# Stuff and Things > HISTORY, veterans & science >  proof of connection between probability and time

## nonsqtr

Well, here it is folks. Boom.

https://phys.org/news/2020-10-coin-f...tum-world.html

This is a somewhat complicated experiment.

But it shows quite clearly, an empirical relationship between quantum probability and time - or more specifically in this case, velocity.

The mechanism is quite clever, something akin to a "probabilistic time crystal".

This experiment supports what I've been trying to bring to your attention: selection from a set requires work.

But it also points to something else: a self-similarity (fractal) structure in the fabric of time.

And I'm pretty sure the only way to get there is with stochastic optimization.

My view to this experiment is, by altering the velocity you have shifted the underlying probability of a process so tiny that it manifests as "Gaussian" at the quantum level.

----------

donttread (11-01-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

Supporting evidence:

https://phys.org/news/2019-12-synthe...d-quantum.html

https://phys.org/news/2020-05-nice-day-quantum.html

https://phys.org/news/2020-07-achill...anglement.html

----------


## OldSchool

> Well, here it is folks. Boom.
> 
> https://phys.org/news/2020-10-coin-f...tum-world.html
> 
> This is a somewhat complicated experiment.
> 
> But it shows quite clearly, an empirical relationship between quantum probability and time - or more specifically in this case, velocity.
> 
> The mechanism is quite clever, something akin to a "probabilistic time crystal".
> ...


From the link:


Thanks, it makes sense now

----------


## nonsqtr

If you study this a little bit you'll see the connection with everything I've been talking about in this subforum for the last 6 months.

Here are the fundamentals of a "quantum random walk".

Quantum walk - Wikipedia

These are not "exactly" like classical random walks, although there are similarities. In a classical random walk the change in position is modeled with a "stochastic generator", which is a process that can be described with a differential equation.

In a quantum walk, the change in position happens because of the decoherence of a spin state in a quantum superposition.

What makes a quantum walk useful, is it can be controlled with the spin states. For example, if there are only two states (spin up and spin down) then the walk is binary and the particle moves either left or right. This property also suggests a natural affinity with quantum computing, and in a topological computer it can speed up the solutions by orders of magnitude.

So, look at what they're doing to model the random walk. It's either discrete space, or discrete time. What they call a "continuous time" random walk is actually a discrete-space model.

So, the only way they could get this to work is to embed a continuous "dimension" into a discrete set.

Which is exactly what I've been talking about for the last six months, and why I showed y'all Cantor dusts and stuff like that.

Here it is. Here is the nexus between the discrete and the continuous, and it's associated with a relationship between probability and velocity.

----------


## East of the Beast

Well, it's probably time for me to go.

----------


## nonsqtr

> Well, it's probably time for me to go.


You're gonna miss all the fun!

"Say it in one sentence": the probability changes depending on how fast you flip the coin! !!! !!!!!

Think about it. Curvature of spacetime around massive objects? Piece o' cake. And you don't need 12 dimensions either.

----------


## East of the Beast

Kinda like the last guy who drove off the bridge before it collapsed......"If I would have stopped for a pack of smokes before I went home,I would have been on that bridge!"......dum,dum,dum.(dramatic music)

----------


## nonsqtr

> Well, it's probably time for me to go.


This is great. You (generic) have to think in very simple terms. 

Think about flipping a coin. What happens when you flip a coin? What do the referees do, in the football games? They toss the coin "up" in the air, right? And, the coin "spins", and then it lands. Anyone looking at it feels more comfortable that it's "completely random" if the coin goes higher, stays up in the air longer, and spins more. Right?

If the referee simply tossed the coin on the ground, it doesn't "spin", and anyone looking at it would say the outcome is "not very random", and might even accuse the referee of cheating.

You see where I'm going with this... spin... time in the air ("interval")... determines the perceived randomness...

----------


## East of the Beast

> This is great. You (generic) have to think in very simple terms. 
> 
> Think about flipping a coin. What happens when you flip a coin? What do the referees do, in the football games? They toss the coin "up" in the air, right? And, the coin "spins", and then it lands. Anyone looking at it feels more comfortable that it's "completely random" if the coin goes higher, stays up in the air longer, and spins more. Right?
> 
> If the referee simply tossed the coin on the ground, it doesn't "spin", and anyone looking at it would say the outcome is "not very random", and might even accuse the referee of cheating.
> 
> You see where I'm going with this... spin... time in the air ("interval")... determines the perceived randomness...


the more time spent in the air spinning exponentially increases the sense of randomness.....I get it

----------


## nonsqtr

If you "forced" the referee to flip the coin faster than he actually could... he would either have to stop the coin flip in mid-flight, or take shortcuts ("flip less") to minimize the time in the air. Either way intuitively results in a "less random" outcome, according to the observer who's watching the poor referee trying to keep up with the coin flip schedule

----------


## East of the Beast

That is basically the theory behind the creation of our existence....time is infinite.So, at some point in infinity it all came together in flawless perfection.Time is a human construct.

