Notices
Results 1 to 29 of 29
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Jilan

Thread: Observations on spooky physics by a pharmacologist

  1. #1 Observations on spooky physics by a pharmacologist 
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    University of Manitoba, Fac of Med, Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    5
    OBSERVATIONS ON SPOOKY PHYSICS

    Frank S. LaBella, Ph.D.
    Professor EmeritusDepartment of Pharmacology and Therapeutics
    Faculty of Medicine, University of Manitoba
    753 McDermott Avenue, Winnipeg, MB, Canada R3E 0T6
    Tel: 204-471-5336
    email: labella@shaw.ca
    University of Manitoba - Medicine - Pharmacology - Dr. Frank LaBella


    From highly specialized instrumentation, two or more elementary particles, can be expelled simultaneously. Theory formulates that the quantum state of each particle cannot be assigned independently but for the system as a whole, because the particles are “entangled”. For the electron, one quantum property, “spin”, refers to an intrinsic angular momentum, but with no further relevance to a spinning top in the macro world. For two electrons, for example, separated by an arbitrary distance, measurements show that one electron appears to “know”, immediately, the spin state of the other and assumes opposite spin . This postulate is controversial. Einstein could not accept this unnatural violation of quantum mechanics and called it “spooky action at a distance.” On the other hand, there are arguments embraced in support of the faster-than-light linkage between entangled particles.
    Arguments against the spooky connection include the category of unrecognized, “hidden variables” responsible for the apparent mutual instantaneous “knowledge” existing between the separated particles. My research, assuredly unrelated to entanglement, prompts me to propose a not previously considered hidden variable as a possible loophole in the widely accepted “action at a distance”.
    Electrostatic fields, a hidden variable?
    Electrostatic fields are everywhere, between objects or surfaces having opposite charge. Furthermore, any static electric field cannot exist in isolation, but is contiguous with surrounding electrostatic fields and its perturbation is propagated ad infinitum
    Our electric field sensor detected changes in the acquired signal pattern from the switching on/off of other instruments and lights and vibrations from any source. Merely moving a tiny bit of material a short distance on the laboratory bench, i.e. changing the location of the field-perturbation, elicited a detector response, as did the movement or placement of any object or person. Both the object and detector could be located anywhere in the room. Furthermore,the acquisition of signal data was , for both test material and detector, independent of containers or other barriers, findings compatible with reports by others using electric field sensors.
    Several laboratories show that an applied electric field influences the properties of the electron including spin reversal. Conversely, the charge on the propagating electron must certainly perturb its immediate ambient electric field, initiating a disturbance cascade.
    Suppose that the transposition of one of the electron pairs, at its new location, perturbs and instantaneously causes its ambient electric field to “flip” to another configuration, which, in turn, leads to reversal of the particle’s spin. This proposal could explain outcomes in experiments that measured spins of the separated entangled particles much faster than the light travel- time between them.
    Alternatively, or in addition, an electric field induced change in spin may occur at some point or points during the translocation of the far-flung electron. And finally, the newly emitted electron pair, at first, experiences a common electric field. Perhaps exposure to any new electric field, as in the case of the transposed electron, induces spin reversal.
    Also, one cannot discount the added contribution to electrostatic field perturbation by the instruments of measurement and their operators . Electrostatic noise is generated, for example, by the presence of a voltage in an electronic device with or without current flow; also, by vibration, nearby machinery and fluorescent lighting .
    The human body, at rest, quickly reaches equilibrium with the ambient electrostatic field, whereupon its subsequent slightest movement will change the field. In fact, body motion sensors, based on changes induced in the ambient electrostatic fields, are being widely investigated for monitoring the activity of individuals in a variety of circumstances.
    The role of perturbation of electric fields should be evaluated, also, in the case of “spooky” results from classical “ slit” experiments. Currently, a generally accepted theory of quantum mechanics views a propagating elementary particle as both a particle and a wave. Briefly, photons or electrons are fired at a barrier with one slit or two closely situated slits and the particle paths through the slits terminate at a detector screen . For photons, for example, a pattern of individual photons at the collecting screen will differ from that generated by waves..
    A variety of slit experiments all tend to show both a particle and wave nature of the photon. Significantly, the act of observing the experiment causes the patterns to change. The emitted elementary particle appears to “know” when it is being observed and measurements show faster-than-light changes between emitter and detector.
    However, the transmitter and detector instrumentation and the observers will exert unrecognized local effects on the particle that may put into question the “spooky” interpretation. Perturbation of ambient electric fields by and emanations from the human body, including electromagnetic radiation, both must be acknowledged. Indeed, physical hypotheses, such as particle interaction with both slits, rather than a quantum wave through the slits, have been proposed.
    Last edited by Frank LaBella; 08-14-2014 at 01:16 PM. Reason: A useful subtitle: Observations on spooky physics by a pharmacologist
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    341
    Hello and Cheers to you, Dr. Labella! I think you will be most welcome here! (I think the site could use more of "you" based on what you have written!)

