1

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 27/07/2021 22:04:20 »

   Atoms have no clear definition for many reasons but the radius of an atom is one thing that doesn't seem to be well defined.  It's hard, if not impossible, to say where an electron cloud ends.   

This is going to sound really stupid and like I'm working really hard to cling onto something. But you did mean doesn't not does here right? You do mean it's hard, near impossible for atoms to be defined by science right?

It's just that, normally in this kind of situation, a person would make a statement and then use "BUT" to set up the explanation of a difference, opposition or exception.
Example "One by one the lands of Middle Earth fell to the power of the ring BUT there were some who resisted." You seem to be saying "Atoms can't be easily defined if at all BUT atoms can't be easily defined if at all."

I suppose I'm just so used to this device being used that I thought that, by talking about atoms being difficult to define then adding the word "BUT" you are making a statement going in the other direction.

By the way, I'd like to say I like your posts. I've been on several forums like this and not met many who have the open-mindedness to talk about how many grey areas there are in science.

2

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 26/07/2021 18:46:21 »

The question you are asking really depends what you mean by an arrangement.
Let’s take a very simple example. Say we have 2 coloured blocks red & blue and we are going to arrange them along a straight line. We can say that there are 2 different arrangements of these blocks: red/blue or blue/red. On the other hand we could say that if the blocks are 1mm apart that is a different arrangement from being 2mm apart and as there are an infinite number of ‘numbers’ between 1mm and 2mm then there are an infinite number of ways of arranging these blocks - ignoring for the moment the discussion on whether you can differentiate between these arrangements.
When we talk about arranging matter eg atoms we are usually talking about the first type of arrangement.

That's not how Eternal Student describes atoms.

3

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 23/07/2021 19:42:06 »

    I'm not Halc but, yes, I think it's fair to say that Halc was implying that our brains would hold only a finite number of memories.  There were a lot of assumptions and simplifications in Halc's reasoning and you really shouldn't worry too much about the point he was making.

Are you saying that Halc is erring on the side of limited memory but his argument for it is not very good? That I shouldn't worry because there is no proof of a limited memory capacity?

There is no agreement on what an atom is.  We certainly can't see one because photons of light don't resolve such small distances of separation.  As a consequence we can't provide a definitive answer for the basic question you asked earlier  "can atoms only be arranged in a finite number of ways?"

So it's ok, even plausible to think that matter can be infinitely arranged in a finite space, despite whatever else people say?

I'm concerned that my language will be too imprecise and may present something as a definitive conclusion while it is not intended to be that way.   I think many other contributors have similar concerns.

I admit I do have a tendency to take statements very literally, I've learned that a single word can completely change any statement. A single sentence can change the way you look at an entire franchise.

4

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 23/07/2021 12:44:44 »

I lay no claim to any expertise on how mammals store memories. My argument rested on the conclusion that there are only a finite number of distinct arrangements of matter in a given proper volume. It goes without saying that most of those arrangements do not constitute a functioning human brain.

The conclusion? Does this mean it's been proven? It sounds to me like this is saying matter can only be arranged a finite number of ways in a finite space.

5

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 23/07/2021 11:33:29 »

You need to go to a philosophy forum. They talk science there, but it is the implications you're after, and a science forum is going to be less help.
You seem to want to jump off a cliff because it is imperative that you know the experience, but you expect to be devastated if it hurts.

The way I see it, the facts uncovered by science can have implications on our lives, regardless of what we think and how we live. I don't see how that is a matter of philosophy.

And no I do not want to jump off a cliff to have the experience, literally or figuratively.

I gave no certain knowledge since science doesn't do that. This is not the first repeat of that.

I ment certain as in particular.

No. I said what I said. There are unproven premises in the statement above, and I said "measurably distinct". There's no suggestion of an actual finite number of states of even a single particle confined to say a jar. Science cannot demonstrate any finite limit to it.

So if we try to measure something it has finite states, can only be finitely arranged? But naturally it's infinite? And this is unproven anyway?

6

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 22/07/2021 21:26:35 »

Neurones
I lay no claim to any expertise on how mammals store memories. My argument rested on the conclusion that there are only a finite number of distinct arrangements of matter in a given proper volume.

Are you saying that there is a finite number of ways matter can be arranged in a finite space? Because that is one of my all time biggest fears, it's the most horrific thing I ever heard, I mentioned this some time ago.

Please be very carful in your answer because if this is a fact it will be devastating to me.

Is this an absolute fact? Do people know this for sure? Is there room for doubt?
I honestly can't tell when people are talking about truths or theories.

