| Subject: Re:
gr-qc/0308089
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 15:51:53 +0300 From: Dimi Chakalov <dchakalov@surfeu.at> To: Manfred Requardt <requardt@Theorie.Physik.UNI-Goettingen.DE>
Thank you for your feedback. > Dear Dimi,
I believe a strong requirement should be introduced to any new ideas about spacetime: they have to address the measurement (macro-objectification) paradox as well. We are facing an incredible paradox: if at some *instant* our brain moves into some indecisive blurred cat state(s), there is nothing in the universe that could help our brain get back on track, invoke the von Neumann projection postulate, and use Born rule for calculating probabilities for *future* outcomes. Such kind of *physical schizophrenia* is lethal to it. The fact that we do not suffer from such disasters, and von Neumann was able to use his brain to introduce his projection postulate, is the ultimate proof that we're dealing with a genuine paradox of the rank of the ultraviolet catastrophe, as noted by Lord (John William Strutt) Rayleigh in 1900. Again, it's all about the human brain, http://members.aon.at/chakalov/Sudbery.html#note It can somehow avoid such terrible catastrophes. How? Maybe because it has the unique ability of self-acting: we think *about* our brain, *with* our brain. Please note that this paradox in linked to another, also utterly ridiculous, paradox of the Big Bang hypothesis: if at some *instant* of the deflation time along the cosmological time arrow the universe were at time zero, there would be nothing, absolutely nothing, that could possibly push it in any "direction" whatsoever. It is not like a seed of a flower that could wait for favorable conditions to grow up. It's non-existent, dead, forever. More at http://members.aon.at/chakalov/Zurek.html#note Obviously, this is not what we observe around us, and there is no sense of introducing some 'cosmological projection postulate' or whatever. We need new physics, since your good old wristwatch reads the same cosmological time during all the steps of measuring the Schrödinger's cat. > As I am presently preparing a second version with new
results, Lovely! I will read your forthcoming paper with great interest. I hope you will address another weird situation, the so-called black holes. Angelo Loinger proved rigorously that neither black holes nor gravitational waves can possibly exist, http://members.aon.at/chakalov/Nature.html#19_Feb Please read his book, it is hard-core mathematical physics. Strangely enough, people are still very reluctant to "think deeply of simple things". In this week's issue of New Scientist, we read the following: "If you plummeted feet-first into a black hole, your feet would experience a stronger pull than your head while your sides would be mashed together. Richard Gott of Princeton University calculated that this spaghettification would take just under 0.1 seconds. That would be long enough for a pain signal to reach the brain, so he wondered if it might be possible to delay the end "so you live longer and are tortured for less time". In a report submitted to Physical Review D, Deborah Freedman of Harvard University suggests a giant ring-shaped structure would do the job. Its gravity would counteract that of the black hole as you fell, keeping your feet and head dropping at the same rate. That would give you an extra 0.09 seconds to observe the event horizon, before being torn apart in the space of just 0.003 seconds." We will learn how to take a glimpse of the so-called even horizon in just 0.09 seconds, which is good. That's 'the good news' which will soon be published in Physical Review D. More in the forthcoming issue of New Scientist, "The black hole survival guide", September 6, 2003. > Best Wishes Manfred Requardt Best wishes, Dimi Chakalov
> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003, Dimi Chakalov wrote:
|
