July 20th, 2023. Does Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity Suggest That There Is an Afterlife?

[socratus]

July 20th, 2023. Does Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity Suggest That There Is an Afterlife?:
A Theoretical Physicist Explains
---
It all began, she [Sabine Hossenfelder] says, when a young man posed to her the following question:
“A shaman told me that my grandmother is still alive because of quantum mechanics. Is this right?”
#
Upon reflection, Hossenfelder arrived at the conclusion that “it’s not entirely wrong.”
For decades now, “quantum mechanics” has been hauled out over and over again to provide
vague support to a range of beliefs all along the spectrum of plausibility.
But in the dead-grandmother case, at least, it’s not the applicable area of physics.
“It’s actually got something to do with Einstein’s theory of special relativity,” she says.
With that particular achievement, Einstein changed the way we think about space and time,
proving that “everything that you experience, everything that you see, you see as it was a tiny,
little amount of time in the past. So how do you know that anything exists right now?”
#
“the present moment has no fundamental significance”; in the resulting “block universe,”
past, present, and future coexist simultaneously, and no information is ever destroyed, just continually rearranged.
-------

Does Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity Suggest That There Is an Afterlife?: A Theoretical Physicist Explains

Thus does theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder start off the Big Think video above, which soon gets into Einstein's theory of special relativity.

www.openculture.com

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

It all began, she [Sabine Hossenfelder] says, when a young man posed to her the following question:
“A shaman told me that my grandmother is still alive because of quantum mechanics. Is this right?”

The appropriate response is "You know a shaman who has a Ph.D. in mathematical physics? Cool!"

 

[socratus]

The appropriate response is "You know a shaman who has a Ph.D. in mathematical physics? Cool!"

“Many physicists these days sound like the Delphic oracle - with equations.” /John Twelve Hawks /

 

[Dexter Sinister]

July 20th, 2023. Does Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity Suggest That There Is an Afterlife?

No. Shamans are not the people to consult about the meaning of physics, all you’ll get is a steaming pile of BS from someone with a tenuous grip on reality and no grasp of the physics at all. Like that famous gas head Deepak Chopra. What that physicist is talking about is the finite velocity of light. Light goes 30 cm (about a foot) in a nanosecond, so everything you see is in fact as it was when the light left it, not as it is now, but special relativity also makes it clear that you have to be very careful in defining what “now” means to different observers. As for knowing whether anything exists “now” at all, it seems a reasonable induction, and the physics is pretty clear that there IS an objective reality that exists regardless of our perceptions of it.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

“Many physicists these days sound like the Delphic oracle - with equations.” /John Twelve Hawks /

The equations make all the difference.

 

[socratus]

As for knowing whether anything exists “now” at all, it seems a reasonable induction, and the physics is pretty clear that there IS an objective reality that exists regardless of our perceptions of it.

Quantum objective reality

 

[socratus]

The equations make all the difference.

For example:
1- Classical algebra: a + b = b + a
2- Matrix algebra: a + b ≠ b + a
--------
1- Classical physics: pq = qp (position and momentum are determined simultaneously)
2- Quantum physics: pq ≠ qp (interaction between position and momentum
is probabilistic and depends on ΔpΔq ≥ ħ/2. ΔpΔq ≈ h)
-------

 

[petros]

July 20th, 2023. Does Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity Suggest That There Is an Afterlife?:
A Theoretical Physicist Explains
---
It all began, she [Sabine Hossenfelder] says, when a young man posed to her the following question:
“A shaman told me that my grandmother is still alive because of quantum mechanics. Is this right?”
#
Upon reflection, Hossenfelder arrived at the conclusion that “it’s not entirely wrong.”
For decades now, “quantum mechanics” has been hauled out over and over again to provide
vague support to a range of beliefs all along the spectrum of plausibility.
But in the dead-grandmother case, at least, it’s not the applicable area of physics.
“It’s actually got something to do with Einstein’s theory of special relativity,” she says.
With that particular achievement, Einstein changed the way we think about space and time,
proving that “everything that you experience, everything that you see, you see as it was a tiny,
little amount of time in the past. So how do you know that anything exists right now?”
#
“the present moment has no fundamental significance”; in the resulting “block universe,”
past, present, and future coexist simultaneously, and no information is ever destroyed, just continually rearranged.
-------

Does Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity Suggest That There Is an Afterlife?: A Theoretical Physicist Explains

Thus does theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder start off the Big Think video above, which soon gets into Einstein's theory of special relativity.

www.openculture.com

Grandma's thoughts, actions and biofunctions do indeed leave a signature but they are scattered over trillions of km and not a whole due to movement through time and space.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

For example:
1- Classical algebra: a + b = b + a
2- Matrix algebra: a + b ≠ b + a