    I studied pharmacology and pathophysiology under Dr. Raymond Rawson in Las Vegas, Nv. back in the early eighties...he became Governor of the state a few years later!

    (I am nowhere near your league, however...I was an EMT (2) at that time. Hardly an "expert")

    .....

    In regard to your article, you seem to be proposing a "sort of" continuity with respect to electric fields and various perturbations that may enable a wave-function to propagate a

    signal response that is not subject to decay over distance...or am I misinterpreting your over-all meanings?

    ....

    (Thanks for reading!) and Welcome!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    157
    And I wonder if people truly hold it against me to being emotional....

    I get confronted with crank BS off the internet too much as well. I feel it is kinda' like rape.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    341
    In reply to Beer w/Straw, re: your #3 post.

    What is the intent of your reply? If it is directed at me, I don't see what I wrote to merit it! "Crank BS?" (imo, unless Einstein wrote it, EVERYTHING is crank bs)

    If your post is directed to Dr. LaBella...it's pretty unfair and unwarranted.

    .....

    (Thanks for reading!)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    157
    I didn't make an introduction, so here it is:

    Being a whiny little bitch on forums has a cathartic affect and keeps me from punching stupid old men in the face. I believe I am capable of making logical arguments but sometimes just go for expressing how I feel.

    And no, it was not directed at you. I have an inkling he posted crap on physorg before it was physforum, and x0x and others might be familiar with him.

    :EDIT:

    And do you want me to take this literally " imo, unless Einstein wrote it, EVERYTHING is crank bs"?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    997
    Hello Frank, welcome to the forum. I followed your logic up to the point of electric fields acting instantaneously over a distance. Whilst I could accept that a change in the field could cause a spin to flip, you still have the inverse square law to contend with . Entanglement has been noted over very large distances so I cannot see how your explanation could be true. Also field disturbances do not travel faster than the speed of light, so how could a field instantaneously flip everywhere at once?
    Gerry Nightingale likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    University of Manitoba, Fac of Med, Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    5
    the act of measurement results in changes in the ambient electric field
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    157
    Prove it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    University of Manitoba, Fac of Med, Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    5
    That was the point of my commentary. I give up
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    157
    Is it published somewhere?

    I could only get through your cut paste for a couple sentences.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #11  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    997
    Frank, yes I don't have an issue with the act of measurement changing the electric field, I just cannot see how the effect would be great enough a few kilometres away to flip the spin of the counterpart or how it could happen instantly.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #12  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    341
    In reply to BeerW/Straw, re: your #5 post.

    I regard almost everything written post 1955 (including my own crap) as being highly suspect, at least with regard to physics theory.

    I see pygmies standing on the shoulders of a Titan (AE) and expounding that what they have observed in the far depths of the Universe denies GR and the reality of our own

    Solar System...such as "ultimate gravity" "blackholes" "wormholes" etc.

    .....

    The extrapolations drawn from theoretical "particles" manage to exceed the parameters of any sort of "proof" other than suppositional calculus equations that cannot prove

    anything other than one can support ANY supposition if it is "massaged" with enough affines!

