SERVING THE QUANTITATIVE FINANCE COMMUNITY

 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 3923
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

March 19th, 2018, 7:56 pm

The Mystery of Mass from Atomism

For the one person (or cat) that read my book in addition to me, this working paper explains the connection to the mass definition I used in my book and kg.  One can go between kg and continuous time (collision time) with the factor \(\frac{\hbar}{l_p}\)  This is the secret to understand continuous time.

Also notice how Charge simply has to do with square root of time to do.
Last edited by Collector on June 10th, 2018, 1:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Topic Author
Posts: 57041
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

May 2nd, 2018, 11:18 am

Hilbert’s sixth problem was the declaration of the expansion of the axiomatic method outside the existing mathematical disciplines, in physics and beyond. This expansion requires development of semantics of physics with formal analysis of the notion of physical reality that should be done.[9] Two fundamental theories aim to capture majority of the fundamental phenomena of physics:

However, and in fact the quantum field theory is not even logically consistent with general relativity, indicating the need for a still unknown theory of quantum gravity. The solution of Hilbert's sixth problem thus remains open.
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 3923
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

May 15th, 2018, 7:02 pm

I am trying to look into atomism possibly relation to modern quantum mechanics. I am new to wave functions stuff, but trying to learn. I started looking more closely at Heisenberg uncertainty  principle. 

When including my max-velocity that is a consequence of atomism I get that the momentum and position operator commute at the Planck scale, but not before that. In other words no uncertainty  at the Planck scale. Same with the energy and time operator. If correct this again opens up for hidden variable theories at the Planck scale, and since all particles are made of Planck mass particles under atomism then there is likely no spooky action at distance. Could Albert have been right?

For example using the standard wave function (plane wave solution to Klein--Gordon)

\begin{equation}
\Psi=e^{i\left(\frac{p}{\hbar}x-\frac{E}{\hbar} t\right)}
\end{equation}
I get the standard operators when working with non-Planck mass particle, at the Planck mass particle the momentum and energy operator becomes 0, and yes the momentum and position operator then commute, the same with the energy and time operator.  Otherwise not commute.

Also I get an upper bound on uncertainty from my max velocity formula for non-Planck particles (for Planck mass particles zero uncertainty)

\begin{equation}
\frac{\hbar}{2} \leq \sigma_E\sigma_t \leq \hbar  \left(1-\frac{l_p}{\bar{\lambda}} \right)
\end{equation}
Revisiting the Derivation of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle: The Collapse of Uncertainty at the Planck Scale. (first draft, comments and critics welcome, likely some typos, and possibly even something formally wrong, but my concept I think is right. typo first line of my equation 24, delete 2pi and add a t)

Renormalization not needed
Uncertainty collapse at the Planck scale
Bells inequality collapses at Planck scale, spooky action no more.
Superposition  collapses at Planck scale
Lorentz symmetry collapses at Planck scale 

We get upper boundary on uncertainty in addition to lower 

Negative energy solutions should possibly be interpreted as we also have upper boundary?

\begin{equation}
\sigma_E\sigma_t\leq \hbar c \left(1-\frac{l_p}{\bar{\lambda}}\right)
\end{equation}

Assume that we now multiply both sides with minus one and we get

\begin{equation}
-\sigma_E\sigma_t\geq -\hbar c \left(1-\frac{l_p}{\bar{\lambda}}\right)
\end{equation}

so mathematical negative energy and probabilities is just a hint of upper boundary? (of course negative energy and negative probabilities are Fake, but do they hint at simply upper boundary, flip of inequality sign.?)

but yes could be something formally wrong with my derivations, I am a farm boy, not a mathematician. 
Last edited by Collector on May 15th, 2018, 7:43 pm, edited 6 times in total.
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Topic Author
Posts: 57041
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

May 15th, 2018, 7:24 pm

Green Acres is the place to be
Farm livin' is the life for me
Land spreadin' out so far and wide
Keep Manhattan, just give me that countryside

Image
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 3923
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

May 18th, 2018, 6:59 am

fixed some important typos Revisiting the Derivation of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle: The Collapse of Uncertainty at the Planck Scale and added one short section on entropy, also entropy must then collapse at the Planck scale. Critics welcome, hand waving equations new for me, so possibly I am on thin ice.

