Two types of data in the world probabilistic and measured

Our physical world can be converted to a set of variables. All physical phenomena can be represented by such a set. If we are careless in evaluating variables there will be duplicates, or a single variable can fully represent many other variables.

observing reduces number of free variables
free variables of quantum physics
free variables are quantum variables that is probabilistic but do not have a fixed value
Delayed choice and quantum eraser - before and after is also affected

We need to find a barrier or mark where number of free variables exceeds it, it shows wave qualities, otherwise shows particle qualities, or visa versa. This mark may have links to plank's constant.

World can be represented by data it consists of or all the variables or attributes it is made up of. Some of all this data is repetitions. When we compress this data removing repetitions we get clean data. This data can be considered as baskets of data, each basket is different, and in each basket we can put all the repetitions. There will be a finite number of baskets in the universe. The number of baskets cannot be infinite - This is an assumption, it's validity has to be considered later. Measuring data is a necessary in order to put it in a basket. There is another kind of data where values are not fixed. This data exists as probabilities. Any data measured will cease to be probabilistic data, and will become fixed data that can be put in a basket. Data in a basket can become loose after any change, that is a collision with something else and becomes probabilistic data.

 A free electron is a probabilistic until it is measured. A slow moving or stationary electron displays particle aspect because of ease of measurement. A fast moving electron displays wave aspect because of difficulty of measurement. The measurement involves uncertainty principal.

These baskets of data are quantum in Quantum Theory.

I have come across a new paradox related to delayed choice and quantum eraser. According to experiments performed, when measurements are made after electrons or light passing the double slit, the wave aspect disappear and particle aspect is surfaced. And appropriate patterns appear in the final screen. Further, when the information which slit the particle passed is erased the fringe pattern reappears. Their is a big paradox here, because what happens in the final screan is also a measurement. Therefore a fringe pattern can never appear, and only particle aspect should be available. Therefore it cannot be measuring alone that changes the aspect of the particle measured. It is important to understand that it is not measuring but the knowledge which slit the particle/wave went through that matters and not the action of measuring. This knowledge depends on the variables that we know, or in other words the amount of data that can be captured. When we increases the knowledge of the system it behaves like particles, when we decrease the knowledge it behaves like waves. The main point we need to know the threshold where this shift happens.
It is necessary to understand it is not the measurebility that matters, the act if measuring need to be done, then knowledge need to be gained from the measurement. If it is possible to destroy the knowledge even after measuring wave aspect reappears.

Another explanation is that whether it is a particle or wave it goes through both slits and that information is stored in the particle, and it is used in the final result. This is hidden variables and Bell's inequalities prohibits it.

The important aspect of all this it is not the measurement of the variables that matter but the knowledge of the values of the variables. Even after measuring, if the record of variables are destroyed, the entity can become a wave.
Therefore the entity is a wave if knowledge value of path information is zero until the ultimate destination of the entity. In the ultimate destination i.e. when the fringes were formed the wave aspect ceases to exist and value of particle aspect becomes 100%.

The above shows a wave created at point A travels to B where the double slit is present, at C information about path is made available. From C to D no fringe pattern. Then it travels from D to E, at D, all path information is destroyed and fringe pattern reappear. From C to D if we insert a screan only two fringes appears, but from D to E fringe pattern is shown. Several points need to be emphasize about the fringes from D to E, this fringe pattern is not a new pattern but just a continuation of the effects of B to C. There is no difference in the phase of the wave. D to E part is acting as if there was no C to D part, rather C to D is just continuation of B to C part.

The conclusion that can be derived is that when the entity passes the double slit at B it has a dual quality as a particle and as a wave. Only contradiction here is when considering classical principals how can a particle can go through two slits at the same instant-note that a detector says the particle went through one slit. If we do away with this principal and accept that even a single particle can go through two slits at once - in particle from at one slit and some other form, may be wave form, at the other slit, what happens can be explained. At C when we get more information about the entity, i.e. which slit the entity traveled it becomes a particle, but though it goes through one slit as a particle some part of it goes through the other slit. The information about two slits never gets destroyed. At D, when the action of eraser is performed, all information becomes normal.

I need to check on one other aspect of the double slit experiment. Suppose a glass block is placed in front of one slit, what will happen? The answer is there will be a shift of the fringes due to the velocity of light difference and travel paths of the two slits are different.
This can be contrasted with a electron gun experiment. Electrons shows fringe pattern even when the gun is slowed down to emit one electron at a time.
The main thing here is in electromagnetic waves the phase difference matters and in particle waves or probability waves it does not matter!!
If quntization is a common phenomena to all energy, how is this difference explained.

GTA online Deadshot

Why world is not imaginary

Suppose there is a mountain and then there are people who sees the mountain. Each one who sees the mountain has a mental picture of the mountain in their brain. This can be represented by a set of data. Each one who sees the mountain will have a set of data. Mostly each of these data sets will be different. Further if one observer moves the set of data will change.

Then suppose that there is no mountain but only different data sets in the brains of each observer. When the observer moves the movement data is used in calculating a new data set continuously. All the data in these sets will be enormous.

Then consider the mountain is real and it's location, size and other details are given by a data set. Then also the location and movement of each observer is given by data sets. All this data will be a finite number.

When you consider the two options, imaginary mountain needs a large amount of data compared with the existence of a real mountain.

