PSI Blog 20231225 Why All Scientific Measurements are Uncertain
Heisenberg
Uncertainty Principle confirmed once again along with Infinite Universe Theory.
Heisenberg
destroyed finite universal causality. That was Newton’s assumption that there
were a finite number of causes for all effects. Einstein and his regressive followers
never understood the universe-shaking importance of Heisenberg’s claim. Because
of the infinite subdividability of matter, causality really is infinite.
Heisenberg slew Laplace's Demon.[1]
As
shown in this article by Karmela Padavic-Callaghan from New Scientist, quantum
mechanics still struggles with this. The prevailing view is known as the
“Copenhagen interpretation,” whereby the infinity of unknown causes is lumped
into a factor called “probability.”
During
the preparation of "The Ten Assumptions of Science"[2]
I was able to resolve the quandary that will afflict theoretical physicists as
long as they continue to assume finity. Here is the
logic:
1.
Assume
the Eighth Assumption of Science, infinity (The universe is
infinite, both in the microcosmic and macrocosmic directions).
2.
Assume
the Second Assumption of Science, causality (All effects have an infinite number of
material causes).
3.
Assume
the Third Assumption of Science, uncertainty (It is impossible to know everything about anything,
but it is often possible to know more about anything).
Remember
these are fundamental assumptions, that is, they are unprovable, always have
opposites, and must be consupponible.[3]
Fundamental assumptions stimulate interminable debates because infinity
prevents the possibility of a complete proof for any of them or their religious
opposites.[4]
There is no way for anyone to go to the “end of the universe” to determine
whether it is finite or infinite. Nonetheless, the switch from finity to infinity
changes everything. It will result in the demise of the Big Bang Theory and the
religious notions supporting it.
Here
is the article on the slow awakening of the thinking needed for advances in the
technology involving the extremely small portions of the Infinite Universe:
Quantum physicists
just got more certain about quantum uncertainty
Some
significant quotes:
“Before
quantum physics was developed, researchers seeking to measure an object more
precisely simply reached for better measuring instruments. But in 1927, Werner
Heisenberg discovered that, when dealing with quantum-scale objects, there is a
fundamental limit on how precisely you can simultaneously measure certain pairs
of values, such as position and momentum.”
But
now, “Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle can apply even when measuring just a
single variable.”
Note
this is essentially what I have been saying for decades, as formalized by uncertainty mentioned above. It applies, not just to
quantum objects, but to all objects, no matter their size. Every measurement
has a plus or minus. That follows from the universal mechanism of evolution: univironmental
determinism (what happens to a portion of the universe depends on the
infinite matter in motion within and without).
This
bit about the referenced paper is telling:
The
theoretical physicists “faced the mathematical difficulty of having to carry
out calculations and proofs for a very general idea of position – because it
can take infinitely many values, it must be represented by an infinite grid of
numbers.”
To
get around that, they had to devise a function amenable to being lopped off for
the “final” calculation. That gets to the nitty gritty of
what math is all about. No finite equation can give a complete description or
perfect prediction of anything in the Infinite Universe. Pliny
was right!
Thanks for reading
Infinite Universe Theory! Please subscribe for free to receive new posts and be
part of the “Last Cosmological Revolution.”
On Medium.com you
can support PSI financially by clapping 50 times and responding with your
questions.
[1] The proposition
an all-knowing Demon could predict the future perfectly, assuming there were a
finite number of causes for each event.
[2] Borchardt, Glenn,
2004, The Ten Assumptions of Science: Toward a New Scientific Worldview:
Lincoln, NE, iUniverse, 125 p. [https://gborc.com/TTAOS; https://gborc.com/TTAOSpdf].
[3] Collingwood, R.G.
1940. An Essay on Metaphysics. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 354 p.
[4] Borchardt, Glenn,
2020, Religious Roots of Relativity: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science
Institute, 160 p. [https://go.glennborchardt.com/RRR-ebk]
