Why All Scientific Measurements are Uncertain

 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!

 

 PSI Blog 20231225 

 

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. [According to this word invented by Collingwood, assumptions are consupponible when two or more can be held without contradiction.]

[4] Borchardt, Glenn, 2020, Religious Roots of Relativity: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, 160 p. [https://go.glennborchardt.com/RRR-ebk]