Comments on: Boltzmann's Anthropic Brain

By: Natalia Kiriushcheva

Natalia Kiriushcheva — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 19:18:00 +0000

http://gravityattraction.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/boltzmann-brain-discovery/

By: Exploding Aardvark » WHICH IS MORE KNOWING: GOD OR A ROCK?

Exploding Aardvark » WHICH IS MORE KNOWING: GOD OR A ROCK? — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:56:16 +0000

[...] Kinda sorta related, and ‘varked here for my own convenience: Boltzmann’s Anthropic Brain (Cosmic Variance, via Maciej) [...]

By: Arbitrary Chronological Signifiers | Cosmic Variance

Arbitrary Chronological Signifiers | Cosmic Variance — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 00:25:30 +0000

[...] Boltzmann’s Anthropic Brain [...]

By: Coast to Coast | Cosmic Variance

Coast to Coast | Cosmic Variance — Sat, 02 Dec 2006 02:38:12 +0000

[...] Boltzmann’s Anthropic Brain [...]

By: Paul Valletta

Paul Valletta — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:33:51 +0000

Time reversed scenario’s/equations, must take into considerations some fundamental processes?

What happens for a reversed Blackhole process, white-hole?, could not occur without DarkMatter becoming visible?..Darkmatter would actually have to be the radiative source of visible Matter.

Einstein field equations have an expression for Darkmatter to convert to Light Matter, entropy in a time-reversed universe would insist that particle collisions, become more feable and less energetic, producing less visible light from atomic interations, light would tend to be fading to grey!

The further one travels back along a “time-reversed” arrow, the more one becomes entangled into a “ONE-PARTICLE” quark soup ?

The initial state may be comprable to that of a Bose-Einstein-Condensate singularity ?..a “one-particle” fluctuation would really be an “all-particle” fluctuation!

By: Sean

Sean — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 19:22:38 +0000

Hugh, general relativity is definitely time-reversible, although specific solutions might not be. The time-reversed version of a black hole is a white hole, which is a perfectly good solution to Einstein’s equation. We don’t see white holes in the real world, but that’s precisely because of entropy considerations.

I think the same is true for quantum mechanics, but will readily admit that I don’t understand the details and might be wrong. Wavefunction collapse ala the Copenhagen interpretation is definitely not reversible, although evolution according to the Schrodinger equation definitely is. My suspicion is that a more complete understanding will be able to derive the apparent collapse of the wavefunction from ordinary Schrodinger evolution plus thermodynamic considerations, but I don’t think this is well understood right now.

By: Hugh Allen

Hugh Allen — Mon, 28 Aug 2006 18:07:04 +0000

The foregoing seems to assume that the laws of physics are time-reversible. It has always seemed to me that both quantum mechanics (at least in the Copenhagen interpretation) and general relativity are not. Wavefunction collapse can’t be time-reversible. And what about black holes? Matter can fall in but can’t escape? If GR were time-reversible then under suitable initial conditions matter could be ejected from a black hole (and I’m not talking about Hawking radiation).

(my personal opinion is that wavefunction collapse doesn’t occur and black holes don’t exist, but I only studied physics up to 2nd year of university, so please correct any misunderstandings I’ve made)

By: Plato

Plato — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 12:13:43 +0000

D-branes represent a key theoretical tool in the understanding of strongly coupled superstring theory and M-theory. They have led to many striking discoveries, including the precise microphysics underlying the thermodynamic behaviour of certain black holes, and remarkable holographic dualities between large-N gauge theories and gravity.

By: Rapped on the Head by Creationists | Cosmic Variance

Rapped on the Head by Creationists | Cosmic Variance — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 15:28:44 +0000

[...] Right now, trying to understand hierarchies in particle physics and the arrow of time has led people to seriously contemplate a vast multiverse beyond what we can see, perhaps populated by regions occupying different phases in the string theory landscape. Wildly speculative, of course, but that’s to be expected of, you know, speculations. Ideas are always speculative when they are new and untested; either they will ultimately be tested one way or another, or they’ll fade into obscurity, as I made perfectly clear. The ultimate goal is undoubtedly ambitious: to construct a theory that has definite consequences for the structure of the multiverse, such that this structure provides an explanation for how the observed features of our local domain can arise naturally, and that the same theory makes predictions that can be directly tested through laboratory experiments and astrophysical observations. To claim success in this programme, we will need to extend our theoretical understanding of cosmology and quantum gravity considerably, both to make testable predictions and to verify that some sort of multiverse picture really is a necessary consequence of these ideas. Only further investigation will allow us to tell whether such a programme represents laudable aspiration or misguided hubris. [...]

By: Plato

Plato — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 12:52:20 +0000

okay,

If you allow “monte carlo” methods, then I suggest the valuation of “Boltzman’s brain” held a time of “illumination” and supersymmetriclaly explained the universe in expression?

“Reimann hypothesis” has to have some (phenom)validation process?

So ya, here is one way to occupy your mind while explaining supersymmetry?