On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 1:54 PM Brent Meeker <meekerbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/25/2022 9:01 AM, John Clark wrote: > >> It doesn't matter what you use, you're going to need an energy >> calibration standard because there's just no way to measure the absolute >> energy of anything, you can only measure the relative energy. > > > * > Energy is proportional to mass thru the speed of light. * > Yep, E= Mc^2. and the speed is measured in meters per second and light moves at 299,792,458 metres per second. But a meter is defined as the distance light travels in the time it takes an atom of caesium-133 to vibrate 9,192,631,770 times (which is the definition of a second), and how fast the cesium atom vibrates depends on Planck's Constant which has units of meters, kilograms and seconds. So when you measure the speed of light the value that you'll put in your lab notebook will be the same after the split as the number you got before the split. *> And mass can be measured relative to a standard unit both > gravitationally and inertially. * > It's groundhog's day again, F=ma. If the inertial mass is half and the gravitational mass is half then even though the force pulling an object to the ground is half the object will accelerate the same way it did before because Einstein tells us gravitational mass and inertial mass are always exactly in sync. > * > The real problem you're pointing to is that the MWI idea is that > probability weighting of a branch rescales everything, KE, EM potential* > Problem? Why is that a problem? If it just rescaled one thing then that would be a problem, but if it rescales everything then nothing observable changes because for something to be meaningful you need contrast. > Does it rescale the angular momentum of spin? > Sure, if mass is rescaled then obviously angular momentum would have to be rescaled too. > *> You might as well postulate it doing so because there's really no > proven theory of probability scaling of physical values.* > Of course there isn't a way to prove it happened, that's what I've been trying to to tell you! There would be absolutely no way to experimentally detect the fact that the absolute energy level of something has changed, you can only tell if the energy level has changed relative to something else. John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> 34b -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2ROCKPOjEPeijExOLfL7MgT4zyd5WwY3NLT2cUrFtfAw%40mail.gmail.com.