And from the little I understand the imaginary number number in the wave equation is also needed because we not can known position and momentum at the same time? But we can this for a Planck mass particle, so I also was throwing out the imaginary part (only for the Planck mass particle), but same result in relation to Heisenberg as keeping it basically. That is uncertainty collapses at the Planck scale.

Also I get a probability amplitude of one only for the Planck mass particle = certainty. When incorporating my max velocity formula we always have for the Planck mass particle  \(\Psi_p=1\)

God Likely Do Not Play Planck Dice! Entropy is crushed ! (for a Planck second) 

The second law of thermodynamics must be replaced by The Law:  Chaos is the Seed of Order and Order is the Seed of Chaos! 

And more important I wondered for a long time why vegans often prefer to meet red meat eaters (for short and effective meetings), and even this answer was hidden in entropy :  (and she confuses Heisenberg's uncertainty principle with the observer effect as I also did once, but the non-vegan part they got right?)
 
User avatar
katastrofa
Posts: 6390
Joined: August 16th, 2007, 5:36 am
Location: Alpha Centauri

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

May 18th, 2018, 8:28 am

This is more of my type, if it matters.Image
Last edited by katastrofa on May 18th, 2018, 10:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 3923
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

May 18th, 2018, 8:59 am

This is more of my time, if it matters.Image
Aquaman in Justice League? white matter eater ?
 
User avatar
katastrofa
Posts: 6390
Joined: August 16th, 2007, 5:36 am
Location: Alpha Centauri

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

May 18th, 2018, 9:00 am

Yeah, like my cats.
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Topic Author
Posts: 57041
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

May 18th, 2018, 9:57 am

This is more of my time, if it matters.Image
Don't know who this guy is but my 1st impression was "those are the mountains facing Reykavik" smoky bay..I wasn't far wrong. Clouds, snow, hazy light are the same.


Image
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 3923
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

May 18th, 2018, 12:56 pm

pictures of the same guy?: after and before he ate the whale?

"who obviously had a whale"
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Topic Author
Posts: 57041
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

May 18th, 2018, 1:27 pm

pictures of the same guy?: after and before he ate the whale?

"who obviously had a whale"
We did meet Ari Gunnarsson at Kevlavik.
Image
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Topic Author
Posts: 57041
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

June 9th, 2018, 3:17 pm

In his later work Wittgenstein was fond of quoting Augustine on the difficulty of answering the question ‘quid est ergo tempus?’ (PI §89). But remarks on conceptual problems connected with our notion of time can be found in many of his manuscripts – in early as well as late ones. As Jaakko Hintikka has pointed out, changes in Wittgenstein’s ways of discussing the notion of time tend to mirror more general changes in his philosophical thought. And as regards this sort of change, no period in Wittgenstein’s development involved more radical modifi- cations of his earlier views than the first years after his return to Cambridge in 1929. Starting from Hintikka’s observations, a few particularly striking remarks Wittgenstein makes on the topic of time during that period will be discussed with a view to bringing out their relevance to illuminating certain shifts in his way of thinking.

Wittgenstein seems not mentioned in the book.
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 3923
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

June 10th, 2018, 10:51 am

"‘quid est ergo tempus?’"

What then is time? The answer is by understanding how to by  pass the Pauli objection!! Each time tick is the same as a Planck-mass event. 

Mass (elementary particles)  are ticking clocks, clocks are ticking mass!
 \begin{equation}
m = \frac{\hbar}{c^2}\frac{1}{t }, \mbox{ }  t = \frac{\hbar}{c^2}\frac{1}{m }
\end{equation}

Pauli Objection, some theoretical (Princeton) scientists has gone as far as claiming no time between two events at quantum level exist, due to the Pauli objection. Others have tried to by pass the Pauli objection by introducing ideas of external clocks to try to put them outside the Pauli objection somehow, or dynamic time operators (alternative QM), I dont think they have any good solutions.

 Pauli objection: no time operator can exist, time can at best be only a parameter. Time operator need to be Hermitian and self-adjoint, something it is not.

 Well that is how it is when one miss out that all elementary particles are time dependent quantum clocks.

I suggest a new time operator that seems to truly pass the Pauli objection? Comments, critics welcome! Modern  physics has missed out that elementary particles indeed are quantum clocks ticking (something that is obvious from atomism, each tick is a Planck mass event lasting for one Planck second) at each reduced Compton second.

\begin{equation}
m=\frac{\hbar}{\bar{\lambda}}\frac{1}{c}
\end{equation}
(for example electron \(m=\frac{\hbar}{\bar{\lambda}_e}\frac{1}{c}\approx  9.1\times 10^{-31} \mbox{ kg}\))
This can be rewritten as

\begin{eqnarray}
m &=& \frac{\hbar}{\bar{\lambda}}\frac{1}{c} \nonumber \\
m &=& \frac{\frac{\hbar}{c^2}}{\frac{\bar{\lambda}}{c^2}}\frac{1}{c} \nonumber \\
m &=& \frac{\hbar}{c^2}\frac{1}{\frac{\bar{\lambda}}{c} }
\end{eqnarray}
The part \(\frac{\bar{\lambda}}{c}\)   we can call  the reduced Compton time t, and we then have

\begin{equation}
m = \frac{\hbar}{c^2}\frac{1}{t }
\end{equation}
Be also aware that \(\frac{\hbar}{c^2}\) (the observational time dependent mass gap, \(m_pt_p=\frac{\hbar}{c^2}\) ) indeed is identical to the Planck mass times one Planck second.  

Klein Gordon plane wave:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi&=&e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\left(px-E t\right)}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\Psi&=&e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\Bigg(\frac{mv}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}x-\Big(\frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}-mc^2\Big) t \Bigg)} \nonumber \\
\Psi&=&e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\Bigg(\frac{\frac{\hbar}{c^2}\frac{1}{t }v}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}x-\frac{\frac{\hbar}{c^2}\frac{1}{t }c^2}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}t+\frac{\hbar}{c^2}\frac{1}{t }c^2 t\Bigg)} \nonumber \\
\Psi&=&e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\Bigg(\frac{\frac{\hbar}{c^2}\frac{1}{t }v}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}} x-\frac{\hbar}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}+\hbar \Bigg)}
\end{eqnarray}
next
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial t} &=& -\frac{ix}{\hbar t} \frac{\frac{\hbar}{c^2 }\frac{1}{t} v }{ \sqrt{1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}}}e^{\frac{i}{\hbar}\Bigg(\frac{\frac{\hbar}{c^2}\frac{1}{t }v}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}} x-\frac{\hbar}{\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}+\hbar \Bigg)}   \nonumber \\
\frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial t}&=&-\frac{ix}{\hbar t} \frac{\frac{\hbar}{c^2 }\frac{1}{t} v }{ \sqrt{1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}}}\Psi \nonumber \\
\frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial t}&=&-\frac{i x}{\hbar t}p\Psi 
\end{eqnarray}

rember \(t=\frac{\bar{\lambda}}{c}\)  and if we set \(x=\bar{\lambda}\),   we get
\begin{eqnarray}
i \frac{\hbar}{c}  \frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial t} &= &  p\Psi 
\end{eqnarray}

This means that the time momentum operator is 
\begin{equation}
\hat{p}=i \frac{\hbar}{c}\frac{\partial }{\partial t} 
\end{equation}
and the time operator we suggest is simply  \(\hat{t}=t\). 

