Navigating the Quantum Froth

Evidence for Programmed Reality is starting to pour in from all fields.  The latest comes from Gamma-ray imaging from deep space.  Here's the deal:

Extremely high energy photons are known as gamma rays and are generated only in really cool places like Cern and supermassive black holes that power galaxies.  The cosmologically-originated gamma rays tend to come in bursts and there are special telescopes, such as MAGIC (Major Atmospheric Gamma-ray Imaging Cherenkov Telescope) that detect and measure these bursts.  According to all known laws of physics, all photons no matter their energy level travel at exactly the same speed, namely the speed of light.  Problem is that several gamma ray detectors have noticed that gamma rays from distant galaxies arrive on earth at slightly different times, which makes no sense.

Unless you consider that space is quantized.  Then, the photons have to work their way through the quantum "froth" and the low energy photons can do it easier than the high energy ones, much like radio waves through a low pass filter.  So says Italian physicist Giovanni Amelino-Camelia.  A couple references on this theory include an FXQi article and a recent article from New Scientist.

The reason this effect isn't normally noticed is that the influence of quantized spacetime is so small, conventional experiments will not demonstrate its impact.  However, as we probe deeper into space and increase the sensitivity of our instruments, we ultimately get to a point where we measure things that demonstrate that the status quo in physics is just an approximation, much as Newtonian physics is just an approximation of Relativistic physics at slow speeds or Quantum Mechanics at large scales.  The recent quantization noise in the GEO600 Gravity Wave Detector is a case in point.  Because it is the most sensitive instrument of its kind, it has reached a resolution limitation that may indicate the granularity of the universe.  With MAGIC, a similar situation exists.  Because it is highly sensitive, it can detect signals whose origin are so far away that they allow for propagation deviations to occur over such a vast region of space.  The 4 minute anomaly that MAGIC observed occurs over 500 million light years.  That means that it is detecting a deviation of 1 part in about 65000000000000 (65 trillion), which apparently is enough to break known laws of physics.

I'm interested in this because the underlying reason for this may very well be the quantization of space.  If so, this and the GEO600 experiments are the first to detect it.  And, for anyone who hasn't read "The Universe - Solved!" or meandered through this website, I ask the question:

Why might reality be quantized and not continuous?

It takes an infinite amount of resources to create a continuous reality, but a finite amount to create a quantized reality.  By resources, I refer to bits, the information that it takes to model reality.  In order to program a virtual reality, there must be quantization.  It is impossible to develop a program with unlimited resolution.  So the very fact that our reality is quantized may be considered strong evidence that reality is programmed.

What other reason could there be?   

   

Currently rated 5.0 by 2 people

  • Currently 5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Categories: Cosmology | Physics | Programmed Reality | Quantum Mechanics | Science

31 Comments
Actions: E-Mail | Digg StumbleUpon Slashdot Facebook Del.icio.us | Permalink | Comment RSSRSS comment feed

Related posts

Comments

August 18. 2009 20:51

STENDEC

Once again, a very interesting article.
Could there be another explanation for these experimental differences, with 'reality' itself not having enough 'bits' of 'computational matter' to accomodate every infinite scenario? Might these differences not be because of programmed reality, but because the structure of the universe itself is not 'large' enough to handle the 'processing' of relaity.

STENDEC

August 23. 2009 02:20

thearchitect

Good question, but I think they are one and the same. If we accept that the universe has structure that is based on "information" and that information has limited resolution, doesn't that sound programmed? Why else limit resolution?

thearchitect

August 28. 2009 08:03

justin

Interesting topic that once again turns the standard model on its head. One statement you make "It is impossible to develop a program with unlimited resolution" makes me think of something I have dealt with in programming. Ofttimes people make the analogy to bitmap images when speaking of the concept of zooming in onto the levels of reality. Finally they say something along the lines that much like pixels in a bitmap image, once getting down to the Plank length of observation we see reality quantized. Obviously nobody has actually seen this so I pose a different explanation.

What if only our means of observation are quantized and that reality, when "observed" (making reference to some writings about we create reality) really act more like a vector image where infinite resolution is capable based on the fact that information can be approximated for states smaller that exist between observable quantized states. I think this would fit the paradigm of a programmed reality as it parallels modern day graphics processing.

One other silly question since I am reading the history of Pi. If we are to propose that reality is truly quantized (speaking spacially) then one could assume that maybe Pi is finite. Maybe the ratio's constituents are flawed since we observe them at such a high level.

Looking back on what I just read, my question makes sense to me but did I can't believe I just wrote that. Anyway it might sound like a looping question but just something I wanted to throw out there.

justin

September 15. 2009 03:51

thearchitect

Hey STENDEC,

Great to see your comment on my blog! Sorry it has taken so long to get back to you.
I really like your point of view on this. Because the froth is technically a little different than quantization. And yes, if the structure of reality is indeed digital, that doesn't prove Programmed Reality, but it sure lends support to it.

Not sure if that really addressed your question, so feel free to elaborate more!

thearchitect

September 15. 2009 04:03

thearchitect

Hey Justin,

Great to see your comment on the blog as well!

As I understand QM, the discrete nature of reality is theoretical and not an artifact of how you observe, although admittedly no one has really been able to prove or disprove that idea. I think your vector graphics analogy is spot on. I think it makes total sense that the deeper we peer into reality, the more the "programmers" have to expand those vectors, right? See www.theuniversesolved.com/.../...any-Stranger.aspx for more about that.

Re Pi, I always liked the speculation at the end of Carl Sagan's book, "Contact", that if you take Pi out to enough places, perhaps there is a message (like a circle) that indicates its design. I think they left that part out of the movie.

thearchitect

October 5. 2009 14:14

SAL

Fractils are holligraphic in nature so it only seems natural for nature to reflect it's own holligrapic image out into the observable world.
If you believe in the possibilty of multiple dimentions,it could very well be that multiple dimentions work in a way that is similar to fractils in that they are holligraphic images of the whole of creation and when seen at a particular level is invisable to the viewer just as looking at what we consider to be a solid objects that in another reality or dimention if you will don't appear solid at all.

SAL

October 5. 2009 14:36

SAL

I've read the the book "Stalking the wild pendulum"

It talks about the nature of reality and consciousness of all of creation at sevseral levels
Mineral,plant,animal,and man all have varying levels of consciousness all of which seem to play a role in what can be seen as the evolution of the universe.Water has been shown to have a memory or consciousness on some level as well.A japaneese scientist has proven that a few years ago.

SAL

 

interactivity