Theos-Talk Archives (August 2002 Message tt00247)

Bart:Zero point energy is a corollary to the Heisenberg Uncertainty
Principle, where it can be shown that if you remove all energy from a
point in space, there is still energy there. This is in line with
Blavatsky's statement that there is no empty space. 

Brian:The above is not correct, and does not reflect quotes from 
Blabatsky or what is in the SD.

The uncertainty principle is actually a recipe for making
measurements with a precision that would be unimaginable classically.

Suppose, for example, that you want to dock the speed of an 
automobile. You could set up two pylons on the side of the road a
known distance apart. An observer at the first pylon will press a nutton
that starts a dock running when the car passes; when the car passes 
pylon number two, a second observer win press a button stopping the 
clock. 
Dividing the distance between pylons by the time on the clock, you
now have a measure of the speed of the iutomobile. The accuracy of the 
measurement depends on such things as how precisely the pylons are 
positioned and how quickly ne observers respond. The effect of these 
uncertainties can be minmized by simply using a larger separation 
between the pylons.

But now suppose you also ask where the car was when its speed --as 
measured. The answer is "between the pylons." The more acurately you 
determine the automobile's speed by moving the pylons apart, the less 
precise you can be about its position. If you want to be more precise 
about the position of the car, you must -ove the pylons closer
together, making the speed measurement more uncertain.

This trade-off is the classic dilemma of measurement. Position -nd 
motion arc said to be "complementary" variables. There are all sorts
of complementary variables in our lives; if we look for greater --curity
in investments, for example, we must settle for a lower rate return.
That was understood before the quantum revolution, it was supposed 
that you could always improve the measure-cnt with better instruments.

What Heisenberg postulated was that there is a fundamental limit on 
how accurately you can simultaneously know both the

position and motion of a particle. That limit, called the Planck
constant, is a measure of the ultimate graininess of nature. The result,
however, is to limit the possible outcomes of an experiment. A quantum
transition between two states of an atom results in the emission of a 
photon of very specific energy. The same transition will always result in a
photon of precisely that energy. Heisenberg had actually made the world 
more certain.

Quantum theory represents the properties of a particle by a 
mathematical expression called the wave function, which is used to 
calculate the probability that a particle will be found at a
particular position. In keeping with Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, a
particle with a well-defined state of motion is represented by a very 
broad wave packet. Once the particle is detected, the wave ffinction is 
said to have "collapsed" to the location of the detector. The act of
observing a particle has thus caused the wave function to change 
everywhere. It is as if, until it was detected, the particle was 
everywhere at once.

Most physicists shrug their shoulders and ask, "Who cares?" Quantum 
mechanics gives them a mathematical description of nature that 
accounts for the outcome of their experiments. But for all the power
of the two great scientific revelations of twentiethcentury physics,
general relativity and quantum mechanics, it has not been possible to
reconcile them with each other. General relativity is a classical continuum
theory, which conceives of the universe as a seamless whole. Therein 
must lie the source of its incompatibility with quantum mechanics. So 
far, in spite 
of many attempts, there is no generally accepted quantum theory of 
gravity.

When Einstein published his general theory of relativity in 1916, its 
predictions on a laboratory scale differed so little from Newtonian 
mechanics that some physicists despaired of laboratory confirmation;
it seemed impossible to make measurements with sufficient precision. It
is a wonderfal irony that confirmation became possible, almost routine, 
through technologies ushered in by the quantum revolution-the atomic 
clock, for example, which is accurate to one second in a hundred 
thousand years. 1hc atomic clock is regulated by the frequency of 
microwaves emitted during quantum transitions of cesium atoms. So 
much for the shibboleth that quantum mechanics describes an 
unpredictable world or remove all energy from a point in space, there
is still energy there.

Brian

--- In theos-talk@y..., Bart Lidofsky <bartl@s...> wrote:
> brianmuehlbach wrote:
> > 
> > Well these few short sentences are not a "huge body" as you 
previously
> > claimed, 
> 
> Did you read the message that came with it? By your 
statement, you
> clearly did not. 
> 
> > by way not even the length of one third of one of the e-mails
> > Dallas sends on a daily basis to this list. 
> 
> Dallas clearly has much more free time on his hands than I 
do.
> 
> 
> > -The "Big Bang" theory of the origin of the Universe.
> > 
> > -Zero point energy.
> > 
> > Can you explain at least what you mean by these terms ?
> 
> The "Big Bang" theory of the Universe is the belief that the 
Universe
> was originally a single, undifferentiated mass, which, due to
internal
> pressures, exploded and reformed into differentiated space. Not
unlike
> the Stanzas of Dzyan, among other writings.
> 
> Zero point energy is a corollary to the Heisenberg Uncertainty
> Principle, where it can be shown that if you remove all energy from
a
> point in space, there is still energy there. This is in line with
> Blavatsky's statement that there is no empty space. 
> 
> > And do you have science to back up your religious opinion, reg.
"the 
> > Big Bang theory" and "Zero point energy" the way it is formulated
in
> > Blavatsky's writings ?
> 
> In the United States, at least, this is taught in high school 
physics. 
> 
> Bart Lidofsky