# LQG and Cramer's Transactional Int.

1. Jan 11, 2010

### czes

Hello everybody
I noticed here are people knowing Loop Quantum Gravity. I am not a professional physicist but I like LQG because it doesn't depend on the background what is needed in General Relativity.
I am learning Cramer's Transactional Interpretation of the Quantum Mechanics recently. TI seems very similar to LQG. TI is also background independent.
http://www.npl.washington.edu/ti/ [Broken]

It is interesting how the background is constructed and developed.
There is a wave function as a fundamental quantum information. Wave function is a solution of the Schrodinger's equation. Each particle behaves due to de Broglie theory and oscillate with a Compton wave length l=h/cm .
That wave length is directly seen in Gordon-Klein and Dirac equations.
According to Bell's theorem the quantum information of the Compton wave length has to be non-local. Recently experiments with lasers shows it exactly.
The distribution of the quantum information has to be inversely proportional to the squared distance from a source of the oscillation (rest mass particle).

I assume the non-local information interact in the space far away from a particle. That creates a quantum network (spin foam). Each point absorbs and emits an information. Therefore there is a double loop because absorbed and emitted information. In Cramer's TI this informations (wave functions) interfere and create an atemporal standing wave. It is a quantum information background. The wave function is here something more than a mathematical expression only.

The Cramer's TI is essentially deterministic because the standing wave is created of a product of the wave functions, though their distribution is probabilistic.
Probability ρ(x) = |ψ(x, t)|*|ψ(y, t)| instead of ρ(x) = |ψ(x, t)|^ 2
as in Copenhagen Interpretation.
This product of the wave functions shows interesting features:
Tp / T(x) * Tp / T(y) = -a Fg / Fe
(lp / l x ) * (lp / l y ) = -a Fg / Fe
where Tp is a Planck time, lp is Planck length, lx, ly are Compton wave lengths , a (alfa) is fine structure const. Fg -gravitational interaction, Fe -electromagnetic interaction.

The interaction of the non-local information causes a tension which is a vacuum energy represented by the virtual particles-antiparticles. This virtual plasma has a relativistic mass which may interact gravitationally.
If the distribution of the wave function is as above, the average density of a local sphere of the virtual plasma is inversely proportional to the radius from the center of mass.
I cant catch and measure the vacuum so I accept the datas for our Observable Universe. The local sphere density d=DR/r, where D is the average Universe's vacuum density (8.9x10-27 kg/m^3), r is the radius of the local sphere, R is the Radius of the Observable Universe, is equal to c/H (speed of light/Hubble constant).
It explains Dark Matter effect. The anomalous Dark Matter acceleration a=GM/r^2, where G is the gravitational constant, M is the mass of the vacuum inside the local sphere, and r is the radius of the local sphere.
The mass of the local sphere M=Vd =4.2r^3 Dc/Hr
The anomalous acceleration a=GM/r^2=4.2Gr^3 Dc/Hr^3 =4.2GDc/H=
a=3.25x10-10 m/s^2
where :
G=6.67x10-11 m3/kgs^2
D=8.9x10-27 kg/m^3
c=3x108 m/s
H=71 km/s/Mpc=2.3x10-18 /s

It is a primitive calculation without differentials and integrals but may be it shows something ?

Greetings

Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
2. Jan 18, 2010

### czes

COMPTON WAVE NOT APPRECIATED ?

Compton wave length l =h/mc results from the Schrodinger equation and is seen directly in Gordon-Klein and Dirac equations.
Reduced Compton wave length l =h/2pi mc
The relations between Planck's length and Compton wave length shows many interesting properties:

1. (lp / l x ) * (lp / l y ) = -a Fg / Fe
Tp / T(x) * Tp / T(y) = -a Fg / Fe
Explains the relation between gravitational and electromagnetic interactions as space curvature (Planck's length contraction) for each oscillation of the rest mass particle.
This equation suggests an informational background network creating the frame of reference for General Relativity.
http://www.cramerti.home.pl/ [Broken]

2. a=GM/r2 = 4.2Gr3Dc/Hr3 = 4.2GDc/H = 3.25x10-10 m/s2
Explains the anomalous acceleration (Dark Matter effect) around galaxy and deceleration of the Pionieers. The non-local wave functions cause a tension in the space and we call it a vacuum energy which posses its relativistic mass.

