On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 5:56 AM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote:
*>>> Consider a system with two possible states with probabilities 30% and >>> 70% before measurement.* >>> >> >> >> OK, then if there were 10 observers 3 would see X and 7 would see Y. >> > > *> I said BEFORE MEASUREMENT! AG* > What about measurement?! > *Try this. For a test mass m, and a gravitating mass M at rest, calculate > the PE from R = 0 to R = inf, and compare that to the rest mass of the > gravitating mass. Do you get precisely zero? How do you handle the fact > that the potential used in the calculation blows up at R = 0? AG* > The potential energy is 0 - G*M^2)/R , so the larger R gets the closer it comes to zero. *> Incidentally, the Wiki link you posted on the Zero Energy Universe says > the theory remains unproven. AG* > Of course the idea is unproven, nobody is sure what Dark Energy is, all I'm saying is it's logically consistent and plausible. It could be that Dark Energy is not the result of the intrinsic energy of empty space at all but it is caused by something else called "Quintessence", a hypothetical scalar field that unlike vacuum energy can change in strength over time and could be either repulsive or attractive. If it turns out the Quintessence is real then the final fate of the universe is either the Big Rip, if it's repulsive force increases, or the Big Crunch, if it's repulsive effect changes to attractive. 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/CAJPayv2StOCp4BtSMGdgFuLfeOo436W1A5zJcaxB3Wcbtx%2B9tw%40mail.gmail.com.
