Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Freaky Physics Proves Parallel Universes Exist

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 10:08 AM
Original message
Freaky Physics Proves Parallel Universes Exist
Edited on Tue Apr-06-10 10:11 AM by KittyWampus
Heard about this on the radio last week. Google search yielded story written up by Fox, so I apologize for the source. Also, the headline is admittedly sensationalist.

Freaky Physics Proves Parallel Universes Exist

Look past the details of a wonky discovery by a group of California scientists -- that a quantum state is now observable with the human eye -- and consider its implications: Time travel may be feasible.

The strange discovery by quantum physicists at the University of California Santa Barbara means that an object you can see in front of you may exist simultaneously in a parallel universe -- a multi-state condition that has scientists theorizing that traveling through time may be much more than just the plaything of science fiction writers. And it's all because of a tiny bit of metal -- a "paddle" about the width of a human hair, an item that is incredibly small but still something you can see with the naked eye.

UC Santa Barbara's Andrew Cleland cooled that paddle in a refrigerator, dimmed the lights and, under a special bell jar, sucked out all the air to eliminate vibrations. He then plucked it like a tuning fork and noted that it moved and stood still at the same time. That sounds contradictory, and it's nearly impossible to understand if your last name isn't Einstein. But it actually happened. It's a freaky fact that's at the heart of quantum mechanics.

To even try to understand it, you have to think really, really small. Smaller than an atom. Electrons, which circle the nucleus of an atom, are swirling around in multiple states at the same time -- they're hard to pin down. It's only when we measure the position of an electron that we force it to have a specific location. Cleland's breakthrough lies in taking that hard-to-grasp yet true fact about the atomic particle and applying it to something visible with the naked eye.

What does it all mean? Let's say you're in Oklahoma visiting your aunt. But in another universe, where your atomic particles just can't keep up, you're actually at home watching "The Simpsons." That may sound far-fetched, but it's based on real science. "When you observe something in one state, one theory is it split the universe into two parts," Cleland told FoxNews.com, trying to explain how there can be multiple universes and we can see only one of them. The multi-verse theory says the entire universe "freezes" during observation, and we see only one reality. You see a soccer ball flying through the air, but maybe in a second universe the ball has dropped already. Or you were looking the other way. Or they don't even play soccer over there.

Sean Carroll, a physicist at the California Institute of Technology and a popular author, accepts the scientific basis for the multi-verse -- even if it cannot be proven. "Unless you can imagine some super-advanced alien civilization that has figured this out, we aren't affected by the possible existence of other universes," Carroll said. But he does think "someone could devise a machine that lets one universe communicate with another." It all comes down to how we understand time. Carroll suggests that we don't exactly feel time -- we perceive its passing. For example, time moves fast on a rollercoaster and very slowly during a dull college lecture. It races when you're late for work . . . but the last few minutes before quitting time seem like hours.

snip

"Newton said all time is universal and all clocks tick the same way," Gott says. "Now with Einstein's theory of Special Relativity we know that travel into the future is possible. With Einstein's theory of gravity, the laws of physics as we understand them today suggest that even time travel to the past is possible in principle. But to see whether time travel to the past can actually be realized we may have to learn new laws of physics that step in at the quantum level."

And for that, you start with a very tiny paddle in a bell jar.

Cleland has proved that quantum mechanics scale to slightly larger sizes. The next challenge is to learn how to control quantum mechanics and use it for even larger objects. Do so -- and we might be able to warp to parallel universes just by manipulating a few electrons.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/05/freaky-physics-proves-parallel-universes/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Richard D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 10:13 AM
Response to Original message
1. So . . .
. . . how do I get into the universe where I won the lottery?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anarch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #1
18. well, just take heart
we've all won the lottery in some 'verse or other. Alternate me is rich as can be! I hope he's enjoying himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Birthmark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
19. You're already there
Well, a version of you. You "two" kids should keep in touch with each other. Then maybe you should look for the you that's equivalent to MLK Jr.

You probably want to avoid the Hitler-equivalent you. Nasty piece of work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #1
22. So where do I get into the universe where Gore was declared winner? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbiegeek Donating Member (844 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #22
29. YES
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
2. As I was reading the snip, I thought it sounded dumbed down to about 4th grade reading level.
Edited on Tue Apr-06-10 10:20 AM by tjwash
Then I saw that it was from fox news, and understood why.

Only those freaking guys could take a subject as complex as string theory and multiverses, and approach it as if they were reviewing a video game. Then the ultimate insult...they name it something juvenile like "freaky physics."

