Recent content by timmdeeg

Thanks for clarifying, this I've been missing even though I'm watching chess games online sometimes.

I'm still not clear with this. Wouldn't the assumption that "a particle may not exist beyond measurements/observations/interactions" be disproved in case the particle feels gravity beyond measurements ... what in principle should be measurable in case it isn't obviously true anyway?

Mentioning GR I refer to "doesn't exist" in the quote in #59 obviously wrongly thinking that this relates to RQM.

My reasoning is that a non-existing particle can't feel gravity e.g. while its path is deflected by a mass.

Why not include General Relativity in these considerations? The wave-function doesn't feel gravity but a quantum object does as long as it exist. Isn't RQM in conflict with GR?

Doesn't already the deflection of particles, e.g. of a photon provided its status is a quantum object by a mass proof their existence?

After skimming through that you seem to refer to the question "Was soll da sonst existieren" (What should there exist otherwise) , but didn't get the point should it exist at all.:smile:

Sorry for a layman question in between. As I understood it a quantum object has no well defined properties unless it interacts. Isn't "don't exist" or "no well defined properties" a philosophical question and as such can't be clarified empirically? Does the answer regarding a quantum object...

I received the photo from a friend who had it from somewhere using facetime. Thanks for these comments, very interesting how they differ from each other.

After having read Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe I have been a bit enthusiastic, but unfortunately ...

Wikipedia: Messier 83 or M83, also known as the Southern Pinwheel Galaxy and NGC 5236, is a barred spiral galaxy<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messier_83#cite_note-WISE-7"><span>[</span>7<span>]</span></a> approximately 15 million light-years away in the constellation borders of Hydra...

Thanks, its very hard to see the connection of the strong Equivalence Principle with Timescape though. According to the paper I showed #14 Timescape is physically motivated "by an extension of Einstein’s Strong Equivalence Principle to cosmological averages at small scales"

To me its hard to grasp how Timescape works. It is e.g. argued that clocks in voids tick faster and in gravitational walls around them tick slower compared to "cosmic Time", which I understand but I don't see the connection with Timescale. Thinking that the volume of voids is bigger by far than...

Here is an update of this paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2412.15143 They argue that according to the timescape model the cosmological constant can be replaced: .... Instead of a matter density parameter relative to average Friedmann-Lemaître Robertson-Walker model (as in ΛCDM), timescape is...

That's the reason why I mentioned "voids expand faster because of under density" as an example. That seems to refer to the Friedmann equations. But its a local effect, so why if at all is the conclusion in "" still reasonable?