7

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 22/07/2021 21:19:56 »

Nothing is proven by science. It's all done by induction, not deduction, and it's only as strong as its premises.

So is it weak or strong?

None of the things we say here has a negative impact on your life. If you find knowledge disturbing, then by all means make up whatever truth makes you comfortable. It's what humans do very well. I can think of nobody that doesn't do it.

I don't do it, I detest the idea of coming up with comforting lies and accepting them. The things said here do have an impact because I want to know the rules of reality. I can only ever be happy if I can say to myself that the things I fear are not true, that why I come to forums like this.
It's not all knowledge I find disturbing, just certain knowledge. Like the one you gave below.

No, my comment was a more general thing that there can only be a finite measurably distinct distribution of matter available at a point in space (which is a worldline, not an event). If the matter is too far away, it cannot be measured at all. So the radius is finite, leaving a finite set of measurably distinct arrangements for that matter.

Are you saying that matter can only be arranged in a finite number of ways in a finite space?
Because I have told you how horrific I find that and there is no way I'll ever be ok with it?
Is this an absolute truth?

8

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 21/07/2021 19:26:35 »

1.   You should worry less about things you hear.

Why?

2.    Halc was quite careful to phrase things a certain way:  He didn't say there is a limited amount of information, only that a limited amount is available at one place and time.   (... and he said it so quickly and softly that there wasn't much empahsis on time).

Well that sounds like there is only a finite number of memories our brains can store to me. Is that what Halc was saying?

9

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 20/07/2021 19:02:14 »

Physics says that even without a limit to the size of any system, there can be only limited information available from said system at a given point in space. So biology aside, there is a theoretical maximum amount of information, and thus memories, available for query from a given point.

When you say "Physics says" do you mean that it's indicated but not proven?
No offense to Halc but is any one else on this site going to dispute this?

10

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 18/07/2021 18:48:24 »

I googled if there was a limit to how many memories a person's brain could store and I found an answer written by a neurologist that the answer was absolutely yes.

Interesting to try to demonstrate that. It seems actually a pretty outlandish claim to suggest otherwise, so I'd actually be more interested in hearing the counter-argument to it. Maybe we ditch the assumption that a given brain is confined to a reasonable volume in a human head.

Are you saying you think there's a limit to how many memories were can store in our brain or not?

11

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 17/07/2021 18:13:12 »

Sounds like you're in agreement with this other guy then. Science has no proof of anything. Proof is for the mathematicians. Science makes predictions based on evidence. It does not assert truth or demonstrate proofs.

I was never in agreement with him, I thought my words were clear.

12

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 14/07/2021 18:39:43 »

You are an artist, so this is like saying we cannot consider a painting just as some different bits of paint in some order.  We have to include the canvass which holds all the paint in that place.  If you take the canvass away, the paint won't stay in the right places.

Similarly, even if two artists just happened to create the same painting, they won't look the same unless they are in exactly the same place and under the same lighting.  Due to tonal differences perceived by the observers, the two paintings will not elicit exactly the same emotional response in the observers.  Regarding the art as a dynamic exchange or phenomena between artist and audience, then the two pieces of art are different just as a result of being in different places

TIME is another wonderful thing in physics.  It seems to flow only one way and makes everything dynamic and performable only once.   Even if there was another artist like yourself somewhere else,  they cannot produce the same work of art here and today.  Only you were here today and there is no way that the other artists can wind the time clock backwards and repeat that.

I've heard similar augments before and they diddn't convince me that the theory wasn't true. If anything, statements like this only make it seem more true. But thank you for the rest of it.

We tend to say the particle was in a superposition of states until it is measured.  This is different from assuming the particle was always in the place where we found it but we just didn't know it was there.  Until the particle was observed it didn't HAVE to be anywhere,  a precise location wasn't a property that the particle had to have.

Are you saying the act of measuring it is what places it there? That it's no place until we do that?
But like the old saying goes, everything's got to be somewhere.

13

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 13/07/2021 21:10:57 »

If we use Quantum Mechanics as our model then we would say that the first atom experiences a different potential when it's close to the other atom and so it's electron orbitals will be slightly different.     In effect then if we pack a hundred atoms closely together like the steel marbles you showed in your diagram, then each marble could still be unique.  The ones near the surface become a different shape to the marbles right at the centre of the structure.
   So the atoms are more like the grains of sand in your castle rather than uniform marbles,  examine each one carefully and it is not the same as the grain of sand next to it.   This all depends on the model you're using and doesn't seem to be your main concern.

