"What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning."
- Werner Karl Heisenberg (1901-1976): German theoretical physicist, an early developer of the theory of quantum mechanics. (This contribution is marked NNN, but there is some specific relevance to aviation-related topics toward the end) - DW In my humble view, research and educational standards have degraded to an alarming level over the last 50 years—even longer in certain ways. In 1916, Albert Einstein wrote a book which he said would explain Special and General Relativity to someone with a competent secondary school education. The standards of the gymnasia in those days were evidently more rigorous than is now current. One would be challenged to find contemporary high school students who were able to read, let alone understand it. Perhaps this at least partly explains the seemingly endless stream of mindless theories, proposals, and claims that are given some scientific justification. As with all of us, Einstein had many flaws. He nevertheless remains among the very few individuals at the top of his extraordinarily challenging chosen field. He also was able to develop some of the most revolutionary and durable theories ever conceived and he had the courage to describe conditions and interpretations that would challenge his own theories. His theories are durable because his two great achievements, Special and General Relativity (hereinafter "Relativity") have survived over 100 years of criticism by multitudes of serious investigators and cranks who were determined to find flaws in their descriptions and predictions. None have succeeded and Relativity continues to make remarkably accurate predictions. The test of a scientific theory comes down to the predictions it proffers and whether these can be reproduced by anyone applying the same procedure and conditions. One test of Relativity's predictions is among my special favorites. There are elemental particles known as Muons, which are known to be formed by high energy collisions between other particles at the outer edges of Earth's atmosphere. Muons travel at close to the speed of light, but because they are massive particles they can never reach that speed; yet they are subject to relativistic conditions owing to the speed they do achieve. Muons are also very short-lived particles—so much so that very few Muons can ever reach the surface of the earth. Because of the nature of the subatomic realm and the difficulties we face when assessing it, we speak of "probabilities" relating to the actions of said particles. Special Relativity predicts the probability of some Muons reaching Earth because their time reference is altered owing to the dilation of time as they near the speed of light. Absent Special Relativity, the probability that Muons can survive long enough to reach the surface of the Earth is low. Some are to be expected, but the number that is observed is always much higher—more that can be accounted for within the range of probability. This is because time dilation extends their probable life relative to the time frame existing on earth. The variance in the probability of Muons reaching the Earth aligns very closely with the predictions of Special Relativity. Despite its multiple proofs, Relativity remains challenging for most people to understand. I suspect this is owing to the problem we all have with reconciling the experience and observations of our lives with what Relativity says must be so. For instance, all massive objects are subject to the effects of time dilation just described. As these move closer to the speed of light such effects become more pronounced. Because photons (which comprise light) are massless, these move at the speed of light (never exceeding it) where the effects of time dilation are infinite. Thus, photons experience none of the effects of time that we observe. In their frame of reference, there is no time. We observe photons emitted billions of years ago by distant galaxies—in our frame of reference. For the photon, the instant of its emission and its absorption are identical—there is no interval experienced at all. Not content with this level of weirdness, the scientific class has still more perplexing ideas to confounded us. Before moving on, some explanation of the Principle of Locality will be helpful. Locality in classical physics expresses the idea that any object is influenced directly only within its immediate proximity. Action at a distance, or non-local action is allowed, but there must be some medium that extends influence between distant points, such as a moving particle or a wave. Because Special Relativity defines a limit to the speed at which non-local action can be transferred, an event at one point can never cause a simultaneous event at another point. There can, therefore, be no exceptions to the universal speed limit imposed by the speed of light. In 1935, Einstein and two collaborators described a logical construct (not a true theory) by which an exception to quantum non-local action predictions might exist. This became known as the "EPR Paradox," after the initials from their names (Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen). Essentially, quantum theory suggests that two “systems” (essentially, two particles for our purposes), may be permitted to interact briefly (what is generally spoken of as “entanglement” today). When such particles move on in different directions (therefore being non-local), quantum theory also describes (such is a basic proposition of quantum theory) that it is impossible (according to Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle; better “Imprecision” than “Uncertainty”), to know certain combinations of physical properties (in the EPR example momentum and position) precisely, because when the precision of measurement for one property increases, the precision of the other decreases. (Apologies for any oversimplification here). However, EPR proposes that momentum or position can be measured precisely for one particle. Yet, once either value for one particle is known, thereby making measurement of the other value impossible, the same value for the other can be calculated without in any way altering its physical state. The paradox that EPR suggests is that both values for momentum and position must have pre-determined values if these can be known