Therefore on the theory of minimizing data mountain should exist outside the imagination of the observer. Further it can be assumed that the world is real and not imaginary inside the observers brain.

Why Quantum theory instead of Classical Theory?
Using randomness uses less data than the Classical theory?
If so it will be proof why the world is Quantum.
If wave particle duality consumes less data than either waves or particles, that will be a good enough proof why duality exists.
If we can prove that if wave remains after observation need more data than becoming a particle that will be a good enough proof about the wave particle duality.

Limits of Mathamatics

By limits of mathematics I do not mean the limits of achievements to mathematics by indulging on current achievements. This may be limitless. I refer to physical phenomena that is interpreted by mathematics.

Even here there may be limitless achievements based on current achievements. I refer here some new phenomena  independent of all phenomena currently known. Currently known mathematics will never lead you to a new phenomena currently unknown.

Reason for this is maths is a tool and not an end. When basic parameters are given using mathematics we will be able to make more achievements. But there will be a limit. It can't predict other independent phenomena but it will be able to predict phenomena where there is a connection.

Improvement from integers to decimal numbers.
From basic arithmetic to calculus.
World is flat to a globe.
All planets rotate around earth to sun.
Quantum Theory.
Schrödinger Cat
delayed choice quantum eraser

1+1=2 (one plus one equals two)

How do you know that 1+1=2 (one plus one equals two)?

This is a proposition about essence. It is abstract. It exists in thought or as an idea but does not have a physical or concrete existence - meaning or abstract. It is an eternal truth.

Those truths are always called "eternal truths." The gist of the argument is that truths are part of the contents of minds, and that an eternal truth must be part of the content of an eternal mind. There is already an argument not unlike this in Plato where deduces immortality from the eternity of the ideas. But in Leibniz the argument is more developed. He holds that the ultimate reason for contingent truths must be found in necessary truths - The History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russell.

When we see two apples we think they have similar qualities, even though each will have a slightly different shape. It cannot be said apple A is exact replica of apple B. In the physical world no two things are the same. Take for instance two hydrogen atoms, they may have different distortions when they strike the container they are in, though these distortions may reduce with time they may not fully disappear for ever. At least at the time the notion 1+1 = 2 appeared in the domains of mathematicians, they were unable to go the the depth of hydrogen atoms but apples are a good example for defining two. Notion of two came about humans seeing similar things. Seeing sheep in a heard, or seeing everyone have two eyes, hands and legs etc build up the concept of two.

Therefore two was not entirely a mental concept. After observing lot of physical things this concept was built in our brains. After the concept was built we do not need the physical things to substantiate it. Like what Wittgenstein said in Tractatus -  My propositions serve as elucidations in the following way: anyone who understands me eventually recognizes them as nonsensical, when he has used them - as steps - to climb up beyond them. (He must, so to speak, throw away the ladder after he has climbed up it.) He must transcend these propositions, and then he will see the world aright. Then the concept becomes purely mental. The propositions are the ones explaining about similar things, existence of it, it's properties, why we treat certain things as similar things etc.  It is an eternal truth.

Construction of the human brain has a special ability to group things. Because of this ability we can separate groups of things which has similar attributes. Here it should be noted that all of the attributes need not match. A percentage is sufficient. This percentage is not a well defined thing. It depends on the brain. Two individuals may differ. Usually, we accept that two things are similar when most of the human brains agree that properties of both are sufficiently same.

Strangely enough 1+1 = 2 concept will not be complete without 3, 4 and 5 so on. This can be explained why an orange and a lemon are not grouped as the same type of fruit. Orange and lemon will have some attributes that are similar, but we won't say they are the same fruit. The reason is when we look at a heap of oranges we know that the attributes shown by the orange is different than a lemon. To make this distinction we will need more than two oranges.

Problems of Quantum theory:

• Two different properties of a particle cannot be measured independently.
• Errors of measuring properties depend on probabilities. Unlike in classical physics where these probabilities only depend on measuring instruments, in Quantum theory they depend on measuring of other properties.
•  Measuring of one particle automatically decide the value of other particle.
• Behaves in different ways depending on ability to observer the particle.
• Local Realism -  having a preexisting value before a measurement is done.
• Realism - the world is independent of mind. 
• Radioactive decay.

No one is worried about 1+1 = 2 not having 100% link to the physical world - people have thrown out the ladder long ago. But worried about quantum theory - people have yet to start throwing out the ladder.

Errors in Physics

Take a postulate in geomatry, say similar trangles postulate. Practically it may be proved that 99.99% acculately tested. The thing is measuring errors will be limited to a value below a certain figure.
In quantum theory there are also errors but then the errors are probabilistic. Errores may go above any predified limit.

Is time continuous

Is movement continuous? Suppose it is continuous, then movement of an object will need an infinite amount of data to record it. Our brains are finite therefore we will never be able to observe continuous movement. Also, we will never be able to build a machine that can record the continuous movement of an object. Therefore we can safely assume that continuous movement do not exist. Therefore all movement will be discrete and anything that move will move in jerks.

Then comes the subject of space. Is space continuous? It seems to be so. Space cannot be discrete because if so speed of light cannot be same in all reference frames.

Zeno's paradox of motion solved. space is continuous but time is discrete. Therefore continuous motion does not exist in the continuous space.


Length and time have very different qualities unlike in science fiction.
Three dimensions of length is continuous and time is not continuous but discrete.

No time travel, no wormholes,