Nothingness is not nothing

Several ancient cultures dispute for the fact of having invented the number zero, a necessary tool for mathematics to work. The thing went well until some disciples of Pythagoras, who as a geometer was a fanatic of the whole numbers, discovered the existence of irrational numbers, with an infinite number of decimals, something very crazy for the time; people died due to it. Later, Newton managed to lift an image of a mechanical universe that remained standing until Einstein began to shake it. The not so modern quantum mechanics now comes to dynamite the idea of emptiness, of zero, of nothing, by the hands of researchers like David Tong, as shown in this short video:

David Bohm would surely have loved it. The truth is that Einstein’s relativity explains only the sensitive universe and has little or nothing to do with reality which our limited senses cannot perceive, that of which we are all made; The fluctuating subatomic universe, saturated, filled with electromagnetic, gravitational, quantum fields, each composed of particles that follow rules different from those of classical physics … that is why quantum mechanics was invented. It’s nothing unusual, it happened with the zero, Newton had to invent the calculus …

Heisenberg demonstrated conclusively the validity of quantum mechanics with its famous uncertainty principle: in the macroscopic world, there is nothing that prevents knowing the position and momentum (which is a value to the direction and velocity) of a ball in movement for instance; in the microscopic world of the Plank scale, this is not as such; When the position is calculated with a very low degree of indetermination, that is to say, the more accurate is the position’s measurement, the particle’s momentum value becomes highly imprecise and vice versa:

incertidumbre-de-Heisenberg

Professor Walter Lewin explains it masterfully in this video, where he first exposes how unfortunate is the image we all have of the atom with its electrons orbiting around the nucleus in a solar system way, and in the end demonstrates with an experiment the mathematical predictions of Heisenberg. The video is long but worth it, in any case, it’s a fact that the behavior of electrons within any chip is governed by the laws of quantum mechanics; which means, that it works, although no one knows very well why.

Like all previous researchers, the present ones are also having problems to prove their theories by means of experiments, but they are on it, apparently they have already found the way to avoid the annoying principle of Heisenberg, without violating it. One of the fattest problems is that normal binary processors go wrong when they have to work with astronomical numbers; hence they are willing to build quantum processors. Andrew Pontzen explains it briefly:

However, it is possible that the biggest problem is that there are too many theories derived from quantum mechanics, many of which are incompatible with each other, so some think that perhaps a simpler way of explaining observations might be found. Terry Rudolph says that we may have to forget the anthropocentric vision that our primate senses have created from reality, in order to really understand it; and to illustrate it, he shows how something like this happened to the astronomers before Galileo, who were forced to design a complex system of geometrical juggling, pretty nice-looking actually, so that the measurements might fit the observations and the prescriptions of religion, which required the earth to be in the center of the solar system … and of the whole universe in fact:

Geocentric                                                 heliocentric

Before Galileo                                                                                  After Galileo

 

Andrew Pontzen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFxPMMkhHuA&t=2s

David Tong https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNVQfWC_evg&t=2323s

Walter Lewin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeK0DV329mU

Terry Rudolph https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKGZDhQoR9E#t=3770.221

Advertisements

ECONOMY

People with lots of money have gathered at DAVOS 2017 to tell us in a show of transparency that they are filling their pockets, and that from now on they intend to continue doing so. They have put it on YouTube under the heading ” Global economy outlook“. They have also said that in the near future they want to eliminate the working class with the help of technology, although they have not said what will happen to the middle class. They have not mentioned the Syrian war or any of the ongoing conflicts, nor have they of course dealt with climate change in any way. It is not reproachable, it must be said, it was not in the script. Here a short video caption as a summary:

Christine Lagarde was there for the IMF, impassive as a first generation automaton, verbalizing figures and percentages based on “models” that showed that everything is going very well. Then there was Wolfgang Schauble, for the Bundesbank, with a lamentable aspect and in a wheelchair talking without saying anything. A smiling Haruiko Kuroda from the Bank of Japan obviated the Fuckushima disaster that apparently had no impact at all on the Japanese economy and also Philip Hammond for Great Britain defended the virtues that would bring to the international community the scission of his country from the international community, Larry Fink on behalf of the “private sector” joked openly that his country, the United States, was the most indebted in the world. But of course, everyone was perfectly in agreement that politics, not to mention democracy and migratory crises, mentioned as if they were flocks of birds, were the problem. Although they may well be qualified as followers of the Antichrist, or kids, it is not in that way, apparently they are adult human beings, so equals and as differents as each of us, just they are much better paid.
There is a video of the Royal Institution dealing with Chaos Theory, dark matter and economics, where a theoretical physicist, Andrew Pontzen,  gives the opinion that the economy deserves to physicists, I have subtitled it because it is for laughing in order to not crying.