----------


## nonsqtr

So then, if you imagine all this happening at the speed of light, where time is dilated... the observer sees the moving clock as ticking slower, so at speed there is plenty of time to flip the coin but as the interval is reduced there is less time and therefore the probabilities start changing.

So now the concept that "flipping a coin takes time" also has a quantum physical meaning. The statement is basically the dual of "selecting from a set requires work".

----------


## East of the Beast

> So then, if you imagine all this happening at the speed of light, where time is dilated... the observer sees the moving clock as ticking slower, so at speed there is plenty of time to flip the coin but as the interval is reduced there is less time and therefore the probabilities start changing.
> 
> So now the concept that "flipping a coin takes time" also has a quantum physical meaning. The statement is basically the dual of "selecting from a set requires work".


Let me apply this in a sports context and tell me if I'm getting it.

A professional baseball player ,specifically an elite hitter , is said to have the ability to read the stitches on a 90 mph fastball.His perception of the ball is slowed and in turn his reaction to it seems much faster than the normal person...so is it a function of the brain?

----------


## nonsqtr

> That is basically the theory behind the creation of our existence....time is infinite.So, at some point in infinity it all came together in flawless perfection.Time is a human construct.


Well, what this tells me is there is a "process" underlying what we perceive as time.

Call it... a "coin flip process". In physics they'd call it an operator.

The real question is, can we quantify the shift, can we plot a graph of probability vs time?

In the coin flip analogy, the coin exists in a "superposition" as long as it's in the air. But we all know that isn't "really" true - what's really happening is the coin is spinning so fast we can't tell - but other than that it's a classical system, the coin spins according to gravity and the momentum imparted to it when it was flipped. 

But when the coin hits the ground and the superposition decoheres, the work done by the ground on the coin goes into the selection of one of the two possible outcomes from the set of all possible outcomes defined by the superposition.

----------


## donttread

> Well, here it is folks. Boom.
> 
> https://phys.org/news/2020-10-coin-f...tum-world.html
> 
> This is a somewhat complicated experiment.
> 
> But it shows quite clearly, an empirical relationship between quantum probability and time - or more specifically in this case, velocity.
> 
> The mechanism is quite clever, something akin to a "probabilistic time crystal".
> ...



This may or may not be related in any way but: I had heard a few years back that someone claimed to have moved a particle in time. Sorry, I know that's vague but that's how by memory works these days. 
Like so many news items with great potential I never herd anything further. Perhaps the experiment could not be confirmed

----------


## nonsqtr

> Let me apply this in a sports context and tell me if I'm getting it.
> 
> A professional baseball player ,specifically an elite hitter , is said to have the ability to read the stitches on a 90 mph fastball.His perception of the ball is slowed and in turn his reaction to it seems much faster than the normal person...so is it a function of the brain?


Well, have you ever experienced time slow down this way, and if so, were you able to accomplish anything more in the interval? Were you able to fit "more actions" into the tick of a clock because time had seemed to slow down?

----------


## Dan40

> If you study this a little bit you'll see the connection with everything I've been talking about in this subforum for the last 6 months.
> 
> Here are the fundamentals of a "quantum random walk".
> 
> Quantum walk - Wikipedia
> 
> These are not "exactly" like classical random walks, although there are similarities. In a classical random walk the change in position is modeled with a "stochastic generator", which is a process that can be described with a differential equation.
> 
> In a quantum walk, the change in position happens because of the decoherence of a spin state in a quantum superposition.
> ...


Wimpy excuse for being late.

----------

East of the Beast (11-02-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

> This may or may not be related in any way but: I had heard a few years back that someone claimed to have moved a particle in time. Sorry, I know that's vague but that's how by memory works these days. 
> Like so many news items with great potential I never herd anything further. Perhaps the experiment could not be confirmed


Well, there's kinda two versions of this ("at least", that I know of).

One version is where the particle actually does move backward in time. The physicists like Feynman say this is possible. It has to do with something called CPT symmetry, and I don't know whether this has been experimentally verified or to what level.

The other version is where the "information" moves backwards in time, without necessarily the same particle doing so. This version has been experimentally verified, it's a part of quantum entanglement and it's probably related to what they call "quantum teleportation" which is movement in space instead of time.

All of these things point to the concept that there is an "information space" somewhere, perhaps a dimension that we can't necessarily see, and that isn't ordinarily accessible through geometry until things get "really really small".

As far as I know, the initiation of entanglement requires juxtaposition in both space and time. Once that happens, the INFORMATION persists, even as the geometry changes radically. And, whatever this information space is, it's not limited by the speed of light. It's already been experimentally verified to be at least 10,000 times faster.

