I missed that 10^-48 is rather an impressive result. Is that definitive -
granularity has to be that small - or merely suggestive?

It does suggest the possibility of a lot of internal structure inside
"fundamental" particles!


On 22 October 2013 14:43, Richard Ruquist <yann...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The 10^-48 meters for the upper limit on grannular size of space is better
> compared to the Planck Scale at 10^-35.
> So space is smooth at least to 10^-13 Planck scales consistent with Fermi
> gamma ray arrival results. Gamma rays a factor of ten different in energy
> arrived from across the universe at the same time whereas granularity would
> delay one measurably.
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 9:11 PM, Chris de Morsella 
> <cdemorse...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>> That interpretation of the signal picked up by that dectector in Hannover
>> has also subsequently been disputed by ESA measurements of gamma ray
>> polarization from distant gamma ray bursts. If as these measurements seem
>> to
>> suggest the universe is not pixelated then anything that relies on the
>> universe being pixelated must also get a close re-examination to see if
>> they
>> withstand these apparent highly accurate measurements of distant gamma ray
>> burst polarization -- or rather the apparent lack of any harmonization of
>> the polarization induced by a granular nature of spacetime, with such
>> granularization apparently excluded down to much smaller scales than
>> previously reached.
>> So I am left still asking myself the question is the universe granular or
>> not -- the ESA experiment seems to suggest it is not down to the scale of
>> 10^-48 meters (by comparison the size of a single proton is around 1.6 X
>> 10^
>> -15 meters, which is inconceivably huger than the previous number)
>>
>> Quoting from their press release:
>> " By examining the polarisation of gamma-ray bursts as they reach Earth,
>> we
>> should be able to detect this graininess, as the polarisation of the
>> photons
>> that arrive here is affected by the spacetime that they travel through.
>> The
>> grains should twist them, changing the direction in which they oscillate
>> so
>> that they arrive with the same polarization. Also, higher energy gamma
>> rays
>> should be twisted more than lower ones."
>>
>>  "However, the satellite detected no such twisting - there were no
>> differences in the polarization between different energies found to the
>> accuracy limits of the data, which are 10,000 times better than any
>> previous
>> readings. That means that any quantum grains that exist would have to
>> measure 10^-48 meters or smaller."
>>
>> In the European Space Agency press release, Philippe Laurent said the find
>> "ruled out some string theories and quantum loop gravity theories."
>>
>> http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/07/06/137634397/physicists-almost-c
>> ertain-the-universe-is-not-a-hologram<http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/07/06/137634397/physicists-almost-certain-the-universe-is-not-a-hologram>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
>> [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Russell Standish
>> Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 5:33 PM
>> To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
>> Subject: Re: String theory and superconductors and classical liquids...
>>
>> Given the "newsworthiness" of such a discovery, and the fact that I've
>> never
>> heard of the Hannover signal until now, indicates perhaps not.
>>
>> That's not proof, of course :).
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 05:12:52PM -0700, Chris de Morsella wrote:
>> > "Quantum physics is almost phrased in terms of information processing
>> > it's suggestive that you will find information processing at the root
>> > of everything."
>> >
>> > Vlatko Vedral, University of Oxford
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On so many levels the universe appears to operate at a binary level
>> > (up, down, +/-, spin and so many other properties)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > One of the fundamental aspects of reality that I have been curious
>> > about -- since hearing about the signal picked up (in 2008) by the GEO
>> > 600 gravitational wave detector in Hannover, Germany that seemed to
>> > suggest that space-time is pixelated -- is whether reality is
>> > pixelated. Is there a smallest pixel of space time (or does space time
>> > have infinite room at the bottom scale) If reality is pixelated at
>> > this fundamental level then it seems more likely to be computable;
>> > however if the Hannover signal was misinterpreted and even the
>> > smallest imaginable chunk of space time can forever be sub-divided
>> > into smaller and smaller space-time locus' or regions then computability
>> becomes harder to imagine.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Given the volume of posts on this list I am sure this has been talked
>> > about before, after all its not new news. I am wondering if the
>> > Hannover signals (and the interpretation of those signals) have been
>> reconfirmed or not.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Chris
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
>> > [mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
>> > Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 1:57 PM
>> > To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
>> > Subject: String theory and superconductors and classical liquids...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ...these are a few of my favourite things!
>> >
>> > In the 12/10/13 issue of "New Scientist", in an article entitled "All
>> > or nothing?" I read that "certain aspects of the behaviour of [high
>> > temperature superconductors] are much easier to capture using the
>> > mathematics of string theory."
>> >
>> > And...
>> >
>> >
>> > "every state of matter matches up with a gravitational scenario that
>> > can be described using (...) string theory. Superconductors can be
>> > understood as stars made of charged particles and (...) Higgs bosons.
>> > Classical liquids can be modelled using the mathematics of black holes
>> > that do not have spin and have no electric charge."
>> >
>> > That struck me as rather mind-boggling. How can a theory of 10 (?)
>> > dimensional space-time and vibrating strings relate stars to
>> > superconductors, etc? (And are there other parallelisms waiting to be
>> > discovered - other physical phenomena that are mathematically
>> > identical when they go through the looking glass, as it were?)
>> >
>> > This seems to me to be saying something profound about reality. I just
>> > wish I knew what it was.
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> > Groups "Everything List" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> > an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
>> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> an
>> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
>> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
>> Principal, High Performance Coders
>> Visiting Professor of Mathematics      hpco...@hpcoders.com.au
>> University of New South Wales          http://www.hpcoders.com.au
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to