I thought others might also enjoy the article I am linking to below.
Delightful! There are all kinds of connections everywhere, but it takes an inquisitive and extraordinary mind to really try to grasp them.
There are other interesting articles that can be found on the Internet that describe methods that have been used to measure and establish the speed of light.
The author of this article has produced some very entertaining and informative videos that help make the ideas associated with string theory accessible to people like me, people who know very little about astrophysics. If you watch the first video in the article below, you may be sucked in, just like I was.
You can also view other videos that have been produced as a part of this series.
Even if these are just theories at this point, these are fascinating concepts. Imagine the possibility that all of the natural processes, of different kinds, of different orders of scale and magnitude, can be defined by similar sets of simple rules at a macro level. Consider the concept of “The Arrow of Time”, and how it fits in with the fundamental structure of our universe.
This is fascinating stuff! There is synchronization happening naturally everywhere, and a lot of it is unexpected and non-intuitive, at least for me. And there seem to be mathematical ways to characterize these synchronization processes. There could be ways to harness the power of synchronization.
Caution that the article is a long read.
The following article is about the Theory of Everything (TOE) and more specifically about String Theory and where it stands today. I do not expect anybody to understand the “science” of the article, but I hope that you get a sense of the tone. We have entered a realm of scientific investigation where the mathematics far exceeds what can be experimentally shown. It will probably remain that way for a long time because the energies required to create the conditions under when the theories can be proved or disproved are not practical. For example, what if a certain phenomenon can only be observed under conditions that exist related to the energies involved in the presence of a black hole?
I used to think that science needs to keep digging deeper and deeper into the fundamentals of existence, but I am beginning to wonder if there is a useful purpose to this endeavor beyond a certain point. Does any of this really help us understand more about ourselves or have the potential to help us in some way in the future? Even if the experiments to prove something about the TOE were to become practical some time in the very distant future, what if the energies required to set up the experiment to prove it are of an order of magnitude that would change the conditions under which the experiment has been conducted in some irreparable way? Would there ever be a reason to conduct such an experiment? It would be like eating the apple in the Garden of Eden.
The comments related to this article below (seen at the end of the article) may be more enlightening than the article itself. You get to a point where the conversation can seem to have overtones that are similar to those when talking about religion. Does science as defined today become pointless beyond some point?
The Standard Model provides a theory that, so far, has been able to accurately describe how all the physical forces in nature known to man, except for gravity, are related to each other. Over the years, the Standard Model has been successful in predicting many physical phenomenon that we are finding in the Universe, most recently, the presence of the Higgs Boson. The article below describes all of this in relatively simple terms.
The democratization of “science” and “information” by the Internet has enabled many strange things today, including acceptance of lines of thinking that one would have expected reasonable people to scoff at in the past, and events that some people would consider quite surprising during our times, such as the results of the US presidential elections in 2016.
Despite early claims, from as far back as HG Well’s “world brain” essays in 1936, that a worldwide shared resource of knowledge such as the internet would create peace, harmony and a common interpretation of reality, it appears that quite the opposite has happened. With the increased voice afforded by social media, knowledge has been increasingly decentralised, and competing narratives have emerged.
This is interesting! The article indicates that one of the big issues with quantum computing is the approach for handling errors that are inherent in the process. I wonder if there is some kind of Information Theory based limitation that in some way parallels what happens in the area of digital communications. Digital communication rates over noisy channels are subject to Shannon’s Limit, but it takes a lot of sophisticated coding for error correction, and the associated processing power, to get anywhere close to this limit. Such sophisticated techniques have become practical only recently, and have been applied to the area of satellite data communications only in recent years in order to enable higher levels of modulation that can increase the resulting data rates supported, but only if the error correction techniques can handle it. (As you get to higher levels of modulation, you are tending more towards an analog means of transmission for the digital data, which feeds into my argument that we human beings are force-fitting digital into an analog world, but that is a subject for a different discussion.)
Might it be that there are some fundamental concepts that are similar and hold true in both digital communications and quantum computing technology? How fast is it theoretically possible to go with quantum computing, and is the limitation due to quantum constraints, or noise, or some combination? Can we make digital computing approximate an analog process in some way? Is mathematics an analog process? Inquiring minds want to know!