----------


## nonsqtr

> Wimpy excuse for being late.


Well, consider the concept of "on time".

Or, framed another way, "at the moment".

Relativity tells us that the "speed of time" changes depending on the reference frame.

But, when an entanglement collapses, it happens "at the moment" in ALL reference frames.

Let me see if I can explain the information aspect.

The "amount of uncertainty" in a random variable is called the Shannon entropy. In the classical case where a bit can be either 0 or 1 with equal probability, the Shannon entropy is 1 bit.

One classical bit obviously encodes 1 bit of information, but in the quantum case a qubit can theoretically encode an infinite amount of information, because the states can be in a superposition, 0 or 1 or anything in between. However because of the peculiarity of quantum "readout" only one bit can be accessed. According to Holevo's theorem the quantum analog of the Shannon entropy is called the Von Neumann entropy, and it is equal to the Shannon entropy only when the states are orthogonal in the state space, and otherwise it's less than the Shannon entropy. (A result that may seem counterintuitive at first, until you look at entanglement as a resource and realize that information consumes bandwidth).

In relativity, time is local, whereas in a quantum disentanglement it seems distinctly non-local.

----------


## nonsqtr

And, here's kinda where it goes:

http://adam.chlipala.net/theses/sherman_sm.pdf

"Embedding of continuous information into discrete spaces".

You could do this with a partitioning scheme but you lose a lot of information that way.

Instead, pay particular attention to what they're calling a "binary cover".

This is topology, so that's what "cover" means in this context.

This paper shows that "non-determinism" (ie entanglement) plays an essential role in the ability to actually accomplish this.

----------


## Fall River

"Proof of connection between probability and time"

Is there a practical application?  How would the average person use this to his benefit?

----------


## nonsqtr

> "Proof of connection between probability and time"
> 
> Is there a practical application?  How would the average person use this to his benefit?


No, this is probably one of those high energy collider things that only the Europeans can afford.

On the other hand, it would be nice if there was a topological quantum computing card you could plug into your PC.

This is more of a theoretical thing, it has consequences for string theory.

----------

Fall River (11-07-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

> "Proof of connection between probability and time"
> 
> Is there a practical application?  How would the average person use this to his benefit?


It actually raises many more questions than it answers.

But they're good questions, of the right kind.

All we have so far is an observation that the behavior doesn't match the theory.

First thing we need to find out if there's a quantitative realtionship, and it looks like there is but it needs to be documented. "Chirality" is not so far a physical observable, however "parity" is.

Then we need to find out if there's a geometric explanation. According to the standard model there shouldn't be, but we may find one anyway. Maybe we're dealing with a curvature of the universe thing, instead of a change in the generator.

Regarding string theory, if the string moves fast enough and in the right way(s), it's projections "could be" perceived as a Gaussian random distribution, according to the law of large numbers. So for example, if we had a way to freeze the string or perturb it in a known manner we could learn a lot from that.

----------

Fall River (11-07-2020)

----------


## Trinnity

I'm not real smart with quantum physics. I've taken a lot of physics courses, but not that branch. I'm asking if the _claim is that time is a physical component of the universe_ as opposed to being a concept?

----------


## nonsqtr

> I'm not real smart with quantum physics. I've taken a lot of physics courses, but not that branch. I'm asking if the _claim is that time is a physical component of the universe_ as opposed to being a concept?


Maybe both.

Look at it this way - Einstein showed us that distance is not really distance, there's something "underlying" the apparent length, which is the real length (or let's say, the length at rest in an inertial frame and etc).

And, this could be similar - time is not really time, there's something "underlying" our perceptions of time. For one thing, we have quantum decoherence which is at least 10,000 times faster than the speed of light. What is that? Is it a wormhole, or a geodesic in a hidden dimension, or ???

In my previous posts on brain mechanisms I raised the concept of dT/dt, and one way of looking at that is T is what's perceived and t is what's real. So if you're in a fast moving reference frame you could measure to an object "at rest" and compare. 

If you do this in normal relativistic physics you get the Lorentz invariances, which the quantum theory must obey. But the quantum theory "assumes" certain types of statistical distributions and this experiment pretty clearly indicates that those assumptions are wrong.

If you muck with the quantum distributions you're changing the very nature of spacetime. Einstein said the laws of physics have to be the same in any reference frame, but he didn't specify what those laws are.

If you have a string that's spinning at Planck rate that's 20 orders of magnitude faster than one photon whizzing by another, and it makes sense that "we" would interpret its behavior as random, simply because we can't discern intervals that small. If the spin frequency is 10^42 and we can only measure as fast as 10^23 then the law of large numbers says we always "see" a Gaussian distribution regardless of what happens underneath.

So for example, you could have a "really fast" string, whose spinning somehow starts being impacted (like, maybe it starts precessing or something) at high velocities.

----------

