How the Physics of Nothing Underlies Everything
nautil.us
nautil.us
> “Nothing?”
> The old woman had her spiel ready. “Physicists long since determined that most of space was empty, and most of each atom was empty, so that the overwhelming nature of the universe is nothingness, with tiny interruptions that contain all of existence. So their library is named for this Nothing that comprises most of the universe. And the mathematicians share the space, because they are proud to say that what they study is even less real than what the physicists study, so their portion is called the Library of Less than Nothing.”
> Rigg decided he was going to like the physicists. It seemed to him, though, that the mathematicians must have an annoying competitive streak.
Pathfinder (2010) by Orson Scott Card
I think the key mistake is expecting others to operate at a conscious and curious level.
Just use an analogies. Analogies are best, even if they are not 100% accurate, which I guess is the point of analogies - to use something one knows to illustrate a new concept.
To explain, I would tell them that the analogy I'm giving is not exact, but a way to get a general idea. So for quantum fields, one possible way is to explain it like an ocean. I would say that a quantum field can be understood as an ocean that covers the entire universe but too small to see, just like atoms. But it's still there. And, there are 24 of these oceans all overlapping each other, for each type of field, like one for electrons, one for the photons, etc. A photon comes into existence in this ocean when it is excited, similar to a wave on an ocean. This means that there is no such thing as "empty space" or a complete vacuum, it is impossible, the quantum fields permeate everything everywhere.
That's pretty simple to understand, even for a 10-year-old.
Maybe there are better analogies. I'm just using this as one such example, showing how to explain a topic, rather than the topic of quantum fields specifically, although the explanation above does that, too.
On youtube, there are great videos that show how this is done, just search on "explain in 5 different levels of complexity". I think you will be fascinated! :)
Here is the search results for it in youtube: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=explain+in+5+di...
> In a theatrical demonstration in 1654, he showed that not even two teams of horses straining to rip apart the watermelon-size ball could overcome the suction of nothing.
In fact, there is an addendum saying the article originally said grapefruit, then updated it to watermelon.
Say the watermelon had a diameter of 10 inches, or a cross section of 78.5 sq in. Atmospheric pressure is 14 psi. The force of the vacuum would be 78*14, so 1100 lbs. Impressive, but it seems like a horse could possibly generate that much instantaneous pull.
This site [0] says horses can pull six times their body weight for short pulls! That leads me to believe the sphere was bigger than a watermelon, and in fact, the drawing of the affair shows a sphere about the size of a beach ball.
[0] https://horserookie.com/how-much-weight-can-a-horse-pull/
This was good science overall, but beware using living things in experiments like this.
The experimenter and participant can switch places.
Changing the subject a bit, the scientist must have made smaller brass balls for himself to try to pull apart. And it's so subjective, like the puppies that were smarter than the shrinks electrocuting them, knew it was torture and being a dog.
Spesh a puppy, according to the shrinks because then they learn faster which was what the learned helplessness experiment was about, also blank slate for reproducible experiments, and finally a bit of cruelty. I've seen the faces they make sometimes, in sick mode. Again, might as well switch places, me telling them what's up. They were practicing for humans later, the industry for electric dog collars is nothing like the industry around torture. Torture is very expensive to administer, huge losses. What 1984 outlines is incredibly expensive if that's the only form of oppression. But it's not, that's only for the patsy, the hero, whatever you prefer to call him. Even in Chile, where it was massive, they just couldn't torture such an incredible number of people because it's so dirty and it takes a lot of people to run the torture apparatus. Couldn't torture four million people, that would require four hundred million people just to operate at a loss, meaning all of humanity as its slave class subsidizing it, and then who tortures all humanity? No, that doesn't scale. What scales is fear. And never revealing their own fear, like they did to me, never being exposed as being the only true bitch in the system. Like in 1984, which it turns out I live-action-role-played, you read it and at some point it's like, O'Brien is a complete bitch. He needs a full-on Egyptian pyramid (inefficient for space, good for monuments though, which is what Miniluv actually is), with a dungeon, tons of guards for a mile on all sides, no getting out no getting in (secret passages), no Brotherhood. And logistically it's a crazy money-loser. Says so right in the book, they're very wasteful.
Like get this: they actually have a guy carefully putting dust back on Winston Smith's book exactly like he did with in one second, taking like an hour very very carefully, that's a career path for some total loser. It's 3600-to-1 and they brag about it anyway.