before any measurement takes place. Hence, according to EPR, quantum theory must be flawed or incomplete (as the conditions just described are not allowed), even though the predictions made by quantum theory can be observed to be “correct.” As the EPR paper <https://www.drchinese.com/David/EPR.pdf> says: "While we have thus shown that the wave function does not provide a complete description of the physical reality, we left open the question of whether or not such a description exists. We believe, however, that such a theory is possible." At one point Einstein made what he intended as a derogatory remark by referring to "spooky action" at a distance. His intent, as he described on multiple occasions, was to demonstrate that the selection of one measurement that is performed on one particle would inevitably lead to multiple quantum states in the second particle (an idea also suggested by Schrödinger—He of the living and dead cat thought experiment, which was termed “steering.”) Therefore, Einstein maintained, quantum states cannot be in one-to-one correspondence with the real (observable) physical states. This idea occupied much of his time for the remainder of his life. It's worth noting that, in the years after 1935, Einstein attempted to distance himself from the paper that started the discussion, saying that it was mostly the work of his collaborators. Ever since EPR was first discussed (beginning immediately after its publication), people have been looking to quantum entanglement for proofs of non-local "Spooky Action" because an exception to Special Relativity limits might have practical uses, and because therefore faster than light communication might be possible. Such folk argue that, because distance is irrelevant to quantum entanglement, altering the state of one entangled particle must immediately alter the state of the other entangled particle—something Special Relativity does not allow. The exception, they continue, is caused by a failing in Special Relativity, not quantum mechanics. As we have seen, this is not what Einstein, and his colleagues were trying to say. During the 1960s, some important work was done by John Stewart Bell (from CERN) to define a test of the EPR Paradox. Bell’s work was significantly expanded by John Clauser (Caltech). The results of this work (and that of others) show that quantum entanglement is real (something that had not been previously proven) and that quantum mechanics can be understood to violate the Principle of Locality, as understood by Einstein. It has also been convincingly shown that quantum entanglement does not violate Special Relativity’s limits, although correct quantum definition of “locality” is still disputed. My object in sharing these thoughts is to suggest an appropriately skeptical response when we hear of exceptions to Relativity’s limits that might enable practical space travel or communication. “Spooky Action at a Distance” sounds encouraging at first pass, but it doesn’t sustain under proper examination. As Heisenberg observed (quote at the beginning of this muse), we are limited in our understanding of nature because of the questions we ask, or don’t ask. We’ve asked sufficient questions to understand that Relativity’s predictions have been sustained for 100 years without exception. Hence, faster than light travel notions also cannot be sustained and we are left to deal with the physical realm in which we live to ask our questions. Space is incredibly vast, so much so that no one can fully understand its extent. Voyager 1, the space vehicle furthest from earth, was launched in 1977 and travels at around 38,000 miles per hour. Only in 2026 (49 years later) will it reach one light day’s distance from earth. Voyager has successfully passed what is called the “Heliopause,” which is the furthest extent of the “solar wind” (plasma emanating from the sun), at which particles from interstellar space exceed the influence of the solar wind. It has yet to leave the influence of the sun’s gravity and will not do so for perhaps another 30,000 years. Traveling at 1% of the speed of light would mean about 6.7 million miles per hour—something that has never been achieved (and is rarely cited as a goal). At such a speed, travel to the nearest stars (were there a reason to go there) could not happen in less than 400 years. Light is incredibly fast, distances are incredibly great, technology is not going to solve these problems, and neither is Spooky Action at a Distance—despite what we read in the papers. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, Old Man Wardell Failed Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Revised: 20250507 You are receiving The Mifnet because you requested to join this list. The Mifnet is largely a labor of love, however the infrastructure isn't exactly cost-free. If you'd care to make a small contribution to the effort, please know that it would be greatly appreciated: https://wardell.us/url/mifbit All posts sent to the list should abide by these policies: 1) List members acknowledge that participation in Mifnet is a privilege--not a right. 2) Posts are always off the record, absent specific permission from the author. 3) The tone of discussions is collegial. 4) Posts are expected to be in reasonably good taste. 5) We discuss ideas and not personalities, and we don't speak ill of other Mifnet members. * The Mifnet WEB SITE is: https://www.mifnet.com/ * To UNSUBSCRIBE from this list at any time please visit: https://lists.mifnet.com/ OR: SEND THIS MESSAGE via email: [email protected]?subject=leave * Send Mifnet mailing list POSTS/SUBMISSIONS to: [email protected] * You may reach the person managing The Mifnet at: [email protected] * Please consider the DIGEST version of The Mifnet, which consolidates all list traffic into 1-3 messages daily. See instructions at: https://lists.mifnet.com/ * Manage your personal Mifnet SUBSCRIPTION at: https://lists.mifnet.com/ * For a list of all available Mifnet commands, SEND THIS MESSAGE via email: [email protected]?subject=help * View The Mifnet LIST POLICIES and PRIVACY POLICY at: https://mifnet.com/index.php/policies * View instructions for Mifnet DELIVERY PROBLEMS at: https://mifnet.com/index.php/delivery-problems * View The Mifnet LIST ARCHIVE at: https://lists.mifnet.com/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/