But if atoms are like that then there must come a point when you pack them in close as the can and they can't get any closer. Resulting in finite possibilities.

1.  Please remember that science doesn't offer absolute truth.  Only some models that are useful and often allow predictions to be made.

Really? I thought science was exactly about absolute truths. At some point I assumed that out there there is some kind of international council of scientists who deem what goes into books about science. What is officially true or false.

So when people say atoms exist in multiple places at once what they really mean is we can't find an atom until we look for it?

I used to know someone who has a physicist for a friend, she asked him about this matter-finite-arrangement theory and he said.

"We now accept that we cannot measure or predict the position or arrangement of any quantity with regards to particles and how they arrange themselves in the universe.

There are lots of attempts to bring order to this but all involve the understanding that there are an infinite number of arrangements of any space and that these only arrange themselves when we look at them. Therefore, there can be no limit to creativity only to our imagination of what is possible."

But if superpositions are just not knowing where the atom is, doesn't that void this statement?

Also it seems that the people here do not fully appreciate how much this theory has hurt me or why. My first reaction was to elaborate further but then I remembered that this may not be the proper place for it.

14

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 10/07/2021 20:23:17 »

To clear things up,
I thought atoms might exist in infinite positions at once.

Then Eternal Student said some things that suggested they weren't.

I quoted him and asked some new questions expecting him/her to respond.

Halc responded instead.

Then I posted a list of examples Halc had asked for earlier. I specifically said they were just examples of how people I'd talked to were so absolute in their opinions and I diddn't want to discuss them here. But people did anyway.

Then Halc and alancalverd said some thing that supported one of the theories I had listed and since this one is such a huge concern for me I wanted them to tell me if they really thought it was true.

So I asked Eternal Student to answer if atoms are like compacted marbles and Halc and alancalverd to answer if matter is finitely arrangeable or not.

In the past I have found little compassion, been strung along and even called mentally ill by people on forums like this. And now I'm afraid that's the reputation I'll have here too.

15

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 10/07/2021 19:34:56 »

Ouch. So ignore science then and hold whatever beliefs are required for you to keep your marbles together. That seems to be one of the primary benefits of being religious: to hold beliefs that one finds comforting rather than ones based on evidence.

I detest the idea of people adopting whatever belief they want, especially if they're only doing it because they find reality unmanageable. If someone I knew became a flat-earther and it brought them comfort, I would tear that away from them without a moment's hesitation. No belief should be acceptable if it's a lie, no matter how beneficial it is. It's why I don't like the DaVinci Code, Wicked or the musical The Book of Mormon.

16

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 10/07/2021 19:25:00 »

What theory? That "atoms exist in multiple places at once"? There's no such theory and nothing called "the matter theory" and I never said I held a belief in such a statement. I didn't see any such statement from Alan either. If that's not the theory you're talking about, then you need to be a lot more clear about which theory it is that you and possibly your father are talking about.

"atoms exist in multiple places at once"? was what I was talking about before but I also wanted you to clarify your position on this other one. And I wash I had a better term then "The theory" for the other one but it's all I've got.

17

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 10/07/2021 19:08:37 »

It seems that you are rebelling against a theory that your father espoused some time ago.
- This theory hasn't been stated very clearly here, so we are just guessing (and it sounds like the guesses from alancalverd and Halc were somewhat close)...
- But it seems that you are concerned that the possibility of a finite universe constrains your creativity...
- And/Or the possibility of an infinite universe limits the uniqueness of your creativity
- Both possibilities seem to cause you deep distress

These two possibilities arise from opposite and incompatible assumptions, and we can't tell which assumption is correct, because it has no practical impact on our day-to-day lives.

I thought I'd explained it adequately. I don't see how they are incompatible. The theory says matter can only be arranged a finite number of ways in a finite space. It works weather the universe is finite or infinite. It may not have an impact on your lives but it had a huge one on mine, that's something few people understand or respect. They either don't understand why it bothers me, don't think it should or think I'm crazy for feeling this way.

Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.

I can't begin to tell you how much I HATE the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy. 

So you may have unresolved issues with your father, but don't blame the universe for it...

This is not some daddy issue.

18

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 09/07/2021 22:11:35 »

It seems to me that Halc and alancalverd both believe in this theory about matter and I find that upsetting.

To be honest, all the things on that list were things that filled me with dread, that's why I went out into the internet desperately searching for someone to tell me they weren't true. I was going to put that in the post but I thought it might not be a good idea to go public with such powerful feeling with people I don't know anything about.

