The Meaning of Super Cosmos
- "Lawrence B. Crowell" wrote:
> At 10:25 AM 7/5/01 -0400, Dan Smith wrote:you are
> >>From the confusion in your statements below, it is evident that
> >ignorant of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle. This is a verymajor
> >shortcoming in your scientific education. The fact that everystudent of
> >science is not thoroughly exposed to this most important fact aboutthe
> >universe does indeed imply a 'conspiracy' of a materialisticallybased
> I am going to make this a bit short. There are 2 variants of the
> Cosmological Principle (ACP). The weak ACP states that we can stateof life
> certain things about the universe because it permits the existence
> and intelligent life (us).[Jack starts here]
Yes, this WAP is strongly in the running now because of the hyperspace
M Kaku's "Hyperspace"
There are literally many 3-dim material universes forming the
Note, this is all classical - nothing to do yet with David Deutsch's
multiverse until you introduce Bohm's ontology. Kaku's Hyperspace in
picture is all Bohm's "hidden variable" or "system point", what Stapp
"the Bohm point" missing in Bohr's epistemology not allowing
particle paths. Here we have the "particle" upped to the level of
with a single Bohm point of incredible topological complexity moving
Wheeler's Super Space. See "Gravitation and Inertia" Wheeler &
supplement to MTW "Gravitation" and also "Journey into Gravity and
for prerequisites. I will be reviewing all this including detailed
Initial Value Problem in GR, the conformal factor, the 3-vector
potential, York Time, are elliptic constraints really superluminal or
Retarded = Elliptic FTL + Far Field Radiation
that Van Flandern et-al, also Phipps, get confused on because it is
confusing - the Sciama-Ellis paper that on a spacelike foliation the
there is FELT though not SEEN by the charge HERE-NOW i.e. you cannot
retarded (or advanced) Green's function 1/r(ret) in the spacelike
you must use Coulomb instant 1/r. This also has to do with Bohm's
potential Q - rule it must be instant relative to the foliation.
symmetry only local not global. But also a foliation involves topology
yes or no? CTC's time travel to the past yes or no? Global
hyperbolicity yes or
no? Positive stress energy densities yes or no? All this in detail
soon in PDF.
Like Bell's theorem we have lots of options the set of which are
incompatible. For example: Bell's theorem:
1. statistical subquantal equilibrium predictions of QM P = |psi|^2
3. counter-factual definiteness
are mutually incompatible.
Note quantum nonlocality is consistent with no FTL communication and
That is locality is sufficient to preclude FTL communication and
but it is not necessary.
If you force 1 to be true, you must renounce either 2 or 3 or both!
PQM renounces all three!
Similarly in classical GR:
I Topology of 3-dim space changes
II Global hyperbolic manifold
III Locality - chronology protection - no time travel to past
IV Positive stress-energy density
are mutually incompatible. Minimal mutually consistent set of
I & II & not III & not IV
The idea of Einstein's Vision behind GR is the Riemann "back-action"
of no action without direct reaction.
GR is only for "rock-like things".
In SR (globally flat 4-dim space-time):
Geometry acts on matter, matter gets its marching orders from
matter does not react back on space-time.
In orthodox QM in the Bohm causal limit:
The thoughtlike qubit pilot wave acts on matter (the hidden variable),
gets its marching orders from the thought-like pilot wave, but matter
react back on the thought-like pilot wave.
This assumes a coherent pilot wave on the relevant scale of
observation, e.g. a
superfluid for macro phenomena for the movement of matter by thought.
Only then will you get 1 above in Bell's theorem, i.e. only then will
subquantal heat death with P = |psi|^2 e.g. p. 30 The Undivided
Universe & Ch
The analogy is obvious.
No rock-like gravity without rock-like matter directly reacting back
No thought-like inner consciousness without rock-like matter directly
back on thoughtlike qubit pilot field.
The rocklike system point and the thoughtlike landscape in two-way
CREATE, COMMUNICATE, COLLABORATE