On 2/8/2021 12:40 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Monday, February 8, 2021 at 1:25:47 PM UTC-7 Brent wrote:
On 2/8/2021 4:12 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Monday, February 8, 2021 at 4:13:38 AM UTC-7
[email protected] wrote:
On Sun, Feb 7, 2021 at 7:25 PM Alan Grayson
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> A hydroelectric dam producing electricity and the
accelerating expansion of the universe caused by the
intrinsic energy of empty space, both convert
negative gravitational potential energy into positive
kinetic energy that can do work, in the first case by
falling inward and in the second case by falling
outward. And I explained previously to you exactly
why that is so. And that is no BS.
/> The flaw in your analysis is that the "negative" in PE
is a convention, not a law of physics./
Without that "convention" there would be no law of
conservation of energy at all.
/>There is no way to magically change negative energy
(what the hell is that?)/
I know a guy who can answer that question, ask Isaac Newton,
he knew what negative gravitational potential energy was over
300 years ago. Albert Einstein could also answer your question.
> to positive energy. AG
And tell that to the engineers who make hydroelectric dams.
/> You're just reaching a conclusion which pleases you
about total energy of the universe being exactly zero./
It's not just me, the idea that the total energy in the
universe is zeroalso pleased people like Stephen Hawkingand
Richard Feynman and Alan Guth who invented the idea of cosmic
inflation. And the evidence is piling up that it's probably
true.
Zero-energy universe
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe>
/> You're just assuming the dark energy fills the gap,
after the total energy of what we can observe is
estimated. And I note that you never referenced dark
energy or matter in your original message./
That is flat out untrue, and as far as this argument is
concerned it makes no difference if the matter in the
universe is composed of Dark Matter or normaleveryday
Baryonic Matter because gravity treats both of them exactly
the same way; and that's why Dark Energy does not have the
word "matter" in it, gravity treats it differently. When a
cloud of Baryonic Matter expands it does not get more
massive, but when a cloud of Dark Energy expands it does,
assuming that a property of space is for it to have a
residual energy, and it's looking increasingly likely that it
does.
/> All I am really asserting is that we can just dispense
with the idea that a system can be in multiple different
states simultaneously,/
Sure you can dispense with that, if you don't mind ignoring
empirical evidence and abandoningthe scientific method in
general.
*Consider a system with two possible states with probabilities
30% and 70% before measurement. I would agree that the system is
in both states simultaneously IF the probabilities were 100% for
each. But that violates one of the postulates of frequentist
probability. So which do you think is more logical; that in the
30%/70% case the system is in both states simultaneously, or in
neither state? AG
*
You don't seem to understand Hilbert space is just a special case
of vector spaces. If your state is having a momentum on a
heading of 45deg, then it's a superposition of |North>+|East>.
"Superposition" is only relative to some basis. We right things
that way when we have instruments that measure "North" and "East",
but none that measure NE.
*I think you meant "write". In any event, can't we write a
superposition of NE even if we can't measure in that direction? *
Sure we could write it that way. Any pure state if conceptually a
single ray in Hilbert space. That it's written in terms of components
that are observable is up to us.
*More important, I don't think your comment relates to what I wrote
immediately above in RED -- which is consistent with Bohr's view that
a system is NOT in any specific eigenstate before measurement*
I don't know the quote from Bohr, but I suspect it's leaving out the
context that the system is not in an eigenstate /of the variable
measured/ before it is measured. That just means the state NE is not
North or East before you measure with your North-or-East instrument.
Brent
*, and defeats the illusion/delusion that systems before measurement
are simultaneously in several eigenstates. AG*
Brent
*
*
*Concerning the convention for PE, if one moves a test mass from
R1 to R2 in a central gravity field, where R1 < R2, aren't we
calculating the work done against the field? Yes or No? We can
call this work negative or positive. Do you agree the choice is
just a convention? This cannot effect conservation of energy,
which is an empirical result, or what works in hydroelectric
facility. AG*
John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
.
--
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 [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/ec315ce0-6192-4c99-859a-bc00e053d7e6n%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/ec315ce0-6192-4c99-859a-bc00e053d7e6n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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 [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/18c9d10b-59c4-43c5-977d-a02927551553n%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/18c9d10b-59c4-43c5-977d-a02927551553n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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 [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/8b9a1b3c-8de3-3a62-ebda-a461f490c782%40verizon.net.
