[Ifroham4]

I have enjoyed following KJW's posts on the Many-Worlds Theory and would like to supply a thread examining it further through the reference of another theory, for any who would like to contribute a thought.

Panspermia seems to have a quantum facility built in when considering subjects such as common origins and entanglement. If one molecule develops a replicating mechanism, why should this not be an instantly reflected potential in any other potentially similar molecule in a similar environment anywhere else in the Cosmos? There are many limits to our ability to force matter to the path of our wishes, but the limits of our knowledge certainly don't impose any restrictions on the elemental forces of the Universe.

[S.T.D.]

Panspermia seems to have a quantum facility built in when considering subjects such as common origins and entanglement. If one molecule develops a replicating mechanism, why should this not be an instantly reflected potential in any other potentially similar molecule in a similar environment anywhere else in the Cosmos?

If the weight of the data suggests that all phenomena resulted from a single common incident with mechanisms that provide common boundaries to the behaviors and potentials of the radio elements, then it seems incomprehensible that Panspermia would not be a foregone conclusion to a BB scenario, if you are to admit that you have both studied the various related subjects and are reading this reference.

The most basic element of the physical universe is the photon. Every energetic action, even the simplest shifting of sands creates a result that can be measured somehow in photons. Once a photon has been created, it can only be absorbed or refracted. Whichever way you look at it, every action that has ever occurred resonates and resounds throughout the ages of the universe in the photon resonances that each created.

What are the limitations of photons? Are the only photons travelling around out there the ones we can detect? Or are the attributes we assign to the ones we know all they are capable of? The phase twisting that can be applied to photons in electronic communication today is fairly mind boggling on it's own. What the energy of the Sun might promote on the surface of this planet in the area of naturally induced 'photon forms', I'm not qualified to speculate on, but can obviously only imagine.

Are these idle questions, or is there an ultimate aim to theories like Many-Worlds, Panspermia and BB/GR? One might ask the Anternet, or one might suppose that we all belong to an Anternet that is present in our intuition, if we know how to listen to it.

[HedgeYourBets]

I'm having difficulty imagining any connection between Panspermia and the "Many Worlds interpretation".
I do find Panspermia though a logical and probable way of seeding lifeless planets
What that has to do with "Sum over Histories" though, I can't imagine. [gives myself an uppercut]



>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not qualified to speculate on, but can obviously only imagine.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


All of science its discoveries and new innovations started of with Imagining.
Just remember what the great man said.

[Beerinkol]

I'm having difficulty imagining any connection between Panspermia and the "Many Worlds interpretation".
I do find Panspermia though a logical and probable way of seeding lifeless planets
What that has to do with "Sum over Histories" though, I can't imagine. [gives myself an uppercut]

As I am not as familiar with the ins and outs of Many-Worlds as KJW, I also am seeking a way to compare the two theories. There is a connection I am driving at here, but I have yet to clearly articulate it.

[Raj_Copi_Jin]

As I am not as familiar with the ins and outs of Many-Worlds as KJW, I also am seeking a way to compare the two theories. There is a connection I am driving at here, but I have yet to clearly articulate it.

OK matey, keep it up.

[MannoFr]

THE EXPANDING PRESENT AND THE RECESSIVE FUTURE

So what is time and separation and how is panspermia suggested in the Many Worlds Interpretation? To begin with, David Cooper referred to a block universe in his discussion with KJW. While a block universe might be an incongruous method of analysing space, it has advantages when assessing time and the properties one would assign to it. If one views the universe as a single block of time, one can assign time characteristics to energetic phenomena. What is an action of time? Viewing the universe as a block, I might have to throw away the notion of time being able to run in either direction. The first reason would be that once a 'direction'(term used very broadly) of time is established by matter coming into existence, quantum de-coherence ensures that no other direction is available. The second reason is due to the manner in which space interacts with time.

Physics tends to view the universe as a block present. Apart from being the chromatic causative sequence of events, the past, once spent, is considered left behind. The future is viewed as eternally 'non-apparent', that is, the future is considered essentially a construct of the human mind to explain where everything is going. Are either of these assumptions right? What is a product of the past that is not a temporal energetic state? Possibly, momentum. Not any particular individual momentum, but the global momentum of the universe. It may turn out that the expansion of space is itself an expression of momentum. Potential is a fundamental aspect of any particle and the spending of a particles potential is in itself an excursion from the particles progress forward in time. In a chemical reaction, can a particle that is dumping energy be said to be moving forward in time? My logic would point out that the particle is using stored energy to return to an earlier state of existence. In fact, the only energetic particle phenomena I would assign a forward motion through time to would be nuclear fusion, that is, aside from bio-genetic action.

THE IMPORTANCE AND LOCATION OF THE OBSERVER

And what of the non-existent future? Is there a place that the universe would prefer to be rather than wallowing in the past? Might seem like a funny question, but ask yourself what governs quantum de-coherence. Which phenomena exacts the result of any measurement? The answer is, The Observer. Quantum de-coherence is entirely inconsequential without an observer to apply it's boundaries. The observer is the preferred frame of reference. In effect, every sentient being is the future, as without the observer to ensure a progressive present, matter wallows in it's own potential.

So, with a past that can only provide momentum that may or may not be applied to accessing a further future and a future that self determines, one is left with an accelerating block present. This suggests that biogenesis on Earth did not happen in a distant past, but occurred within a momentum boundary that may not recognise the present as separate from then. If now is no different to then, how is any other separation physical or energetic, relevant to genesis?

[HedgeYourBets]

the future is considered essentially a construct of the human mind to explain where everything is going. Are either of these assumptions right?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Doesn't time dilation and the famous "twin paradox" experiment invalidate that sort of thinking?
That to me shows that the "future" from one twin's perspective exists, while at the same time it shows that the past is still in existence from the other twin's perspective.
So I would say the assumptions are wrong.