    .....

    In modern QM, anything that is "supposed" can be made "true" if someone famous shows "how the math works". If this were not so, Hawking would be unknown outside of a

    small circle of adherents and admirers.

    .....

    If you tell me I must "show proof" of "how things are wrong in QM"...I can't. I cannot disprove "magic" or the existence of God either.


    (Thanks for reading!)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #13  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    341
    In reply to Dr. LaBella, re: your #9 post.

    "Give up?" What is there to "give up?"

    You post some valid questions, and now you "give?" Why post in the first place if you feel the questions on your part are untenable...you surrender far too easily!

    For instance, there is some merit to idea that the "chirrup" of cricket could influence the entire Universe in some way...in that our Universe could be considered a "singular entity

    of self" and therefore anything that occurs within it will become, at some point, "part and parcel" of ALL of it!

    (this difficult to prove with regard to "time" intervals, as in "how "long" before the chirrup is everywhere?")

    ....

    (Thanks for reading!)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #14  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    University of Manitoba, Fac of Med, Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    5
    there is nothing to prove. I have posted a perspective, a commentary, a proposal
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #15  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    997
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Nightingale View Post
    In reply to Dr. LaBella, re: your #9 post.

    "Give up?" What is there to "give up?"

    You post some valid questions, and now you "give?" Why post in the first place if you feel the questions on your part are untenable...you surrender far too easily!

    For instance, there is some merit to idea that the "chirrup" of cricket could influence the entire Universe in some way...in that our Universe could be considered a "singular entity

    of self" and therefore anything that occurs within it will become, at some point, "part and parcel" of ALL of it!

    (this difficult to prove with regard to "time" intervals, as in "how "long" before the chirrup is everywhere?")

    ....

    (Thanks for reading!)
    Hi Gerry, yes the chirrup seems to be heard everywhere all at once. This is what is known as non-locality. One of the stranger aspects of Quantum Mechanics. I don't think it involves the EM field though. We know that disturbances in that medium are limited to the speed of c.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #16  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    341
    in reply to Jilan, re: your #15 post.

    No Jilan...I'm most definitely not supporting "spooky action at a distance!" Even in a "quantum-field" frame, there must surely be "lag over distance". If EM can support a "wave-function"

    then there is a strong possibility of "action/reaction" in place! (think in terms of a "push" factor from a force...the EM field does not "move" in terms of transit, rather a "bed-sheet fold

    in place" scenario occurs. A wave-point.

    ......

    I think Dr.LaBella should continue with posting his assessments and questions, and not be discouraged so readily! (I've been 86'd twice now from two sites, and I still think what

    I write has merit, right or wrong) It makes no difference if I am a "know-nothing crank bs artist". What if I'm right...even once?


    (Thanks for reading!)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #17  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    997
    Gerry, I have nothing against spooky action at a distance, I just regard the EM field as something real in our space dimensions and so limited in its transmutative speed to c. The spooky stuff's mechanism is as yet unknown.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #18  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank LaBella View Post
    there is nothing to prove. I have posted a perspective, a commentary, a proposal
    How many forums have spammed this over?

    :EDIT:

    I'd like for this forum to be where I can ask questions.

    Not one where I'm haunted with cranks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #19  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    341
    In reply to Beer w/Straw, re: your #18 post.

    Golly Jeepers! A forum where you can ask "questions?" There are at least (4) really great books available regarding "introspection"...get one and a hand-mirror, and then perhaps

    ask yourself "what does it all mean?" That should be an adequate forum for you! (your response may come from your insipid avatar)

    .....

    I have yet to see a post from you that does not involve the work of others...have you nothing of your own? Your "pronuncimentos" of "crank" might actually have validity w/ regard to

    the mirror effect. (You and xOx may have to form your own site where you can pontificate to each other)

    .....

    You don't want your "questions" answered...you just want to snap-off one-line judgments that have no meaning at all.

