefore, a determinate classical photon path is already in a future frame of a DVD video that is playing back the prerecorded script of the universe.

However, the quantum photon spectrum does actually depend on both paths and their time delays and the quantum photon does interfere with itself and therefore determinate photons simply do not represent measurement of even a simple beamsplitter. Simply blocking or altering the time delay of one path changes the spectrum of the single photon and and so the beamsplitter entangles these two paths and results in the conundrum of QM. There are many more complicated examples of entanglement, but this rather simple device is sufficient for showing the reality of a quantum photon.

Even after measurement, the exact path of a quantum photon remains unknowable. A quantum photon exists as a superposition of both paths or futures and so a quantum photon spectrum retains the information not only about the source, but also about the beamsplitter, two paths, and observer. Therefore when an observer sees a quantum photon (i.e., measures the single photon spectrum), there is no way to know which path A or B the photon followed, but only that there were two possible paths. The observer sees or measures a photon spectrum that shows information about the source, beamsplitter, both paths, and of course information about the observer as well. Even at zero time delay, there are polarization effects that further reveal the natures of the two paths, but do not reveal one path or the other.

A quantum photon does not have an independent existence from the source and observer and that single photon represents a transient bond between the source and observer that may represent parts of many spatial paths. Photon exchange is what bonds all sources together in one way or another and if the observer ended up coherently re-emitting the photons back to a coherently emitting source, that would actually be a stable source-observer bond.

Even this simple device is therefore not like a DVD playing a determinate future that is an already recorded script of the universe. Rather, a single photon measurement is like a live stage play with the same script of the universe as the DVD, but with constant rewriting during the performance. A performer is a source of photons and the audience is observers of those photons and there are no exactly determinate futures for the scripts of any of those photons. But there is a bonding state between the performers and the audience due to quantum photon exchange that goes both ways. Therefore a performance is never exactly the same as the preliminary script, including a performance without any audience at all.

There are quantum bonds between all sources and observers due to photon exchange, with or without a beam splitter. The GHZ experiment is an elaboration of a stage performance that assumes a source and observer and then creates a labyrinth of coherent atom paths and spins to illustrate the same principle of bonding between source and observer.

However, many of the explanations of magnetic fields and atom spin use classical fields and therefore lose site of the inherent quantum photon exchange that bonds the source and observer. Therefore even very smart people can argue endlessly about these complex experiments and the only thing that really resolves these contradictions is a quantum gravity that is compatible with quantum charge.

Aethertime’s unification of charge and gravity provides unique insights so far denied to mainstream science into the quantum nature of all of reality. Notice, though, that none of the above explanations depend on anything more than the quantum logic of mainstream science. The quantum logic of mainstream science is not wrong, it is just limited just like the determinism of Einstein’s GR geodesics is not wrong either…GR is likewise limited by the determinate action of Einstein’s GR. After all, GR does not describe the photon exchange bond between a source and observer at all.

Quantum exchange is the action that bonds a source and observer and that bond is what makes for the uncertainty of action. Therefore the uncertainties of free will and free choice and even thought itself all derive from actions of quantum bonds between sources and observers. Of course, there is a lot of chaos in classical determinate actions and so people can still argue endlessly about free will…until there is a common quantum gravity and charge. Ironically, it is quantum gravity that is what rescues free will from the determinate actions of Einstein’s GR.


Said in other words, the action differential of Einstein’s GR is simply the cosmic action time average of the quantum gravity matter wave action derivative. Both space and interval atomic time emerge from the gravity/charge action derivative, now with respect to the action time of the universe. The cosmic action time of the universe represents a kind of absolute time and is different from the interval time of atomic clocks, which varies over cosmic action time. It is the cosmic action of the universe that defines all force and the progress of interval time represents a second time dimension.

The same dipole photons of quantum charge bonds are the quadrupole biphotons of gravity bonds. While charge bonds have very short correlation lengths on the order of atoms, gravity bonds have very long correlation lengths on the order of the universe. While discrete photon emission and absorption are what bond charge matter, discrete biphoton emission and absorption are what bond neutral matter. The biphoton exchange of gravity defines the motions of sources from gravity, but biphotons are also coupled to charge bonds.

Therefore, charge bonds affect gravity and and gravity affects charge bonds. However, the biphoton nature of gravity means that the gravity wave beamsplitter does not show interference effects. This is because the gravity biphoton exchange between source and observer is much more symmetric than the single photon exchange of dipole charge force. In other words, resonances between source and observer result in cavity modes just like a laser.

Stimulated absorption and emission are only possible with the special conditions of a laser cavity for dipole photons, but stimulated absorption and emission are very common for gravity biphotons. Therefore any interaction between two gravity sources represents a quadrupole cavity mode with the exchange of a very large number of biphotons.