No, matrix addition is commutative as long as they have the same dimensions, a+b=b+a. If they don’t you can’t add them unless you redefine addition, which of course the math folks have done in at least two ways to produce the so-called direct sum and the Kronecker sum.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

...
2- Quantum physics: pq ≠ qp (interaction between position and momentum is probabilistic and depends on ΔpΔq ≥ ħ/2. ΔpΔq ≈ h)

That doesn't seem right to me either, though I'm no expert in quantum theory, nobody is except the physicists who work with it (I'm not one of them and never was), so I had to think about it for a while and look up a few things. You're talking about the application of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, not probability. Heisenberg says there's a lower bound given by Planck's constant to how accurately you can simultaneously determine certain pairs of related properties. Position and momentum are the most common example, but there are others: voltage and electric charge, magnetic potential and current density, gravitational potential and mass density. Energy and time are another such pair of what are called conjugate variables where the uncertainty principle applies, which implies that energy can vary over very large ranges if the time interval being considered is short enough. That accounts for the particle-antiparticle creation and annihilation in the quantum foam of space.

 

[socratus]

No, matrix addition is commutative as long as they have the same dimensions, a+b=b+a. If they don’t you can’t add them unless you redefine addition, which of course the math folks have done in at least two ways to produce the so-called direct sum and the Kronecker sum.

1- Euclidean/Cartesian geometry
2- Minkowski geometry
----
Commutative law of classic algebra: ab = ba.
Noncommutative algebra (such as the matrix),
in which commutative law is invalid: ab ≠ ba.
--------
1- Classical physics: pq = qp (position and momentum are determined simultaneously)
2- Quantum physics: pq ≠ qp (interaction between position and momentum
is probabilistic and depends on ΔpΔq ≥ ħ/2. ΔpΔq ≈ h)
-------

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Commutative law of classic algebra: ab = ba.
Noncommutative algebra (such as the matrix),
in which commutative law is invalid: ab ≠ ba.

Yes, matrix multiplication is not commutative, addition is. Though what any of this has to do with special relativity suggesting there’s an afterlife eludes me.

 

[petros]

Yes, matrix multiplication is not commutative, addition is. Though what any of this has to do with special relativity suggesting there’s an afterlife eludes me.

As stated all the EM involved is scattered throughout the galaxy. They arent in a single group in space and time to constitute a "life" only bits and pieces.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

As stated all the EM involved is scattered throughout the galaxy. They arent in a single group in space and time to constitute a "life" only bits and pieces.

If all the quantum particles and processes that used to be somebody get decohered and scattered all over the galaxy, that hardly constitutes an afterlife in any meaningful sense. All that means is that nothing goes away, it just changes form, but there won’t be anything identifiable as some part of the personality that survives the death of the body.

 

[socratus]

All that means is that nothing goes away, it just changes form,

according to "The law of conservation and transformation of energy/mass"

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Yes, I’m familiar with the conservation laws, they emerge from basic symmetries of physical systems, Emmy Noether proved that in 1915. Most people have never heard of her because she was female and didn’t get proper credit at the time, or the academic appointments she deserved, but her results are fundamental to modern physics.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Yes, I’m familiar with the conservation laws, they emerge from basic symmetries of physical systems, Emmy Noether proved that in 1915. Most people have never heard of her because she was female and didn’t get proper credit at the time, or the academic appointments she deserved, but her results are fundamental to modern physics.

They had better PR back then. By naming their theories "laws," they ensured that the not-particularly-bright people of their future would respond to challenges with "It's a LAW!" whilst at the same time denigrating anything that terrified them by saying "That's just a theory."

 

[Dexter Sinister]

They had better PR back then. By naming their theories "laws," they ensured that the not-particularly-bright people of their future would respond to challenges with "It's a LAW!" whilst at the same time denigrating anything that terrified them by saying "That's just a theory."

Better PR? Emmy Noether certainly didn’t have it, she deserves to be as well known as Planck, Bohr, Schrödinger, Heisenberg, et al. But “That’s just a theory” is certainly a tactic creationists use against evolution, not understanding what theory means in science.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Better PR? Emmy Noether certainly didn’t have it, she deserves to be as well known as Planck, Bohr, Schrödinger, Heisenberg, et al. But “That’s just a theory” is certainly a tactic creationists use against evolution, not understanding what theory means in science.

I was speaking of the "natural philosophers" generally, not M Noether in particular.

Obviously to anyone with any sense, there are no laws in science, only in mathematics.

 

[socratus]

I was speaking of the "natural philosophers" generally, not M Noether in particular.

Obviously to anyone with any sense, there are no laws in science, only in mathematics.

The "natural philosophy" is physics
Physical laws have mathematical face