I'm sure that article will really quake the foundations of the "earth is 5000 years old" crowd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. I started another thread with better scientific explanation/information-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrs_p Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #4
10. ah, much better. thanks!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. To be fair...
I was just telling someone that Carl Sagan touched on much of this 20 years ago, and that he was like the Huell Howser of science... he could break complex theory down to the most basic, simplistic, easy to understand set of facts. Not everyone has the capacity to "get it" or even the desire to try. It's important that this information gets out... how do you do that without lowering the bar to a level where "most" can understand?

I'm never insulted when an effort is made to educate. Never.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pipi_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. One of the best
Science series (IMO) was Carl Sagan's "Cosmos".


He not only takes things and simplifies them for us laymen, but he makes them interesting and gives us a lot of other things to chew on while he explains Science...like History. Or even Ethics.


I'm never insulted either.

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #12
25. I just put that series in my Netflix queue!
It's been a while, but I remember absolutely loving that series.

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. Carl Sagan actually made an effort to educate people.
Carl Sagan also made an effort to get their facts straight.

This is just wrong, and misleading.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #14
26. How is it wrong? Misleading?
And what "facts" are wrong in this piece?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. Well, for starters, there's the title.
The experiment does not prove the existence of parallel universes. In fact, it has nothing to do with parallel universes whatsoever.

Furthermore, a quantum phenomenon is observed in the experiment, but it is not observed by the human eye.

Furthermore, there is no time travel involved in the experiment.

Furthermore, Einstein's theory of relativity doesn't enter into this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Winterblues Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
3. I felt my Universe changed in December of 2000
When the Extreme Court selected the pResident and for the next eight years everything was Bizarro land.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Birthmark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #3
20.  I thought I was the only one
I swear (by or on whatever atheists swear by or on) that I *physically* felt the universe change when the USSC ordered the recount stopped. It was weird...even by my standards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Delphinus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #3
30. I felt something similar myself:
like all of a sudden I wake up and I'm living in an entirely different timeline, one that was foreign and obscene.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nebenaube Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
5. persistence of vision...
Edited on Tue Apr-06-10 10:33 AM by nebenaube
These brainiacs need to take a course in neurophysiology. On edit: after reading the more scientific explanation I still don't buy it due to what is essentially signal aliasing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MJongo Donating Member (11 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Re: vision
I don't think they just looked at it and came to a conclusion. Scientists usually use really accurate and precise tools to measure things you know...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nebenaube Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. the problem is sampling theorem...
Edited on Tue Apr-06-10 10:56 AM by nebenaube
the observations have to occur at twice (or more) the frequency of the phenomena being observed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrs_p Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
8. science writers suck
as science doesn't PROVE anything - it is one of the tenets of being a scientist... otherwise, the article is interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #8
27. My oldest became a science writer...
and technical writer after getting his degree in chemical engineering because he couldn't stand the way the text books were written.

I tried saying "science doesn't prove anything" around here once... I got pummelled... but I still think you're right;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrs_p Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #27
31. as a trained scientist
i'm sure your oldest is great :blush:

thanks for understanding, and i should be more careful about blanket statements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. No worries!
You understand his position:) Nothing is so bad something good can't come from it:) A vast amount of that writing IS horrid! And it got my son interested in making his corner of the world a little better:) Hopefully the next generation of scientists will benefit from his frustration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
11. If it doesn't involve observables, it's really not science. Do all the fancy
calculations and metaphysical speculation you like, the "universe" is what we can observe and "parallel universes" that we can't prove to exist are daydreams

"we might be able to warp to parallel universes just by manipulating a few electrons" sort of lsounds like a grammatical sentence, but it contains the nonsense verb "warp" that doesn't actually describe anything, together with empty promises about how we'll be able to do this whatever-it-is-that-we-don't-know-what-it-is simply by "manipulating a few electrons"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. Um, this does involve observable quantum phenomenon. That's the point of the whole article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Lots of quantum phenomenon is observable.
But I don't think the facts support the claim of the article about it being observable to the naked eye.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #15
23. "... we aren't affected by the possible existence of other universes ..."
No? Then "other universes" aren't a scientific phenomenon
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:13 AM
Response to Original message
13. They say it's visible to the naked eye...
But then they show an electron micrograph.

(nevermind that electron microscopy is a fine example of quantum mechanics working at a reasonably large scale, and it's been around for decades).

All this shit about multiverses, time travel, and relativity have nothing to do with the actual research.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
17. That's just a horrible article.
Besides just making shit up, the writer buried the lead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. I found a better one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tcaudilllg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
24. Next they'll be arguing for cold fusion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheManInTheMac Donating Member (512 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-06-10 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
33. And the DU Lounge proves that a freaky parallel universe exists.
I kill me.:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 01:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC