Questa intervista al fisico Michele Arzano, ora ricercatore presso il Perimeter Institute in Canada, è apparsa sul numero 02 di Catastrophe . Not since the Middle Ages that the scientific world did not suffer a collapse as a theological one we are seeing now. Nell'affannosa search for a theory that can explain "everything" after the theories of chaos and that of the strings, the new generation of astrophysical find themselves, paradoxically, to admit their impotence in the face of the unexplained. It is a defeat across the board, a lunge led to the certainties of science by the likes of Portugal's Joao Migueijo (sworn enemy of the myth of Einstein), Chinese Jack Ng, and Italian Giovanni Ameline Camelia, La Sapienza University of Rome . Just come by the school of Camelia Arzano Michele, now a member of the Institute of Field Physics University of North Carolina, United States.
Arzano So, what is this history of space-time foam?
spacetime foam is nothing but the structure of space-time in its basic aspects, infinitely small distances. Or rather, rather than infinitely small distances, the precise length of which we are talking about is the so-called Planck length, or 10 -23 cm. At this scale we have witnessed a breakdown in the usual concepts of distance, time and localizability of events: in practice, the space becomes a lump of foam consists of a plethora of very small holes that swallow blacks to one another. That distance can not be measured with a microscope, however powerful: the method used in physics provides that a photon jets in the region of space that interests us, and once the photon bounced effects are observed. Now, at that distance, così piccola, dovresti gettare un fotone così energetico che quel fotone creerebbe un buco nero, esattamente lì dove stai cercando di leggere la parte di spazio che ti interessa.
Praticamente stai dicendo che non puoi conoscere l’infinitamente piccolo?
Esatto.
D’accordo, ma cosa ci interessa a noi dell’infinitamente piccolo?
Beh, da un punto di vista prettamente scientifico, questa è una scoperta che demolisce l’intera teoria della relatività Einstein, contradicting one of the axioms of special relativity which, among other things, this year celebrates a century. One of the most popular concepts, know well that the pigs, special relativity is: if you go to a certain speed, your time is slowing down compared to an observer who is stationary. As a result, your distances are shortened. We have dozens of books of science fiction, space-based travel and stuff like that, starting from this axiom. But back to us: according to Einstein distances are shortened ... Now, if there is a distance, the Planck length precisely, beyond which you can not go, how is it that if I go to a certain speed I see in one way and another who is in detention?
You say that this length, which is the minimum, should be the minimum for all observers who are stationary or moving, no? Are you saying that there is an absolute minimum objective for all, in fact.
Exactly, which is to blows with Einstein's relativity, which instead provides for the length contraction.
An Absolute One can not understand
Then this is the first certainty. I guess now we are all happier in knowing that there is a universal minimum applies to everyone ...
Well, yes ... I do not understand what you mean: I'm saying that there is a scale in which this new theory of relativity that quantum should occur.
But the important thing is that there is a lowest common denominator underlying the universe as we know it. Which is almost like saying that at the end of the universe is made by an absolute sum of all these ...
More or less.
But this one is so small that it can not be investigated. We can not know except to cause a black hole, according to what you told us before. So we can not penetrate more than both the existing ...
Yes, we say that there is something undetectable, but we know that there is there.
A bit 'as understand that they can not see God in the face, knowing that there is ...
Well, if you put it like that ...
is a mystical drift, so to speak, science ...
I would say the most mystical and theological drift. Which makes us return to the good old days of quantum mechanics, when the Nazi scientist Werner Heisenberg formulated his uncertainty principle, stating that we can not determine the exact position and velocity of a particle at the same time.
But the important thing is knowing that there is something unfathomable, then.
course.
We're just shadows
Returning to the space-time foam, we - so to speak - to float in it, floating in the unfathomable ...
E ti dirò di più: galleggiamo in una realtà olografica.
Che vuol dire?
Beh, a te sembrerà che noi siamo esseri tridimensionali, giusto? E invece sembra proprio che una delle caratteristiche fondamentali della scala minima di cui stiamo parlando, sia il cosiddetto principio olografico. E cioè: che tutta la materia contenuta in una regione tridimensionale, una scatola, come per esempio questa stanza in cui stiamo parlando adesso, può essere descritta semplicemente da un insieme di informazioni sulle facce di questa scatola.
Are you saying that we would be the projections?
Bravo, as in Plato's cave.
But that comes more mystical! You're saying that we're just pawns of the poor believe to exist, but that does not really have the perception of their true essence!
Yeah. We're just shadows. And I could tell you more: you can predict everything, reading these shadows. Past, present and future. It's all written on the walls of the universe, the important thing is to find it.
Ma se sta tutto scritto sulle pareti dell’universo, e noi queste pareti non possiamo sondarle, come facciamo a trovarlo? Come possiamo predire il futuro?
Semplicemente non puoi farlo, per via dell’infinitamente piccolo inconoscibile di cui prima.
Quindi noi non possiamo conoscerlo in questa dimensione, ma il disegno dell’universo è da qualche parte già segnato…
Più o meno.
Science is useless
Sorry, but I do not understand the purpose of science, what it's all ...
just about anything. The speech is essential is this: that science is useless. We know that there are limits beyond which we can not go. Once you have studied these limitations, it is useless to continue. It is useless to continue to give money to these people who still insist on string theory, the "theory of everything. " The "it" you can not know, period. In the words of Joao, the strings are nothing more than "cocks floating in space."
want to Joao Joao Magueijo, right?
's him. He is a professor at Imperial College London, author of Faster Than the Speed \u200b\u200bof Light , who has done much scandal for the harsh tone with which he faced and refuted the myth of Einstein's theory of strings. It must be said in fact that he is an addict. It is a fan of techno and rave parties, if you go on your site you can find the link with the list of all rave planned this week in Europe.
Interesting.
However, beyond these digressions, the key concept is only one: that science is useless. Science, let's face it, has failed.
The fastest computer universe
Returning us, poor shadows of a world plunged into a holographic foam holes blacks ...
Well, back to this point the black hole itself. What is the importance of blacks holes in this theory? What is the only object in the interior is unfathomable? Eh?
... The black hole?
The black hole, of course! The black hole is a mass of matter collapsed curve so that the geometry of spacetime that nothing can get out of this hole after entering. Not even the light, as Einstein said, is the fastest thing there is, then think about the rest. The fact is that Jacob Bekenstein, a great Zionist scientist, in 1973 observed that, in contrast, lost in the information given to a black hole were partly traceable to the so-called "event horizon" of the hole itself. In essence, the membrane that surrounds the black hole: a membrane that increases its size more and more each time an object enters the black hole. It is a principle of entropy, which anticipates the holographic concept, it is clear ... I do not know if Stephen Hawking, the scientist paraplegic, tried to refute this thesis, but instead ended up as a misguided attempt to confirm it, just with what is called the "radiation Hawking. " But Hawking radiation comes to random scatter information, says a number of inaccuracies, which I personally am demolished in an article in Physical Review Letters .
Look, there is no need to talk about your career in the scientific literature. Then you're going too far in the specific ...
right. So suffice it to say this: the information can escape from a quantum event horizon.
Let's say that, as I understand it, la teoria dell’orizzonte degli eventi conferma la presenza di un’informazione all’interno del buco nero. Però naturalmente questa informazione è rintracciabile solo in parte, solo nella sua proiezione ultima, perché altrimenti si dovrebbe entrare nel buco nero e di conseguenza… beh, morire . Insomma, è come sapere che c’è la vita dopo la morte!
Non utilizzerei proprio questi termini… Però in effetti dobbiamo constatare che in qualche misura i buchi neri sono entità pulsanti, che calcolano informazioni, come degli immensi computer. In ogni buco nero c’è un computer, e anzi, ti dirò di more: the black hole is the fastest computer in the universe.
The computer extreme ...
Let me give an example: an ordinary laptotop has a speed of ten to nine hertz. A laptop extreme, then a black hole, has a speed at 10 to 35 hertz, which is the maximum speed at all, you can achieve.
You know that according to the so-called Moore's Law speed of computer processors doubles every 18 months and are already designing the chips to effect quantum to meet at the time when today's technology will not be able to tolerate certain speeds. This means that sooner or later we will arrive at the computer too extreme?
Well, we could actually end up with a small black hole in the house.
This recalls the famous story The answer, by Frederic Brown, in which a supercomputer is being built linking the most powerful computers in the world. When the researchers put the supercomputer to the question "Does God exist?" Responds to "Now." Now, if we could produce a computer extreme as those you mention you would really like to have God in the house ...
The problem is precisely this: to be so fast, a computer has become a black hole. The fear of the more conservative studies is physical fact that blacks make holes in the laboratory, as the LHC is doing in the U.S., you will end up swallowing the world.
as being produced in house apocalypse ...
At the moment, there is this danger. Holes blacks who attempt to reproduce in the laboratory are so small that they will be around nothing but empty. But maybe one day ...
Homemade Apocalypse
Look, what that in the end understand, beyond your backlinks from a man of science is this: we poor puppets, puppets, holograms of this huge universe, we are dealing with something that we can not know but which in fact exists. Something that at the end we will be sucked into the time when spirit, and we will come as particles immersed in a space-time foam that everything is still composed of tiny holes blacks living (in short, heaven, life after death, etc.). Holes blacks who are nothing but huge computer, and that modern technology is trying to recreate in the laboratory, with the paradoxical result that maybe one day, instead of the home PC, we will work on the table a black hole itself, which once lit likely to suck us and all the rest, according to the most tech-heavy doom prophecies ...
're manipulating my thinking. I'm just saying that, at most, science is useless.
But you can not ignore the ethical implications of such discoveries, and their convergence with the disturbing apocalyptic millenarianism!
What we can learn, at least, is the awareness of living for nothing . What is more satisfying to do the crossword in the toilet that understand who we are and where we go, so we'll never know why.
This is your typical nihilistic position scientific empiricism. But whatever possessed a mystical view of the objective inexplicable of all, we feel authorized to give a theological interpretation to the extreme ...
OK, but not a problem of science. It is obvious that there is a risk to justify the crusades in the name of something that you do not know, knowing that no one will ever know, and then realize that no one will ever question the veracity of what you say. Since the infinitely small is unfathomable, we do not even know how the universe was born. We can not go to the roots of the big bang. If you feel to say that the big bang was created by a race mutants of monkeys, well, you're free to do so. No one can ever confirm or disprove your hypothesis.
many ways this is funny but also disturbing, you know it?
Yes, but I do not care.
Whatever you say. But listen, there's just one interesting thing: if there is a computer in the holes blacks, blacks are also holes in the computer?
... (thoughtful pause) Yes, it depends: if you do not know that this website che si chiama Ebony Anal Sex …
0 comments:
Post a Comment