    (by the bye...what are your professional accomplishments that allow you to critique others? I see no "DR." associated with your cartoonish photo)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #20  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    157
    I wouldn't have even made a post in this thread, but you seemed to be begging that this forum has cranks.

    If I feel like making a conversation with my thoughts, I will. That would also depend on whom I'm conversing with.

    You sound like an old man who would throw undergraduates under a bus. My professors give me more respect than anyone has on a forum. I can also finish a PhD in a world class institute for theoretical physics without even moving.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #21  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    341
    In reply to Beer w/ Straw, re: #20 post.

    "Courtesy is a given...respect is always earned".

    I have no Phd. in anything. My point being that LaBella DOES have one.

    I am an "old man"...I too could pass ANY theoretical physics class anytime I would choose to do so. (I can recite cant as well as any...as if it means anything)

    "Undergrads under a bus?" Hardly. I would teach them "how to THINK" rather than "what to think".

    .....

    Pssst...I WRITE THEORY, not just "read and store".

    .....

    Does this "forum" have cranks? Well, so far there are least two...me and xOx.

    The difference being I am not a avatar...when someone writes to me, they write to ME as I am, not a "personae". I never feel the "need" to hide.

    The other difference being is that real theory interests me...when I can find some! I have no interest in "magical properties, complete w/calculus that is also magic" scenarios.

    They explain or prove nothing, except conjecture based on extremely suspect conjectural observations.

    .....

    I have only one professor, and even though he speaks silently to me...I still hear.


    (Thanks for reading!)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #22  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    157
    You're only trying to provoke me now.

    And your previous words were a lie, you DO consider me a moron and can't think for myself.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #23  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    341
    In reply to Beer W/ Straw, re: your # 22 reply.

    HUH? I am not insinuating anything with regard to your intellect or your comprehension or knowledge of anything!

    YOU are "putting words in mouth" concerning you personally! Why?

    And now you say "I'm LYING"!?!? About what?

    Okay then...I won't respond to you anymore. Happy now?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #24  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    157
    You ask why?

    Because you are.

    I feel harassed.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #25  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    551
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank LaBella
    Einstein could not accept this unnatural violation of quantum mechanics and called it “spooky action at a distance.”
    I'm curious why you think you feel the need to tell a forum of physicists/physics enthusiasts what quantum entanglement is? If you merely want to let your reader know what you're going to build on then simply post a link such as Quantum entanglement - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank LaBella
    Electrostatic fields are everywhere, between objects or surfaces having opposite charge. Furthermore, any static electric field cannot exist in isolation, but is contiguous with surrounding electrostatic fields and its perturbation is propagated ad infinitum
    If an electric field changes by such a perturbation then it's not an electrostatic field anymore. Such changes propagate at the speed of light.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank LaBella
    Our electric field sensor...
    Who are you referring to when you say our?

    Quote Originally Posted by Frank LaBella
    Several laboratories show that an applied electric field influences the properties of the electron including spin reversal.
    Who are these labs and in what journals were the results published?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #26  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    University of Manitoba, Fac of Med, Winnipeg, Canada
    Posts
    5
    As a career biomedical researcher, I prepared the definition for myself and for my non-expert colleagues. Apparently, my simple summary appealed to other viewers. I then felt that my observation on electric fields could be of real significance and wanted to expose them to knowledgeable experts in the field. In my first approach to posting, I confused this forum with Physics Discussion Forum and my commentry was posted in both. Here is a reply to my posting in the latter forum:

    "Perturbation of ambient electric fields by and emanations from the human body, including electromagnetic radiation, both must be acknowledged."

    I realized this when trying to 'calculate' reference of two particles based on locality, and the quest continued from there. Frank, great explanation of "spooky physics" by the way!
    Chevy106

    Reply to second question
    I am saying that the electrostatic field at the site of measurement is changed by the operator/instrumentation

    Reply to third question
    I observed that an electronic device in use was sensitive to exposure to or movement to any new substance. An electronic engineer helped me to identify that the circuitry was sensitive to electric fields and modified it to be more sensitive.

