Quantum Physics for Dummies

Most of the time when my mind wanders, it finds its way to dead ends.  The random problems that my brain thinks up work themselves out when I realize that the answer was either so obvious or I decide that the problems weren't worth the time to solve.  But then there are the rarities where I ask myself a question that I can't answer and it just leads to more questions.  That's when, if I'm feeling ambitious enough, I start scouring the Net for the answers.

 

About a week ago, I started thinking about parallel universes.  I know, that's not really a light subject to just conjure up out of thin air.  I'm not sure how it came up, but I'm sure it was because of a TV show or something I had been watching.  Being a sci-fi geek, this happens quite often.  So here was the multi-tiered question that occured to me:  Has a parallel universe, if it exists, always existed or is it created because of some event?  If created by an event, does all history prior to that creation cease to exist for the parallel world, does it use the history of the universe from which it was spawned, or does a completely new history get assumed by the people living in it and recorded as if it had actually happened?

 

Right now you're probably thinking one of a couple of possible responses.  "Huh?"  "Are you on drugs?"  "This is completely stupid."  "That just blew my mind."  There probably are a few more I didn't account for, but to answer those:  no, I'm not on drugs and yes, it may be completely stupid, but then again, it may be mind-blowing,  In preparation for writing this, I did a Google search for "Albert Einstein parallel universe" and clicked on the first link I found that looked like it would have some interesting information.  http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/parallel-universe.htm was very short in length, but rich in information about theories concerning parallel universes.  My questions still haven't been answered, but at least it's a start.  Basically, Albert Einstein believed that alternate universes are altogether possible, but was never able to prove it.  Other scientists in the years following his death, like Hugh Everett III & Dr. Michio Kaku have picked up the torch to prove he wasn't off his rocker and some have gotten closer, but still no concrete proof.  Their individual theories like "Many-Worlds", "Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle", and "String Theory" sound impressive and that's because they are, but no one can confirm them.  That's why they're still theories.  But with every day that passes, we're getting closer to some confirmation.

From what I'm reading, some theories, like the Many-Worlds or Heisenberg Uncertaintly Principle,  hinge on some sort of event that actually creates the parallel universe, such as a scientist simply observing the state of a quantum object (whether in wave or particle form, wave vibration, etc...) or even by making the decision to not make a determination at all.  Such an event can cause the split of the universe to accomodate for all possible outcomes of the observation.  What a powerful thing to consider:  that even the THOUGHT of multiple outcomes could create those multiple outcomes somewhere.  If we'd ever find this to be true, the human mind should be considered the greatest object ever created.  Sort of makes you reconsider trying to discuss Schroedinger's cat (Google it).  Using this information to my question, my question still remains unanswered; we could still share history, there could be no history prior to the event for the alternate world, or they could create a history from shared thought-pooling once it is established.  If we follow the theory of Dr. Kaku, which is called String Theory, it's much easier to believe that the universes have their own histories different from each other.  His theory states that all objects in the universe, even on down to the smallest particles known currently as quarks, are made up of tinier building blocks that resemble rubber bands and what matter they create depends on these bands and how they vibrate.  This creation happens across eleven separate dimensions.  Because of how it's created, our universe is therefore separated by itself inside of a "bubble", which exists along side of the other parallel universes in their own "bubbles".  It's theorized that they can interact with each other by sharing gravity, but that would create an explosion similar to what some scientists believe happened at the Big Bang.  Probably not a good idea for this to happen.  BUT, this string theory would then, as I said, give credence to the idea that any alternate worlds would have a unique history, some being just slightly out-of-phase from each other, but definitely unique to that "bubble".

These theories are just the most prominent; we've barely scratched the surface.  Plenty of other scientists have their own ideas on if any of this is possible.  The truth could be a combination of a couple or all of them, it could be one singular idea, or another possibility is that none of these can actually occur.  Possibly by considering these in this blog, we've created some alternate realities of our own.  Maybe some day we'll know...or in another reality, we already know.  One thing I do know:  I'm not anywhere even CLOSE to answering my own questions.  But I think it's fun to keep trying! 

If I haven't driven you nuts by this discussion, I invite you to join in.  Any of your own theories?  Questions that you think I or someone else that reads this may be able to answer?  Post them here!

Woohoo! for New "Who"

This weekend, unless you're not involved in social media at all (in which case, how are you seeing this?) or don't watch much TV, it was announced that veteran Scottish actor Peter Capaldi will be taking over the role of the Doctor in the long-running British sci-fi TV show "Doctor Who".  I join the numerous positive comments on this choice and congratulate Mr. Capaldi on landing the job.  To be honest, I've only ever seen him in two other roles before this was announced.  Funny enough, one of those was as the patriarch of a Pompeiian family in a previous season's episode of "Doctor Who" (before you consider that strange, check out Colin Baker, who played a Gallifreyan guard during the 5th Doctor's tenure, then went on to be the 6th Doctor).  The other was in the "Doctor Who" spinoff, "Torchwood", during their "Children of Earth" series of episodes.  His role was a very tortured, dark role, but well played.  I look forward to exploring his other works that have been mentioned online since then (especially one called "Local Hero", which looks great).

Besides being a choice of a great actor, I applaud this decision on another level.  When the original run of this show was televised starting in 1963 until the late 80's, it was all about the sci-fi entertainment.  While there were other plots and elements woven in, the main points were most assuredly about the time and space traveling, the scary monsters, the strange worlds, etc...  But with the kickoff of the new seasons in the 2000's, "Doctor Who" has inserted relevant issues of our day into the stories.  Not only are they entertaining, but they make us think.  The show does just about the best balance of this of any other show I've seen.  Of course at the center of it all has always been the Doctor, the mad "spaceman" in a blue box called the TARDIS, that travels in time and space.  Most assuredly he's the star of the show, but when someone else needs the spotlight, the Doctor just blends in for the sake of the story.  When it was announced earlier this year that 11th Doctor Matt Smith would be leaving, a whirlwind of controversy was stirred up.  Because the Doctor has the ability to regenerate and change his appearance instead of dying outright, many have left this open to interpretation about who could take over the prestigious acting role.  Questions about possibly having a woman become the 12th Doctor arose.  Quickly names like Emma Watson & Helen Mirren were thrown about for consideration.  There was also a suggestion about someone of a different race taking over (all previous incarnations of the Doctor have been white males).  I didn't disagree with anyone that was named as a possible replacement, including any of the women or guys of a different race, but in the end I think Peter Capaldi was just about the best choice of any...and here's why.

Like I said previously, the newer seasons of "Doctor Who" work so well because it has the ability to make points relevant to today's day and age (somewhat in the same way "Star Trek" did), with keeping a main character that could fade in and out for the sake of the story as needed.  Now imagine pressure from various groups to suddenly change the Doctor into, for example, a black male or a female, just because it's possible and "because they can".  Suddenly, with one of those changes, the Doctor becomes the focal point of every show.  It becomes a change for the sake of change, not for relevancy of the story.  Let's be honest:  those who will actually stop watching "Doctor Who" because they picked another "white guy" probably weren't fans in the first place.  Most, if not all, Whovians would want what's best for the show, what is most logical.  What makes most sense is to put someone in the Doctor's shoes who blends in to the part as if he had always been there.  To do anything else would interrupt what the new series has worked to build just to placate special interest groups that were only concerned about the publicity from a controversy.  Ultimately, I think head writer Steven Moffat did what he felt was best.  Ever since Russell T. Davies left has head writer at the end of the 10th Doctor David Tennant's tenure, Moffat has made decisions that have Whovians talking, blogging, tweeting, etc... and not always in a good way.  It was his idea, though, to consider Capaldi for the role of the Doctor.  In fact, according to the live announcement special, he had almost put him in as the 11th Doctor in place of Matt Smith, but decided against it, thinking the time was not exactly right.  It's that type of person that I like to see in charge of such a decision.  Moffat will not make a knee-jerk reaction just to ride the wind of political correctness or cave in to pressure of a select few.  Again, to draw another "Star Trek" parallel, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one".  The "many", in this case, are we Whovians who care deeply about this show.

Unfortunately, we will have to wait for a new "Who" episode until November, which will be the 50th anniversary episode & Matt Smith's penultimate.  The no-doubt emotional on-screen regeneration of Matt Smith's 11th Doctor into Peter Capaldi's 12th Doctor will come at Christmas, a time fans of the new series have come to look forward to because of the great special episodes released that day most every year since the Doctor reappeared on our televisions.  If this Christmas is anything like last year's, I will hopefully receive more cool "Who" merchandise, too! (Hint, hint!)  But first, I'll be patiently waiting for November to get here for the 50th.  Yeah...patiently waiting...  Does anyone have a spare TARDIS they're not using?  There's someWHEN I have to be  :)

(I hope you've enjoyed this blog, even if you're not a Whovian like me.  Any questions, comments, criticism or suggestions?  Post them here, hit me up on Facebook, or send me a tweet @nBoEnforcer)

Don't Blame Doc Brown

Already I'm hearing comments on the Internet, and even in person, from people saying, "Back to the Future was full of crap! It's almost 2015 and nothing has come true like the movies". Did you ever stop to think that maybe it's for a good reason (other than "Back to the Future" is a movie)? I thought about this today (maybe for too long) and came up with a few answers as to why none of this has happened..and don't you dare blame Doc Brown.

