Oh No...the EU are going to LOVE this!!

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by avandonk

Without the underlying base of chance there would be no US. It would be a totally deterministic Universe without life and boring.

My niece is doing her PhD in quantum computing. She has a MsC in Astrophysics. She is often surprised that an old bloke like me is up with the latest 'magic'.

We used to stand on the shore of an infinite sea. We are now at about knee height. We have a lot to learn before we can swim in this ocean.

Bert

Only problem, Bert, is if we walk out till we're upto our waist or neck in water, will we be able to swim??!!.

I don't know if a deterministic Universe would be without life, necessarily, but it would certainly be awfully boring.

Although, the classicists amongst us would be in their element

[avandonk]

Thanks for the reference Carl.

Many years ago (1980) I postulated that the brain was a quantum device that somehow worked at room temperature.

My only evidence was the fact a solution to many of my scientific problems came from nowhere. Some people call this inspiration. I call it spooky.

Since then it has been shown that photosythesis depends on quantum effects for it's efficiency. All of life on our planet relies on this solar energy conservation for it's existence.

Bert

[renormalised (Carl)]

It wouldn't surprise me if it was.....the microtubules in the neuronal axons within the brain most likely record and pass along information via quantum processes, probably entanglement, superposition and tunneling. They've hardly touched the physiology of the tubules simply because they're hard to study. Not only that, most physiologists and biologist understand jack about QM.

[avandonk]

Originally Posted by renormalised

It wouldn't surprise me if it was.....the microtubules in the neuronal axons within the brain most likely record and pass along information via quantum processes, probably entanglement, superposition and tunneling. They've hardly touched the physiology of the tubules simply because they're hard to study. Not only that, most physiologists and biologist understand jack about QM.

Carl I worked in a biological division of CSIRO. I picked up enough biology in thirty years to agree with your premise. Microtubules are in all living things and are self assembling.
The biologists just never got what we trying to tell them.

We also have this problem that all our desires are just molecular in origin and our higher thought processes rely on fleeting electrical impulses and neurotransmitters that all seem to be random?

I am having a molecular driven drink right now!

Bert

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by CraigS

I find this issue, which arises very frequently around the various forums, to be intriguing … and perplexing at the same time.

My view of the issue of where energy resides in a galactic jet, or in a wire carrying current, resembles the issue of whether light is a particle or a wave. Any, and all is correct because it is an inter-related, multi-variable definition which characterises the behaviours.

The issue seems to be more of a concern for those who seek a mechanical explanation for how the EMF (Electromotive Force) originates and moves from one form to another. Perhaps this would also be of interest to say Alex (Push Grav) as well ?

Thinking through the issue more, leaves me towards querying the reality of a field. From what I've seen, folk who seek a mechanical explanation seem to have great difficulty in accepting a field as real, (any field .. gravitational or EM). If the effect of a given field is capable of being measured, and if it has a direct measurable influence over other measurable matter, then it is real in my book.

Which comes first … the electric field, or the current or … the gravitational field, or the mass .. to me, is kind of like a chicken or egg thing.

Have I read the issue correctly do you think ?

Comments welcome.

Cheers

I can see what you're trying to get at, is it the instigation of the current (the moving electrons) or the field they produce (Poynting Flux) which carries the energy along the conductor (in this case, the jets from the BH). It probably is a chicken and egg case in that you cannot have one without the other, but the manner in which the energy is dispersed along the conductor is another matter entirely. It would appear that because of the resistance in the "conductor", the electrons only move at a crawl so they cannot deliver the energy in their movement to the other end of the conductor quick enough. So the energy has to be transported in some other form...that being the Poynting flux, which is essentially the EMF. Since EMF in a vacuum = c, the energy would travel at that velocity to the other end of the jet. The electrons would catchup later on.

[CraigS]

Here's another one … no-one really understands what causes static electricity …
What You Learned About Static Electricity Is Wrong

Different substances have a tendency to pick up either positive or negative charges, we’re often told, and the process doesn’t transfer a lot of charge, but it’s enough to cause a balloon to stick to the ceiling, or to give someone a shock on a cold, dry day.

Nearly all of that is wrong, according to a paper published in today’s issue of Science. Charges can be transferred between identical materials, all materials behave roughly the same, the charges are the product of chemical reactions, and each surface becomes a patchwork of positive and negative charges, which reach levels a thousand times higher than the surfaces’ average charge.
…
the authors found that this process doesn’t seem to occur by transferring electrons between neighboring areas of different charge—instead of blurring into the surroundings, peaks and valleys of charge remain distinct, but slowly decrease in size.
…
So, what causes these charges to build up? It’s not, apparently, the transfer of electrons between the surfaces. Detailed spectroscopy of one of the polymers (PDMS) suggests that chemical reactions may be involved, as many oxidized derivatives of the polymer were detected. In addition, there is evidence that some material is transferred from one surface to another.

More of the basics go out the window !

Cheers

[avandonk]

Craig I told you quite some time ago ALL science is counterintuitive!

Bert

[CraigS]

Originally Posted by renormalised

I can see what you're trying to get at, is it the instigation of the current (the moving electrons) or the field they produce (Poynting Flux) which carries the energy along the conductor (in this case, the jets from the BH). It probably is a chicken and egg case in that you cannot have one without the other, but the manner in which the energy is dispersed along the conductor is another matter entirely. It would appear that because of the resistance in the "conductor", the electrons only move at a crawl so they cannot deliver the energy in their movement to the other end or the conductor quick enough. So the energy has to be transported in some other form...that being the Poynting flux, which is essentially the EMF. Since EMF in a vacuum = c, the energy would travel at that velocity to the other end of the jet. The electrons would catchup later on.

Yep … the old tap-delivering-water-to-one end-of-the-pipe analogy, (ie: battery connecting two ends of a wire, battery providing the impetus to get electrons moving), … would now seem passe.

Interesting ..

Cheers

[CraigS]

Originally Posted by avandonk

Craig I told you quite some time ago ALL science is counterintuitive!

Bert

Sure, Bert … no arguments there !

Others perusing these links may find some of this surprising, though.

Cheers

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by avandonk

Carl I worked in a biological division of CSIRO. I picked up enough biology in thirty years to agree with your premise. Microtubules are in all living things and are self assembling.
The biologists just never got what we trying to tell them.

We also have this problem that all our desires are just molecular in origin and our higher thought processes rely on fleeting electrical impulses and neurotransmitters that all seem to be random?

I am having a molecular driven drink right now!

Bert

The microtubules, or to be more precise, the compartments making up the microtubules may act like the p-n junctions in solid state transistors in silicon chips, acting as quantum switches where the information is encoded by the spin flip of the electrons within the tubules. The tubules themselves would then act like the paths between the transistors/switches moving information about. A neuron would then, in essence, be much like a cpu in a computer.

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by CraigS

Here's another one … no-one really understands what causes static electricity …
What You Learned About Static Electricity Is Wrong



More of the basics go out the window !

Cheers

That would suggest that a chemical bond occurs between the surfaces and that, in effect, the apparent transfer of charge is just either an ionic or covalent bonding and sharing of electrons between the surfaces. No permanent transfer of electrons is involved.

Also seems some of the surface is sloughed off onto the other, which may carry some charge with it. Meaning, in reality, it's a bit of a messy arrangement.