Live data from Hacker News

Entanglement Builds Space-Time. Now "Magic" Gives It Gravity

quantamagazine.org

171–180 of 191 posts

Re: Entanglement Builds Space-Time. Now "Magic" Gives It Gravity

#171
post #67

"Einstein cast gravity not as a force but as the geometric bending of space and time. In a popular analogy, the fabric of space-time is like the flat expanse of a mattress, and a massive object like a star is like a bowling ball sitting on top. The weight of the bowling ball compresses the mattress, forming a dimple — matter tells space-time how to curve. In this analogy, a planet is like a smaller ball. If it rolls…

That’s very interesting, but the analogy is not wrong, because the mattress is analogous to space-time , not just space. Essentially it is a 2D analogy for a 3+1D reality.

The beauty of a useful analogy is it allows you to make correct inferences, even without a full understanding.

If you view gravity as a mattress, you're stuck. There's nothing to do with it that you couldn't already do, because it's fundamentally wrong. Another way to say this is that it's actually an analogy for Newtonian gravity, not for GR, despite apparently including something curved.

If you view gravity as a field of local clocks that tick at different rates, you can make many correct predictions:

- Clocks at different heights will tick at different rates.

- GPS needs gravity corrections.

- Light climbing out of a gravitational field is redshifted.

- Radar signals passing near the Sun should be delayed (the Shapiro time delay).

- You can have no gravitational pull but still have time dilation (inside a perfectly spherical shell, Newtonian gravity seems to cancel out).

- From the outside, it appears to take an infinite amount of time for something to fall into a black hole's horizon.

- Aging can be path-dependent.

- Gravity affects every physical process: chemical reactions, radioactive decays, biological aging, atomic transitions, molecular vibrations, computer processors, pendulums, pulsars.

- A sufficiently precise clock can measure height.

- Objects in eccentric orbits should have periodic clock-rate changes.

- Quantum matter waves should accumulate gravitational phase shifts.

- Spectral lines from compact stars should reveal compactness.

- Thermal equilibrium in gravity should involve a temperature gradient.

Re: Entanglement Builds Space-Time. Now "Magic" Gives It Gravity

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Penrose's argument isn't rational itself, so I don't see why a rational argument should be required in order to dismiss it. As CuriouslyC points out, quantum consciousness is the equivalent of Newton's dalliances with alchemy and astrology.

Maybe you could briefly describe and steelman his argument as a show of good faith instead of just denouncing it because it’s “equivalent with alchemy and astrology.” My understanding is that it’s very rational, it’s based on mathematical proofs.

That's not how this works. Why don't you ask me to steelman Newton, too?

As for models, the map is not the territory. There is no valid mathematical model that proves that quantum woo is a prerequisite for consciousness. If Penrose thinks otherwise, Penrose is wrong. He can go get a Vitamin C shot from Linus Pauling, debate the relationship between HIV and AIDS with Kary Mullis, or talk race relations with William Shockley.

Re: Entanglement Builds Space-Time. Now "Magic" Gives It Gravity

#174
post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This naming-proposal couldn't possibly cause any problems down the line... You're a little late here, "magic" is already a fairly well known term in quantum computing literature. There's "magic states" and protocols for "magic state distillation" and "magic state injection", there's "shallow magic depth circuits", etc.

> "magic" is already a fairly well known term in quantum computing literature which is fine, but the point is still valid. who looked at the state of science education in today's world and though that "magic" was a word that belonged anywhere near legitimate discourse? and more importantly WHY?

it's a cool word

Re: Entanglement Builds Space-Time. Now "Magic" Gives It Gravity

#175

Whole lotta bike shedding going on in this thread.

This whole thread is embarrassing to be honest. Lots of clueless people on a notoriously difficult field complaining that the experts on such field decided to use this or that word.

As the old saying goes, better to stay silent and look like a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

Re: Entanglement Builds Space-Time. Now "Magic" Gives It Gravity

#176
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same way you bend space. In GR, time is just another dimension of a slightly different flavor.

Whats the actual mechanism though?

You contribute to the stress-energy tensor by having mass or energy. That directly influences spacetime curvature. The Einstein field equations tell you how precisely.

If that answer doesn't satisfy you, I'm afraid that's all we can say. It reminds me of Feynman's answer on how magnets work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0r930Sn_8

Re: Entanglement Builds Space-Time. Now "Magic" Gives It Gravity

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One nit: Time moves a bit slower on the sun's side. Other than that, thank you for a very clear explanation.

If a particle was dropped into the sun’s gravity (not with “horizontal” motion that might cause it to orbit), is it time dilation that causes it to accelerate toward the sun somehow?

My guess: In the reference frame where the particle is not moving, the sun would be either a) moving (with a perpendicular component) and be ever so slightly moving toward the particle or b) not moving but a third body would be, moving both the sun and the particle at different “strengths” (different mass and distance, different time dilation) thus the particle and the sun would appear to move closer to each other. That means in either case (sun in the middle or particle in the middle) the third body moving closer must make it look like the particle and sun are gravitationally pulling each other. If we then shift reference frame back to the third body being stationary and the particle and sun moving, we should see that. It would be really cool if we could simulate this to test it but I believe that would require solving the 3 body problem.

Re: Entanglement Builds Space-Time. Now "Magic" Gives It Gravity

#178
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A particle is a useful metaphor I disagree, an actual point particle with a mass should have an event horizon. Using terms without baggage helps avoid such misleading assumptions.

No metaphor is perfect.

Many are terrible.

Re: Entanglement Builds Space-Time. Now "Magic" Gives It Gravity

#180

>In holographic theories, physicists may have traced the pliability of space-time to its quantum roots ...ah yes holography again. Not to say that all these insights from it are completely worthless, but unless we actually find a holographic dual of our universe instead of AdS spaces (which are the opposite of our universe if anything), this whole field is starting to feel more like a jobs program for mathematicians…

Thanks for this - holography as a theory strikes me as an absurd math trick - if a 3d world is really just a 2d surface, would it not logically follow that said 2d surface is itself merely a projection from 1d, and perhaps that is a projection from 0d?

Obviously I don’t understand this, and probably won’t but what limits the dimension reduction?

Going the other way, would our 3d space not be the “surface” of a deeper 4d space, and that of a 5d space, etc?

Post reply on HN