First, anyone who is a sci-fi geek like I am can tell you that anything dealing with the future is an uncertainty from the word "go". While many theories exist of how time travel can occur, many agree that events that happen in the past directly affect how the future plays out. Anyone with foreknowledge of those events and means of time travel can affect the outcome. Even such a thing as killing a butterfly in the past can affect future events on a grand scale (see "the butterfly effect" on Wikipedia or elsewhere). It's very possible that Marty McFly's adventures in the future and past could have affected timelines and events so much that those displayed in the movie never occurred. Nothing shown there appears to be a "fixed point" in time, or something so pivotal to time itself that nothing can alter it. Still, not knowing how the years played out between 1985 and 2015, all of this technology could still develop sometime in the next three years. I still find it hard to believe, though, that fifteen more Jaws movies could happen between now and then. Please, for the love of Spielberg, don't let that happen.

Another theory that has just as much sci-fi goodness as the last one is that the "Back to the Future" trilogy occurred in an alternate universe. Although I don't claim to fully understand physics, some scientists are of the belief that there are universes just out of phase with our own, some with Earths having subtle differences, others having drastically different characteristics. For example, in one universe I'm writing this blog about "Back to the Future" starring Eric Stoltz (see Wikipedia info on the original screen tests). In yet another universe, I'm not writing a blog at all because electricity hasn't been invented. See how that works? Imagine a possible outcome and *BOOM* it's another universe. Want to really blow your mind? That universe both existed AND didn't exist until you thought of it. It was real AND not real simultaneously. Read up on Schroedinger's cat for more info on that bit of mind-screwing. So to recap this theory, somewhere in another universe, Marty McFly and Doc Brown are real people having real adventures.

Last, but not least, is an idea that my friend Kris thought of today, something that I hadn't considered. The technology in the movie is indeed possible RIGHT NOW, but the government doesn't want you to know about it. Yeah, I know...fit me for a straitjacket and lock me in a padded room with Fox Mulder and the Lone Gunmen (which, by the way, would be a kick-ass nerd band name). Call me a government conspirist, but I think this is totally possible. Think about it for a second with the biggest, most important technological advancement of the movies (other than time travel): FLYING CARS. Can you imagine the repercussions this would have? Citizens would all have to pass different exams to drive/fly a car. Different safety upgrades would be made for all new vehicles. Older cars would be retrofitted with this technology and THOSE cars would need to be upgraded for safety. Companies like those in the tire industry would have financial loss (why replace tires when you don't need them except for takeoff and landing?). Buildings would needed to be upgraded for safety, possibly with each including a member of Air Traffic Control, to navigate vehicles safely around them. We'd constantly have to be on the lookout for Jihadists trying to fly their explosive-laden cars into structures. Do you see the problems this causes? And that's just ONE upgrade and advancement in technology. The government probably has this stuff hidden in Area 51 with the rest of the alien technology it has captured over the years (again with the conspiracy!) but refuses to release it because of the myriad of issues that would ensue upon its release.

There may be more reasons that the "Back to the Future" trilogy hasn't come true, but I think these are three pretty good reasons why we don't see it happening in 2012 (or 2015 for that matter). I may not be able to fly my Honda Accord to work using the scraps from last night's dinner, take a leisurely ride through the park on my hoverboard, or take in a matinee of Jaws 19, but I take a minute to appreciate what I can do and what I do have. In the amount of time mankind has been living on this Earth, we've accomplished some great advancements. In an even shorter span of time those advancements have increased exponentially. If you think it hasn't, look at the smart phone you most likely carry on your hip or in your pocket. Such a thing wasn't even a reality for the general public ten short years ago. That should put some things in perspective.

So, please don't blame Doc Brown, Marty McFly, or any of the other characters (well, maybe Biff) for a near future that doesn't resemble the movie. Instead, be excited for what could possibly be even better than what the movie predicted. Look forward to what lies ahead down the road. Wait..."Roads? Where we're going we don't need roads." Yeah, that still may be a possibility :)