3. Here I show a third property – the entropy.
Imagine a subset inside a sphere of a radius “R”. This subset interacts with an environment through the surface of the sphere A=4pi r^2.
Due the equation (1) there is a length contraction and time dilation at the surface and inside a sphere for each fundamental quantum information (oscillation due Compton wave length).
Each oscillation creates 2 information (emitted and absorbed). The interaction in the three-dimensional space creates a cross product = a*b sin x . We get then after summation (integral) 4 possible sets of the distinguishable information (++,- -, +-,-+).
Each information (quantum oscillation of the particle due to Compton wave) inside a sphere has to be entangled through the surface with the sphere's environment and has to be written on this surface with an area equal 4 squared Planck's length (Lp^2 = hG/c^3). This area is reserved for the entanglement and is not accessible for another information flow such as an entropy. There are (M/m) particles inside of the sphere (“M” is the mass of the subset inside a sphere and “m” is an average mass of the particle). To create a sphere we have to supply the average radius of the sphere/ Compton wave length (R/ l) fundamental information for each particle inside a sphere.

Therefore we get a freezing of the surface of the sphere due to time dilation or length contraction which prevents the outflow of the information and causes slower increase of the entropy.
S=A-D
S = property proportional to the entropy of the subset.
A = a surface of the subset's sphere
D = a freezing of the subset's sphere.
If the subset is perfect closed (S=0=A-D) there isn't outflow of the information and entropy is conserved because the time stops.

A=4pi R^2 = 4(Lp)^2 (M/m)(R/ l) = (4 hG/c^3) (M/m) (R 2pi mc/h)
it results:
R = 2GM/c^2

It is the same condition for a theoretical static Black Hole but which we found by Compton wave length.
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Bekenstein-Hawking_entropy

In the informatics there is used the Shannon entropy which is very similar to Gibbs thermodynamic entropy with the Boltzmann constant S=-k sum(ln p).
John von Neumann introduced Gibbs entropy in quantum physics in 1927. As far as I know this entropy is related to the kinetic energy of the local interactions between particles. It isn't related to the non=local information of the potential (gravitational) energy between particles due to Compton wave length.

These three applications of the Compton wave length (Gravity/EM relation, Dark Matter effect, Black Hole entropy) are made without high mathematics. May be you can do another applications of the quantum mechanics in the macro world ?

Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
3. Jan 19, 2010

### czes

There is another claim of the crazy non-local Compton wave:
TIME AND SPACE DO NOT EXIST
they are human perception.
There is a non-local information of the Schroedinger wave function only. The absorbed and emitted wave functions interact and create an atemporal standing wave (as wrote Coliver) which is a background network for every energetic interactions. We call it vacuum with its virtual particles-antiparticles as points of the tension.
There isn't a quantum jump so the information doesn't move between the virtual particles. It appears and disappears. Therefore virtual particles-antiparticles fill all the space. The empty space doesn't exist.
The only sign of the time is a dilation of the Planck's time during the interaction of the quantum information and only sign of the length is the contraction of the Planc's length because of this interaction.
There is an atomic clock as an example:
The clock counts the oscillations around a nucleus of cesium. The space around the nucleus is not empty it contains standing wave of the virtual particles-antiparticles. The electron interacts with that vacuum and suffers a time dilation of the interaction. More exactly the electron counts a number of the virtual particles-antiparticles during each oscillation.
Time (t) = Number (N) x Planck time (Tp)
We perceive it as a time but it is a number of the information which a particle absorbs and emits in the vacuum.
We also measure the speed of light in the Vacuum , isn't it ?

A man is not older because of the Earth's revolution around the Sun (the years). He is older because of the increasing entropy of his body. If you can slow down this entropy (medicine, food, behaviour) you can be young longer.

Recent investigation in quantum decoherence suggest its connection to a time.

4. Jan 19, 2010

### Demystifier

5. Jan 19, 2010

### czes

What are emitters and absorbers? Does this interpretation say that there are objects not defined by wave functions? Is Schrodinger equation violated at the places where emitters and absorbers are present?

I have my idea how to understand Cramer's Transactional Interpretation.
The absorber and emiter are quantum informations. In our space it exists in an entangled state i.e. virtual particle-antiparticle. It creates our space - the Vacuum.
If there are enough entangled information due to uncertainty principle and there is a magnetic momentum the real particle-antiparticle is created. Therefore these real particles are in the quantum network as in Loop Quantum Gravity.
We may observe real particles and their Compton wave length. Therefore we may conclude what is the vacuum around.

