How current science and cartoons view time

Meme with Wile E. Coyote found at Man vs Brain

***

Are space and time (aka spacetime) a continuum?  Einstein thought so, Petr Hořava, a physicist at the University of California, Berkeley, does not.  Quoting from the article, Splitting Time from Space, in Scientific American:

Physicists have struggled to marry quantum mechanics with gravity for decades. In contrast, the other forces of nature have obediently fallen into line. For instance, the electromagnetic force can be described quantum-mechanically by the motion of photons. Try and work out the gravitational force between two objects in terms of a quantum graviton, however, and you quickly run into trouble—the answer to every calculation is infinity. But now Petr Hořava, a physicist at the University of California, Berkeley, thinks he understands the problem. It’s all, he says, a matter of time.

More specifically, the problem is the way that time is tied up with space in Einstein’s theory of gravity: general relativity. Einstein famously overturned the Newtonian notion that time is absolute—steadily ticking away in the background. Instead he argued that time is another dimension, woven together with space to form a malleable fabric that is distorted by matter. The snag is that in quantum mechanics, time retains its Newtonian aloofness, providing the stage against which matter dances but never being affected by its presence. These two conceptions of time don’t gel.

Evidence for Hořava's theory is offered in this followup.

So why are we including gravity in a discussion of spacetime?  This article at Einstein Online explains Einstein's geometric gravity.

NASA has confirmed Einstein's theory by means of its Gravity Probe B. You can download the results of NASA's report cites at Physical Review Letters; click on the Download Accepted Manuscript link.

What do you think: is time a continuum or discrete?

-- Marge

Einstein' spooky action

This proven phenomenon, now known as quantum entanglement, was called "spooky action at a distance" by Einstein. He was very uncomfortable with the idea, as reported in the Nova video below (it's a little long but well worth the time):

***

***

Einstein and Niels Bohr were often on opposite sides of a given theory. Thankfully, they made their disputes public in the Bohr-Einstein debates.  Einstein's discomfort with quantum entanglement prompted him to publish a paper in collaboration with two other physicists, known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox.  In the paper they considered measurement of two entangled particles in light of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and concluded  that quantum mechanics was incomplete since, in its formalism, there was no space for hidden parameters.  As stated in the Wikipedia article:

According to EPR there were two possible explanations. Either there was some interaction between the particles, even though they were separated, or the information about the outcome of all possible measurements was already present in both particles.

Years later, physicist John Stewart Bell presented a paper that essentially drew a line in the sand between quantum mechanics and classical theory.  Bell's theorem states

No physical theory of local hidden variables can ever reproduce all of the predictions of quantum mechanics.

Current scientific activity studying quantum entanglement presents some interesting ideas and possible explanations, such as "Einstein's 'spooky action' common in large quantum systems, mathematicians find," "Imaging Quantum Entanglement," and "Quantum Experiment Shows How Time ‘Emerges’ from Entanglement." This last article was found at The Physics arXiv Blog, "An alternative view of the best new ideas in science."

In this video, theoretical physicist Michio Kaku answers Matthew's question, "Could quantum entanglement be used to transmit information instantaneously between interplanetary spaceships?" 

***

***

For some background in quantum mechanics, take a look at this excellent piece.

***

***

And for a simpler explanation of quantum entanglement, try this link to simple.wikipedia.org.

-- Marge

Coincidence?

Recently I've noticed the plots for TV shows using coincidence as a tool for plot resolution more often than in the past. While such devices seem contrived to me, as explained in this article at the blog TV Tropes, coincidences do happen.
***

“Coincidence is God's way of remaining anonymous.”
― Albert Einstein, The World as I See It

***
In fact, one of my favorite TV shows, Strange Luck," used coincidence as the basis of its storyline.  Here's a video of the first episode:
***

***
While researching this topic, I came across this article titled, "Lucky coincidence may have saved lives," published at Statesman.com in 2010.  Following up on the interesting statement in the article,

"Fire officials say the presence of the Travis County crews was particularly vital because several Austin fire engines in the area were already battling a blaze at the home of Andrew Joseph Stack III, accused of being the pilot."  [italics mine -- Marge],

I found an entry on Wikepedia that states the crash and house fire were deliberate.  However, the presence of the Travis County Hazardous Materials Team and its equipment appears to be coincidental. And thus we segue into synchronicity.
***

“We often dream about people from whom we receive a letter by the next post. I have ascertained on several occasions that at the moment when the dream occurred the letter was already lying in the post-office of the addressee.”
― C.G. Jung, Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle

***
The quotes on coincidence above were found at Goodreads. Oh, and by the way,  Cambridge University is collecting your coincidences.  Share them and read about those of others at Understanding Uncertainty.

 -- Marge