Question about speed of light and information

[Chalnoth]

I wouldn't mind if you expanded on that a bit. Seems important, and I'm not quite getting it.

The way that we observe interactions of the pre-collapse wavefunction is by looking at interference patterns. In order for two wavefunctions to interfere, they have to oscillate in a coherent manner. That is, the total oscillation time of the system of interfering wavefunctions must be small. But when one or both of the two wavefunctions becomes coupled to a larger system, the oscillation time blows up, and the interference pattern disappears.

Does that help?

 

[Omega0]

You've stated and re-stated this opinion of yours. There's no point in continuing to state it. What counts as "really issues" vs. "speculation" is a subjective judgment. Please try to keep focused on mainstream science and what its theories say, not on your opinions (or indeed anyone's opinions) about what's worth talking about. If you think something isn't worth talking about, then, as Chalnoth has already advised you, just don't talk about it. Don't keep posting that you don't think it's worth talking about; that adds nothing useful to the discussion.

I am just thinking. For me it is quite natural to discuss about my thoughts. If any thoughts apart of some mainstream tracks are not welcome, please let me know in which track my thinking exactly have to be. It might be wrong from my assumptions that physics is a free place to talk with others.

 

[Omega0]

The way that we observe interactions of the pre-collapse wavefunction is by looking at interference patterns. In order for two wavefunctions to interfere, they have to oscillate in a coherent manner. That is, the total oscillation time of the system of interfering wavefunctions must be small. But when one or both of the two wavefunctions becomes coupled to a larger system, the oscillation time blows up, and the interference pattern disappears.

Does that help?

This for example is a statement which says that decoherence is a natural thing which finally does not allow coherence on a cosmic scale. I find this very natural but is this true?

 

[Jimster41]

The way that we observe interactions of the pre-collapse wavefunction is by looking at interference patterns. In order for two wavefunctions to interfere, they have to oscillate in a coherent manner. That is, the total oscillation time of the system of interfering wavefunctions must be small. But when one or both of the two wavefunctions becomes coupled to a larger system, the oscillation time blows up, and the interference pattern disappears.

Does that help?

Yes, thanks. I get wild questions about what does and doesn't qualify as an interference pattern, at what scales and due to what causes, do they stop at a certain point really, or carry on while we just call them something else, like particles, molecules, compounds, plants, animals, people, civilizations etc etc? But I was getting your drift. I just wasn't sure.

 

[Chronos]

A classical view can be refreshing. Decoherence is synonymous with fuzziness - or out of focus.

 

[Chalnoth]

This for example is a statement which says that decoherence is a natural thing which finally does not allow coherence on a cosmic scale. I find this very natural but is this true?

There may be rare situations with particles that don't interact much with anything achieving cosmic scale coherence, but for the most part, no, this isn't possible.

 

[Jimster41]

A classical view can be refreshing. Decoherence is synonymous with fuzziness - or out of focus.

I thought decoherence was exactly the opposite . I thought it meant the "collapse of the wave function" or whatever metaphor for classical-making-measurement-of-superposition one is most comfortable with.

So in a volume of isolated space with one kind of stuff, some specific gas or concrete or whatever, what is the ratio of entanglement and coherence at any given time? What if two different kinds of stuff are mixed, like light and gas or gas and concrete, or light and concrete? Does that change the ratio? Is it mass that dictates the degree of entanglement?

 

[Weinsyein]

Speculations about events that we cannot yet know about are useful for they tell us where we want to go. And who knows when we will get there. Hmm, I've left physics for philosophy (sorry).

 

[Weinsyein]

As light leaves a star (gravity hole) it loses energy -- is red shifted. Ever wonder if the "Black Holes" are really infrared holes? Maybe the light undergoes a severe red shift. Just a thought.

 

[PeterDonis]

Ever wonder if the "Black Holes" are really infrared holes? Maybe the light undergoes a severe red shift.

Light coming from just above the horizon of a black hole does undergo a large red shift. But the redshift is an effect, not a cause; it doesn't explain what a black hole is, it's just a consequence of what a black hole is.

 

[Chronos]

Light does not 'leave' a black hole, it only leaves its immediate vicinity.