O'Brien gets a great wage let me tell you, and everyone in that building is at least in their own view handsomely paid for blind loyalty, and their sadism really, job requirement, like the sadism bribes of government land Pinochet handed out for pittances to the most sadistic and abstracted political supporters, in the elite of course, way below market prices. And they loved him forever, set up a flight Santiago to London direct motherfucking Pinochet airlift, again the inefficiency plane after plane of sychophant must have been weekly or biweekly, just to get the one asshole out without any consequence. Call it 100 airplanes to lift that fat ass out of London, just to clean up after his shit. All the people that the operation required, duh yes lawyers but so much more behind the scenes, so many specialists, each with their field working together as a team.
Like in 1984 there's a guy preparing the heroin for the hero to him addicted to giving in just a tiny bit, you know that bartender went to an institute to specialize in getting the measures right, just enough heroin (it's heroin, it's real heroin in the Miniluv, uncut) to seduce him into thinking he can think he is a bitch, but not that much, they're still mostly torturing him. The funhouse mirrors with screens behind them, same thing, that's a national security first priority getting those special effects built to the highest standard, like there's a make-up crew to paint Winston Smith horribly when he's passed out to make him believe that he really is being bitched in his heart of hearts. Dude and nobody does any work in that book, tells you how privileged Orwell was in a way, he thought he could be a writer or intellectual, yeah. Yeah an intellectual who participates in torture, O'Brien, then yes. Need that degree though, very into the certificate and especially the prestige. Typically, though, intellectuals are persecuted just as Salvador Allende predicted in his final radio address, when the Republic of Chile announced it was operating under the same name, but a change in management due to treason. Still in power, a long golden age for traitors, and it seemed like it would last forever...
Or let's put it another way.
Your choice.
Be a bitch or die being a hero. Die under torture. Or be a bitch.
And in the end, people get what they want. Ends up being, the subtext, is millions of Chileans were subjected to the threat of torture, millions of cases of extortion, because most people aren't so...stupid, as the shrinks put it. They're smart, they let someone else take the fall. But don't underestimate yourself! There is absolutely some threshold of abuse (eg making you eat dog meat, or human feces, or force you to penetrate another victim) at which you wouldn't try delegating the dying to someone else. Don't think there's not a hero in there somewhere! Why else would you watch those movies? That Batman Superman Joker shit resonates with you because in fact most of the genome comes from heroes. It's a remote possibility but that's the entire genome, heroes and heroines. Like most of the genome, like 66% is from the Cambrian explosion, that's the basic outline of vertebrates, crazy era, the Justice League, so idealistic. So every so often, and you can tell age of fossils with this because it's like a clock, a mutation brings about a new protein. Molecular clock, literally. Like 10,000 years. A defect within a defect, in fact. There is a local maximum, this is a departure from that, hence defect, with the stigma, defect. Then, something happens and you go even farther out--and attempts to go with the herd are hopeless. And this protein made him different. It's rare but it's like the whole genome, apart from that it's remixes, like deciding in what order to watch Batman and Superman movies for the millionth time.
But don't think those actors with their special effects are the heroes! You're more of a hero for watching that movie than they are for starring in it, by a lot. And they aren't actually heroes in a Roman Law capacity as they , people confuse actor with character. On the contrary, Heath Ledger! I actually did that exact same shit to a real gangster, made my getaway just like Heath Ledger, like a glitch in the system. Declared a hero, told what I did was perfect. And that was just the beginning, long weekend, long ten years of silence. But what happened ultimately? Justice, the dungeon being put to original intended use. A bitch in the system.
When everyone goes along with the abuse, the amount of abuse goes up. Instantly. Not even overnight, like 8AM to 9AM. The only thing that protected the dignity of Chileans was--for a long time--the resistance, counter-terrorist (officially designated as such by the President in the final radio address, a message that carries official weight, final instructions from a shrink in fact--he researched psychiatry--but more of like a psych, a real attendant of the soul. And as such his suicide was unconditionally heroic, not cowardly by any means. The Chilean left tiptoes around this, uh-uh. Suicide is legitimate under the threat of torture. Better to die than betray. The other option was in fact to cooperate, get threatened all the time by everyone, suck up to the worst people on earth, and the biggest thing--bid up the betrayal contest, and betray. Treason. Betrayal. The absolute worst, the lowest circle of Hell. I've been told by many doctors I'm stupid to think such a thing, for real, like in practice not on film in real life. But it's not so strange. Some people are smart, they cooperate. Some people are dumb, they don't. But don't think you're so smart, if it hadn't been me it would have been up to you, could you have done what I did?