The oscillation of the particle emits an information about its Compton wave length. Due to Quantum Information this information is non-local and it creates the atemporal standing wave with the entangled particle.

So it is relative to say what is an absorber or emiter. The loops are closed and the information goes in two parallel loops forth and back. We do not know which of them is forth and which is back. There are points of the interaction (no quantum jump between particles) and we observe no empty space.

The interaction I imagine as a product of the wave functions which are stable informations (not a matter), Schrodinger equation is conserved. It is not a pure probability (squared wave function) which appears from nothing and disappear after collapse as in Copenhagen Int.

This wave functions product shows many useful properties - explains vacuum, Dark matter effect, Dark Energy and other.
It is under construction and needs an help.

6. Jan 19, 2010

Staff Emeritus
This all looks highly speculative.

7. Jan 19, 2010

### czes

May be it looks but the simple calculations are true:
1.Gravitational/EM interaction
2.Dark Matter effect and Dark Energy
3.Information outflow and Black Hole entropy
4.Timelessnes and arrow of the time
5.Decoherence of the quantum information
6.Cramer's TI alone avoids the old quantum paradoxes.

8. Jan 20, 2010

### czes

Reference for non-local information of the Compton wave length
http://www.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/tiqm/TI_toc.html [Broken] – Cramer's TI
http://ldolphin.org/zpe.html – quantum vacuum fluctuation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_wavelength
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klein–Gordon_equation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_equation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrödinger_equation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlocality
http://www.quantum.at/zeilinger/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantized_spacetime [Broken]
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0264-9381/22/23/012 -Casimir effect in a weak gravitational field.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-point_field
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_oscillator
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_emission
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_information
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_quantum_computing
http://www.decoherence.de/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_interpretation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(information_theory)
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0264-9381/11/12/005 – Timelessness of quantum gravity.
http://www.idiocentrism.com/time3.htm [Broken] -timelessness by Dieter Zeh
http://www.metanexus.net/magazine/ArticleDetail/tabid/68/id/8615/Default.aspx [Broken] -discussion between Lee Smolin and Dieter Zeh
http://www.blackhole.glt.pl/ - kinetic and potential energy
http://www.cramerti.home.pl/ [Broken] - information background space

Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
9. Jan 20, 2010

### czes

The most highly speculative idea of the crazy non-local Compton wave is that everything (matter particles, energy, space, time) is made of the information.
We don't know what a physical meaning has the information as well as the wave function from the Schrodinger equation.
The question is the above notions are the same or there are different things.
What if the wave function = quantum information ?
The interaction of the wave functions (cross product) creates a tension and there is a zero point energy represented by virtual particle-antiparticle.
We can't say a wave function is a virtual particle because it exists during an interaction as a pair only. There isn't a quantum jump so the single wave function doesn't exist in our space. Therefore we can't say what a quantum information is.
A single pair of the virtual particle-antiparticle is due to uncertainty principle not observable experimentally. It is observable indirectly if there are more information entangled and a sufficient magnetic moment can separate this pair for a moment, so we observe a spontaneous gamma emission.
If the threshold is over crossed we observe a creation of the real particle and antiparticle.
New information added decreases uncertainty. Experimentally we increase the energy of the particle and decrease its wave length of the uncertainty due E=hf.
May be it is strange and crazy but with a help of the Cramer's Transactional Interpretation of QM it is possible to prove it I think.

10. Jan 21, 2010

### czes

If you do not belive my simple calculation, you may compare my article of 18 January 2010 (entropy) with prof. Smolin's article of 20 January 2010:
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1001/1001.3668v1.pdf [Broken]

Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
11. Jan 21, 2010

### marcus

I do see some features which your post #2, of 18 January, shares with Smolin's recent paper, which appeared at arxiv.org on 20 January.

For concreteness, I will quote the part of your post #2 which is about entropy. This is section 3 of the post:

You invite us to compare your post, the section I quoted, with Smolin's article.
I would rather invite you to help me understand Smolin's proof, where he shows that LQG implies Newton's law of gravity in the appropriate limit.