When my father told me about the matter theory, it was the worst thing I'd ever heard. I'm a creative person and the idea that all possibilities are finite, that everything I or anyone else have or will ever create are part of a limited set... it sent me into a spiralling depression unlike anything I'd ever experienced. It was the worst thing that ever happened to me and I still haven't gotten over it years later. And it doesn't help that most people, including my father, don't understand why it would bother me no matter how painstakingly I explain the reason for my feelings.
And I really hope you wont ask for that now because it's so upsetting, frustrating and exhausting.

Incidentally, this thread started because I was looking into a specific aspect of the theory. One thing that gave me hope the theory might not be true is what I'd heard about atoms not existing like the marbles in the picture I posted.

I specifically said that I diddn't want to discuss these things here because I diddn't want to get drawn into obsessively debating it with people again, as I have done so many times in the past.
And now, thanks to Halc and alancalverd, I am faced with a renewed feeling that this theory is 100% true because I can't help but believe people who say things, especially if I think they know more then me. Frankly, what you said was not unlike the zealots I was talking about before.

And yes I know I've argued with people before but that was going against the grain for me and I never know if my arguments are justified, valid or even permittable.
I posted that list because I wanted you to tell me they at least have room for doubt and now you've just told me one of them is true.

Also, I am still waiting for Eternal Student to reply to when I quoted him about atoms.

19

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 08/07/2021 19:10:56 »

I think you maybe need to give some specific examples of such claims.

Ok, I'll tell you a few personal experiences I've had on other forums. But I'm only mentioning them as examples, I don't want to debate these in this particular subjects is this thread.

I asked if the universe will come to end, not how or when but if. And the first reply I got was "Of course it will."

I was talking with someone on a similar site to this and somehow the conversation turned into weather there was an afterlife, this 2nd party was absolute in his opinion that there was no afterlife, he diddn't even think of it as an opinion. I said that science had no proof to the negative and he said there was no proof there was one and that plus the fact no one had ever come back from the dead was proof of no afterlife.

On the same site I got into another debate with someone over atoms. He to was extreme in his position and provided a link to a site backing up his claim. Interestingly, his reference source said that was they were saying was just a theory.

I googled if there was a limit to how many memories a person's brain could store and I found an answer written by a neurologist that the answer was absolutely yes. And just now I saw the same thing on Scientific American "There must be a physical limit to how much the brain can store."

There is a theory that matter can only be arranged a finite number of ways in a finite space. There are finite number of different objects that can exist and events that can happen within that space. This also means that somewhere out in the universe there are exact copies of Earth, you and me doing exactly what we are doing right now. By pure coincidence.   
My father told me that, he was a scientist, he worked for a chemical company and later as consultant setting up laboratories. He subscribes to multiple science magazines, he has a hobby in astronomy. He's the most intelligent, knowledgeable and scientifically minded person I've ever known. And he talked about this theory like it was gospel, a perfectly known fact, he diddn't even call it a theory. There is no doubt in his mind about it at all. And later he told me his scientists friends believe it too.
I looked on the web to find out if it was true and the reply I go was quote "Yes, next."
I asked on a science website and most of them said it was true, including one who said it was true, certain and obvious "as 2+2=4."

20

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Re: Do atoms exist in multiple places at once, 2 places or 1?

« on: 08/07/2021 03:40:20 »

   Well that's the thing.  Atoms don't have to exist in the way you (or we) might imagine them.  Historically, we were quite sure that atoms were solid little things with the properties of a particle.   These days, we're aware that they are nothing like this.

Actually that was going to be my next question. If atoms aren't in many places at once, does that mean they're like the grains in a sand castle or uniform marbles? When they come together do they knock up against each other until they can go no further like this?

This is confusing, so let's just consider a smaller simpler idea:  An atom may not be a particle, it might be a wave of energy and like most waves you should usually expect to find it spread out or smeared over a region of space.

To me a wave is something that you find at the beach, it's not exactly a thing, its a disturbance that dissipates back into the water. I know about how light has a wave length but I don't understand how anything solid can be made out of it. If things were made of waves shouldn't they dissipate too?

Scientists (the good scientists) don't usually claim to know "the truth".  There are some theories which are well tested and can make predictions.  It's nice if these models match up with some underlying truth about the universe but it's not required.  Provided we can model various situations and make predictions that turn out to be verified later, then the theory is useful science.
     Most early scientific theories (for example the extraordinary work of Newton) have now been modified; completely replaced  or shown to have a limited range of applicability.   It would be unwise to assume that the current theories of today are going to fair better in the future developments of science.

So are you saying no one knows what atoms are like?