I actually think you could in fact. Everyone, the instant you realize the betrayal contest is a set-up, and they capture you--you have a limit too, believe it or not. It will come as a total surprise, but you can only take so much. At some point, there are conditions (which is what this experiment is, measuring those conditions to get as close to them as possible) under which you physically couldn't submit (shrinks unanimously agree to the contrary). Maximum suffering with no consequences, science applied to the mind. Your dignity is defined by your courage. At any rate the Chilean Idealists--especially the detenidos desaparecidos (not going to translate that)--those guys stuck up to torture, that's why they erased all traces of them. Didn't want to see how much a man can take and still not cooperate. José María Sepúlveda. They erased the really dangerous ones, the ones who were totally right and totally wronged, they guys who bit and shit and nobody wanted to be assigned to torture. And three thousand of them, tres mil, under those specific conditions of erasure. Three thousand really dangerous men and women, on a totally different level than anything I've ever done or been through. I went in like a lot of people, them to much worse than me, comparatively speaking my only merit was making it out. Live to tell the tale, nothing more.
Them? Just wow.
Um. It's not "suction of nothing", it's the pressure of the atmosphere. If the vacuum-"filled" ball were put into another vacuumed container, a small child would have no trouble separating the halves.
Hell, they would likely come apart on their own due to a low pressure differential and gravity pulling at them.
Cold welding
The underlying aspect of existence is universal potential. All existent reality is a perturbation of universal potential distributing as an “aspect” of existential being.
This nothing being observed is actually the distribution of potential acting upon itself. The “space between” existent potential is the potential acting upon neighboring potential. So where “nothing” is observed, it is actually the field separation of the discrete potential.
For instance in the pauli exclusion principle, the boundary of a particle is not similar to a physical object, more like a magnetic field, these oppositional forces displace other particles, producing the distant nothing in between.
The smallest aspect of the universe isn’t a particle, it is potential, and a particle is a discrete localization of the stably bound particle’s potential. And nothing is all that will fit in between!
force conception of pressure -> modern physics and qft, Higgs field implies non-vacuum -> kaluza klein and string theory compactified dimensions -> it's actually a theory for each vacuum state -> the anthropic principle -> some vacuum states hypothesized to destroy spacetime vvv
https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.L...
^^^ a dark energy description by de Sitter <- the observation that the universe is undergoing accelerated expansion <- the multiverse hypothesis <- the anthropic principle
I know Occam's razor is not a valid scientific argument, but supposing that everything just exists removes the arbitrariness of it all, our subjective view of the world in particular. It's the simplest explanation of it all.
I also believe that the simplest axiomatization of this theory would be a paradox. From a false postulate, any true (and/or false) statements can be derived. Including that which describes/corresponds to our reality.
It only takes 0 == 1 for everything to exist, but that's something we cannot logically prove, nor use at our advantage. It's a useless theory of everything, but a neat one.
Physics is one of those things. its too big and far away for me to stress about it. If its gonna kill me I cant stop it.. I might as well enjoy what I do have control over.
It's the universe that kills us.
Eventually, over 10^100 years of operation you get into interesting problems with the number of possible states a mind of a given size has being finite; but if you can continually add more matter via non-energy-conserving interactions, you could add more memory/processing up to fundamental physical limits: you can only fit so much information in a given volume before it collapses into a black hole; you can only communicate at c, so if you make your mind bigger, it has to parallelize or slow down; Given the expansion of space, at some scale, light signals from one end of your mind can't reach the other (the space inbetween expands faster than C), which would be the the fundamental limit... except that gravity counteracts the expansion of space, and I'm not sure what the expansion properties of a visible-universe-filled volume of just-barely-black-hole-subcritical computronium is. I imagine you're in a big crunch regime at that point, except... Isn't that the same thing as a black hole collapse? Nonetheless, there's presumably some balancing density that perfectly avoids both expansion and contraction, though it's presumably unstable. Ignoring the instability-difficulties, though, that means you can continue growing the amount of memory you have by slowing down your processing speed to one clock cycle every ~2*the diameter of your mind in light-years years. I'm not sure what the ultimate limiting factor is here, given infinite time; does the amount of computation of this system in infinite time go to infinity as your scale goes to infinity, or does it asymptotically approach some finite upper bound?
(One possible avenue against defection is that if I can simulate you well enough, I know by definition whether you'll defect or not.)
This whole process is called 'timeless acausal trade', and it's pretty interesting.
except due to time dilation, you would just experience it as the blink of an eye (and that's assuming that you're not quite at full light speed, full light speed and it's nothing)...
"...Don’t panic. Even if our vacuum is only metastable, given its staying power so far, it will probably last for billions of years more."
Ooph, such a wild ride an article!
No wonder a participating scientist, as mentioned, has worked himself to a disturbing need to seek therapy.
Reading this, it seems that the science is very comfy operating with time concept as we know it, projecting its flow into the 'billions of years' into the future. Time as a sole witness to truth and to the human struggle to comprehend its own destiny. But could this time too be a temporary or a even dynamic state or even a dimension itself?