    Response to fourth question
    Here are just some articles


    1. Electric field control of spin transport : Article : Nature Physics
    Nature Publishing Group : science journals, jobs, and information › Journal home › Archive › Letter‎
    o Similar
    by S Sahoo - ‎2005 - ‎Cited by 287 - ‎Related articles
    Electric field control of spin transport. Sangeeta Sahoo1,2, Takis Kontos1,2, Jürg Furer1, Christian Hoffmann1, Matthias Gräber1, Audrey Cottet1 and Christian ...
    2. Zeeman-type spin splitting controlled by an electric field : Nature ...
    http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/...nphys2691.html
    by H Yuan - ‎2013 - ‎Cited by 13 - ‎Related articles
    Here we investigate the possibility to generate and modulate a giant Zeeman-type spin polarization in WSe2 under an external electric field. By tuning the ...
    3. Electric field control of spin transport : Abstract : Nature Physics
    Nature Publishing Group : science journals, jobs, and information › Journal home › Archive › Letter‎
    o Similar
    by S Sahoo - ‎2005 - ‎Cited by 288 - ‎Related articles
    Electric field control of spin transport. Sangeeta Sahoo1,2, Takis Kontos1,2, Jürg Furer1, Christian Hoffmann1, Matthias Gräber1, Audrey Cottet1 and Christian ...
    4. Coherent Control of a Single Electron Spin with Electric Fields
    Science › 30 November 2007
    by KC Nowack - ‎2007 - ‎Cited by 466 - ‎Related articles
    Nov 30, 2007 - Abstract. Manipulation of single spins is essential for spin-based quantum information processing. Electrical control instead of magnetic control ...
    5. Electric-field-induced spin wave generation using multiferroic ...
    scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/104/8/10
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #27  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    341
    In reply to Dr. LaBella, re: your #26 post.

    Cheers and hello...good to see a post from you.

    Have you considered the implications of "entanglement?" Such a concept virtually demands "continuum metric" which is pre-existent to any perturbation...this is why almost no one involved

    in modern physics theory wants to risk publishing anything in regard to it! A "pre-existent" continuum would, at some point, amount to a "resurrection" of aether theory...something must

    be there to conduct a signal!

    A clever way to get around this issue is to compare a "wave-function" of any sort to photon emission, in that the photon does not experience "normal spacetime" and thus requires no

    transit media to conduct it...a "magic" set of conditions.

    .....

    (don't get too concerned over being attacked over every nuance "what does this mean?" "what does that mean?" replies. I am a complete amateur, and seem to have no problem discerning

    "what you mean"...it's English, and that's good enough for "not real science" people like myself)


    (Thanks for reading!)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #28  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    997
    Gerry, it becomes less "magic" when higher dimensions are involved. Did you hear the story about the ant on a twig which is one of my favourites?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #29  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    341
    In reply to Jilan, re: your #28 post.

    Yes, I know that one...bug/twig/movement of bug on twig pro-rated to distance and velocity/ can bug discern "curve?"=perception of Universe by observers. Very good.

    ......

    What I object to is the "Copenhagen" interpretations of QM, Jilan...in which fantastic qualities can be "verified?" by equations...to me this is not real science. It is grasping at mathematical

    "straws" to support untenable, unprovable "conditions" such as "the density of mass enables greater gravimetric-field (density sqr. = gravity sqr.?) NO, I cannot accept this as a corollary to

    EMc2! And yet this seems an un-escapable mandate of blackhole theory...based on "what we think we see".

    .....

    I rely on our Solar system as "proof of how gravity and matter/mass interactions" work. And many QM propositions deny "reality in our System" in favor of "reality as we think it is" in some

    incredibly distant observations that can NEVER be proved nor disproved.

    ......

    As for "higher" dimensions? I mentioned "thought" and it is not even considered "appropriate!!!" (what more proof could one want than "thought" that there are "higher dimensions" involved

    with the Universe? A thought has neither matter nor any "provable" reality of it's own, yet it is still real)


    (Thanks for reading!) Cheerio!
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •