Oh No wrote:
Thus spake Kent Paul Dolan

Oh No wrote:

No. Remember this is a prediction of a model
in which the standard mystique of the energy
of the vacuum does not hold.

Of course, that would also be a mystique in which
transisters failed to operate, since both fall
directly and in the same way out of Hiesenberg's
uncertainty principle, so perhaps you should find
a different mystique, the one you have being
already falsified.

xanthian.

[Mod. note: please concentrate on the
astrophysics: I'm sure there is some other
newsgroup where you can argue about transistors
-- mjh]

Physics is physics; if the math that makes
transistors work makes space seethe with energy of
the vacuum, then transistors operating as they do is
evidence that space seethes. The two subjects are
not in the least divorced. Much of what we know about
astronomy was discovered here on earth in the realm
of condensed matter.

[Mod. note: you appear to be under the impression that I'm talking
about what is physics and what isn't: I'm actually talking about the
charter of this newsgroup, which requires clear relevance to the
sub-discipline of astrophysics -- mjh]

I am not in the slightest bit interested in
arguing about transistors!

I've noticed in the past, online and in email, how
prompt you are to reject any evidence that rebuts
your theories. This is just another case in point.

There is absolutely no analogy between solid state
physics, in which qft may be correctly applied as
an approximation and works extremely well, and the
vast reaches of empty space between the stars
which we study in astrophysics.

Well, you are perfectly free to argue by special
pleading that physics works differently where we
cannot do direct local measurements than it does
where we can do direct local measurements, but the
scientific community is quite free to choose to
ignore arguments by special pleading, and routinely
does so.

A set of laws of physics which have only local
coverage isn't of much use studying a universe the
size of the one we inhabit, and once you grant that
the laws of physics can change from locale to
locale, you have abosolutely no way to pretend to
limit physics over the vast universe to having only
two sets of laws, or only three, or only any finite
number, and instead are left to entertain the
likelihood that nothing we know about anywhere,
including here, is true anywhere else.

Your version of reality would require for example,
because the laws governing transisters _do_ hold
sway, for sure, where solid matter exists, that
every passing dust speck in the reaches of empty
space would carry its own separate set of laws of
physics with it through the passive vacuum where a
quite different set of laws of physics pertained.

Were your version of reality correct, space would
_twinkle_ so.

Do you have any evidence that this is the case?

xanthian.