[LottiFurmann]

It may turn out that the expansion of space is itself an expression of momentum.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I see the expansion of the Universe as an expression of time and the direction in which it is pointing...the future.


Sorry I am unable to help with your original question thus...
" The reflection of Panspermia in the Many-Worlds-Interpretation"
I just cannot for the life of me, see a connection.
"

[NeroASERCH]

It may turn out that the expansion of space is itself an expression of momentum.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I see the expansion of the Universe as an expression of time and the direction in which it is pointing...the future.


Sorry I am unable to help with your original question thus...
" The reflection of Panspermia in the Many-Worlds-Interpretation"
I just cannot for the life of me, see a connection.
"

Is there something that connects expansion to having a direction in time for you to discount any other cause?

I will review my text and attempt a clearer explanation of what I am proposing in terms of a Many Worlds Panspermia mechanism.

[brraverishhh]

I will review my text and attempt a clearer explanation of what I am proposing in terms of a Many Worlds Panspermia mechanism.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Maybe I have a mental block??
Anyway, I'll leave it up to you and hope for comment from KJW or Copernicus or molly

[Big A]

I will review my text and attempt a clearer explanation of what I am proposing in terms of a Many Worlds Panspermia mechanism.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Maybe I have a mental block??
Anyway, I'll leave it up to you and hope for comment from KJW or Copernicus or molly

I will provide a summary of the proposal before the day is out. It's sunny here so I'm in no particular rush I'm afraid.

[Raj_Copi_Jin]

I have enjoyed following KJW's posts on the Many-Worlds Theory and would like to supply a thread examining it further through the reference of another theory, for any who would like to contribute a thought.

Panspermia seems to have a quantum facility built in when considering subjects such as common origins and entanglement. If one molecule develops a replicating mechanism, why should this not be an instantly reflected potential in any other potentially similar molecule in a similar environment anywhere else in the Cosmos? There are many limits to our ability to force matter to the path of our wishes, but the limits of our knowledge certainly don't impose any restrictions on the elemental forces of the Universe.

I suppose it does but I haven't fully absorbed the multi-verse theory yet. I would assume the mere fact that there are organic molecules in this universe which are 'injected with life' would mean that from a quantum superposition viewpoint, the multiverse must be teeming with life.

That however doesn't sole the problem of abiogenesis. It had to start somewhere.... That I believe is at the core of the conundrum. Panspermia is a logical extension but still doesn't get to the heart of the question. :-))

[Slonopotam845]

If one molecule develops a replicating mechanism, why should this not be an instantly reflected potential in any other potentially similar molecule in a similar environment anywhere else in the Cosmos? because they weren't entangled in the first place? but they both would have had this mechanism before entanglement. you don't just get some new property. well at least i don't think it works like that.

[Big A]

I suppose it does but I haven't fully absorbed the multi-verse theory yet. I would assume the mere fact that there are organic molecules in this universe which are 'injected with life' would mean that from a quantum superposition viewpoint, the multiverse must be teeming with life.

That however doesn't sole the problem of abiogenesis. It had to start somewhere.... That I believe is at the core of the conundrum. Panspermia is a logical extension but still doesn't get to the heart of the question. :-))

I will be sure to address this point as significantly as I am able when I summarise the article later. thanks for the point.

[brraverishhh]

because they weren't entangled in the first place? but they both would have had this mechanism before entanglement. you don't just get some new property. well at least i don't think it works like that.

I thought decoherence or wave function collapse was a symptom of measurement in our classical universe and that in the Many Worlds Interpretation an 'entangled' superposition persists. Need an enlightened one to help me out on this? :-))

[PhillipHer]

I thought decoherence or wave function collapse was a symptom of measurement in our classical universe and that in the Many Worlds Interpretation an 'entangled' superposition persists. Need an enlightened one to help me out on this? :-))

This from wiki

Decoherence does not generate actual wave function collapse. It only provides an explanation for the appearance of the wavefunction collapse, as the quantum nature of the system "leaks" into the environment. That is, components of the wavefunction are decoupled from a coherent system, and acquire phases from their immediate surroundings. A total superposition of the global or universal wavefunction still exists (and remains coherent at the global level), but its ultimate fate remains an interpretational issue. Specifically, decoherence does not attempt to explain the measurement problem. Rather, decoherence provides an explanation for the transition of the system to a mixture of states that seem to correspond to those states observers perceive. Moreover, our observation tells us that this mixture looks like a proper quantum ensemble in a measurement situation, as we observe that measurements lead to the "realization" of precisely one state in the "ensemble".

[MannoFr]

because they weren't entangled in the first place? but they both would have had this mechanism before entanglement. you don't just get some new property. well at least i don't think it works like that.

entirely fair point. One I would like to make is that the first two posts were more about marking where I was mentally than providing the greater substance being addressed. Specifically I would withdraw the term 'incomprehensible' as applied. I may have been tired and melodramatic at that point.

[S.T.D.]

Would it be permissable to speculate that for any physical change to occur, a wave function collapse might be necessary, but the moment of collapse might not have to be present during the moment of change?

[Lt_Apple]

Would it be permissable to speculate that for any physical change to occur, a wave function collapse might be necessary, but the moment of collapse might not have to be present during the moment of change?

This is one for KJW Pospoc. I couldn't do justice to it. An interaction...or event.... 'I think' causes wave function collapse in this universe but I will leave it to the Master *bows, puts on slippers and leaves temple* :-))

[Beerinkol]

An interaction...or event.... 'I think' causes wave function collapse in this universe

Actually I retract this Postpoc, it is just plain wrong. It is the measurement taken or alternatively the environment which I believe is thought to cause the collapse but I will shuddup now :-))