Both you and Smolin make use of the Compton wavelength of a particle which is being made to cross a boundary surface, or horizon. And you both make use of the Bekenstein area-entropy relation. Is this not true? What are the parallels between your derivation of the Schwarzschild radius formula, and Smolin's derivation of Newton's gravitational potential formula? Maybe you should make the comparison, not me?

I am not a moderator and have no authority but I want to urge you to please focus on explaining published work and interpreting or asking questions about professional peer-reviewed published research.

I note that Cramer's Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics was published in a respectable peer-review journal. The paper you cite is from:
Reviews of Modern Physics 58, 647-688, July (1986)
Smolin's paper, and the paper by Erik Verlinde that it is based on, will probably likewise both be published. These are very interesting developments. Please be informative about these things. Try to strike a balance between 49% your own ideas and 51% professional research. Or whatever you think is the acceptable percentage. That way we might continue to enjoy and benefit from your participation in this forum (which is primarily intended for discussion of mainstream professional work.)

If you go over the invisible line and focus too much on your own ideas, then your posts could be seen to belong in some other place and they might be transferred. Personally I hope that doesn't happen and I hope you stay around here, at the Beyond forum. You are the first other person here to mention Smolin's 20 January paper---which I think is quite interesting. The Cramer T.I. has also gotten very little attention, and I appreciate your bringing it up.
See the posts #18 and 21 by Dmitry, and the posts #19 and 20 by Demystifier, on that page.

Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
12. Jan 21, 2010

### marcus

I see that John G. Cramer was born in 1934 but is still active on the faculty of the Physics Department of the University of Washington:
http://faculty.washington.edu/jcramer/

He taught an upper-division course on Waves, in the autumn semester of 2009. He gives popular talks, gets on radio programs. He popularized listening to the acoustic waves of the early universe starting soon after the big bang and continuing to around year 700,000 of the expansion. For someone who is 75 years old he seems to be a smart, energetic guy.

I wonder, with all this spacetime emergence and upsurge of entropic (ie information) reasoning, whether Cramer's Transactional Interpretation story about quantum mechanics will turn out to have a grain of sense, a lasting residue of on-trackness. It looks like the 2010s decade is going to see a revolution in fundamental theory. We are seeing an invasion of thermodynamics reasoning into the foundations arena----an intensified focus on ideas of "emergence".

Czes, another person who is in on this "shake-up" or minor revolution is Thanu Padmanabhan. If you haven't read his "Dialogue on the Nature of Gravity" you probably should. Very lively. Full of challenging ideas. And he's a senior mainstream guy, so he can be provocative and it carries weight.
http://arxiv.org/abs/0910.0839
A Dialogue on the Nature of Gravity
(Submitted on 5 Oct 2009)
"I describe the conceptual and mathematical basis of an approach which describes gravity as an emergent phenomenon. Combining principle of equivalence and principle of general covariance with known properties of local Rindler horizons, perceived by observers accelerated with respect to local inertial frames, one can prove that the field equations describing gravity in any diffeomorphism invariant theory can be given a thermodynamic re-interpretation. This fact, in turn, leads us to the possibility of deriving the field equations of gravity by maximising a suitably defined entropy functional, without using the metric tensor as a dynamical variable. The approach synthesises concepts from quantum theory, thermodynamics and gravity leading to a fresh perspective on the nature of gravity. The description is presented here in the form of a dialogue, thereby addressing several frequently-asked-questions."
Comments: Based on lectures given in several conferences (including VR lecture of IAGRG); results have been updated and format has been changed to one involving a dialogue; 3 figures; 37 pages

For a technical treatment of related material, here is an invited review article by the same author:
http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.5004
Thermodynamical Aspects of Gravity: New insights
(Submitted on 26 Nov 2009)
"The fact that one can associate thermodynamic properties with horizons brings together principles of quantum theory, gravitation and thermodynamics and possibly offers a window to the nature of quantum geometry. This review discusses certain aspects of this topic concentrating on new insights..."
Comments: 85 pages; 5 figures; Invited Review to appear in Reports on Progress in Physics

I find the "Dialogue" far more intuitive and readable. He argues that not only is the horizon an observer-dependent concept, but even entropy itself is observer-dependent.
That's just a small sample, the article is full of challenging ideas. I expect you may have seen Padmanabhan's writings but mention it just in case you haven't.

Last edited: Jan 21, 2010
13. Jan 22, 2010