gives  
\begin{eqnarray}
\lbrack\hat{p},\hat{t}\rbrack\Psi&=&\lbrack \hat{p}\hat{t}-\hat{t}\hat{p} \rbrack \Psi \nonumber\\
&=&\left(i\frac{\hbar}{c}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right)(t)\Psi-(t)\left(i\frac{\hbar}{c}\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\right)\Psi \nonumber\\
&=&i\frac{\hbar}{c} \left(\Psi +t\frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial (t)}\right)-i\hbar t\frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial (t)}  \nonumber\\
&=&i\frac{\hbar}{c} \left(\Psi +t\frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial (t)}-\frac{\partial \Psi}{\partial (t)}\right)  \nonumber\\
&=&i\frac{\hbar}{c} \Psi  
\end{eqnarray}
and naturally this leads to
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma_p\sigma_t&\geq&\frac{1}{2}|i\frac{\hbar}{c}| \nonumber \\
\sigma_p\sigma_t&\geq&\frac{\hbar}{2}\frac{1}{c}  
\end{eqnarray}

Unlike the position momentum uncertainty principle the energy time uncertain version of Heisenberg is not really accepted due to the Pauli objection on time operators, but it should be okay from my new time operator that by passes the Pauli objection by getting a time operator that get same spectrum as energy.

Multiplying by c on both sides

\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma_pc\sigma_t&\geq&\frac{\hbar}{2}\frac{1}{c}  c\ \nonumber\\
\sigma_E\sigma_t&\geq&\frac{\hbar}{2}  
\end{eqnarray}

and yes my time operator must be Hermitian and self-adjoint!  or what ? (but seems to indicate momentum must be quantized as well) 

This also means the appendix in my previous paper is screed up,  and must be replaced by my new time operator that I think must by pass the Pauli objection,  they key is all elementary particles are quantum clocks ticking at a rate of their reduced  Compton time, each tick is a Planck mass event lasting for one Planck second.

Any particle with rest-mass lasting for longer than the Planck time is a tick-tock clock \(m = \frac{\hbar}{c^2}\frac{1}{t }\), where t is reduced Compton time.  The Planck mass particle is just one tick!

And also the time operators become zero at the Planck scale and further we have \(\Psi^2=1\) for Planck particle (only). (using my max velocity as limit for v). Nothing unphysical about it, it is pure logic!

Uncertainity collapses at the Planck scale! 

GOD dose not throw dice at the Planck scale! 
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 3923
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

June 10th, 2018, 1:01 pm

not only do we have space-time we also must have mass-time!!

The space-mass-time soup is served! Eat it, or leave the table now!

The atomist soup kitchen  is open at random times only!
 
User avatar
Collector
Posts: 3923
Joined: August 21st, 2001, 12:37 pm

Re: "Unified Revolution" new book by Espen Haug

June 27th, 2018, 10:15 pm

When reading text books on gravity I get the impression we need the Newton gravity constant for gravity predictions and often to know mass sizes?. 

But why not just go stright to the source of gravity? Guinness

First I drop a bottle of Guinness and measure its free fall in two time-gates, and find out it accelerate about 9.8 m/s^2  

Second I drive around the earth to measure the circumference, and after the driver gives me the pi I figure out the radius of the Earthmust be about 6,371,000 meters

Third I google the speed of light and find out it is 299792458 m/s

Fourth I combine the three rings: 

\(r_e=\frac{gr^2}{c^2}=\frac{9.8*6371000^2}{299792458^2}\approx 0.043373649 \mbox{ m} \)

yes u are right, that is half the Schwarzschild radius. And next I can use this number to calculate orbital velocities, gravitational time dilations, red-shifts etc. No need for big G or M size in any calculations (M is actually hidden in the Schwarzschild radius together with the Planck mass and the Planck length) . The only time I need to know a mass size is if I want to extract out the Planck mass or G itself, but not needed to study the Gravity Music of the Large Spheres.

Image
ABOUT WILMOTT

PW by JB

Wilmott.com has been "Serving the Quantitative Finance Community" since 2001. Continued...


JOBS BOARD

JOBS BOARD

Looking for a quant job, risk, algo trading,...? Browse jobs here...


GZIP: On