Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: latebind on 12/02/2009 20:41:32
-
I have an 'out there' theory that I like, I have thought about it for a few months but kept it to myself.
I am not a scientist, and I am also realistic and know there are many very respected scientists in the world working on unification of quantum mechanics and gravity.
There are 2 parts to this theory, 'The Electromagnetic Aura' and 'The Electromagnetic Aura Gravity'.
The Electromagnetic Aura
- It is possible that there is a quantum aura surrounding every object in the universe.
- This aura is thought to be a property of the electromagnetic field.(Credit : Vern)
- The size of each aura is directly dependant on the amount of particles composing the object.
- The strength of the aura will always be stronger closer to the center of an object.
- Particles of an object pop in and out of its aura constantly(obeying quantum laws)
- Particles of an object statistically have a higher chance of appearing in a high strength zone of an aura, and less chance of appearing in a weak strength zone.
- Strong aura zones are closer to the centre of an object, and their strength is determined by the object's mass.
- Weak aura zones will be further out, and can reach as far as the universe stretches, becoming infinitely weak with distance.
- Particles of an object cannot leave the object's aura unless there is another object's aura to move into.
- Particles of an object that leave it's aura must, at some stage, return back to the object from where they came.
- Particles of an object that return to home base are not required to return to the same position from where they left. In fact particles prefer positions that are facing a high strength aura zone.
- Particles know exactly where they would like to go when they pop out and back into reality, but they must obey a statistical law, which I believe is a law well known to science : Chaos law.
- Chaos law affects particle movement in the Aura by preventing all particles from going exactly where they want(causing the whole object to teleport like science fiction), a percentage must go elsewhere to avoid this effect.
- In this case, Chaos law has mercy for the particles, as enough of them are allowed to go and come near to where they want causing a movement we call 'the effect of gravity'.
Electromagnetic Aura Gravity
Once you have grasped the notion on object aura's then aura gravity becomes relatively easy to see.
Suppose an asteroid flies past a star too close and gets sucked into orbit, or worse crashes and burns, what really happened there on a particle level?
Well, as we know gravity took hold and 'pulled' the asteroid towards the centre of the sun. I want to explore the mechanism by which the asteroid was 'pulled' in.
It could be this aura around the star that is causing this gravity by indirectly and passively providing a strong aura zone which any passing asteroid's particles would find hard to resist during their quantum leaps.
My view is that as the asteroid moved too close to the star, the particles of the asteroid were appearing more and more in the direction of the star because the aura strength was greater there then anywhere in the aura of the asteroid itself, and hence it seemed that the asteroid was being pulled into the centre of the star, when in fact the asteroid was pulling itself in!!
Yes, I said it, the asteroid is responsible for pulling itself into the star, because it is the asteroids particles that are moving into a higher aura zone, the star is just passively sitting there. And yes some atoms from the star appear in the asteroids aura but this amount is so minuscule that you would not detect the star movement easily unless the asteroid was large.
If the asteroid stays in orbit then that means that the momentum of the asteroid has equalled the strength of the aura around the star.
On Earth.
Ok, but what happens when an apple falls from a tree?
The way I see it is that even before the apple falls, it's particles are moving toward the centre of the earth's aura and returning to home base, but the force of this movement is not enough to pull the apple down because it's stalk is too strong. But once the stalk breaks then there is no upward force keeping the
apple suspended and 'ALL' it's particles are free to migrate toward the centre of the earth's aura.
The majority of the particles that returned were always landing up in a region near to the center of the apple. Once the apple was free to move in space then some of the particles that returned home landed up slightly closer to the edge facing earth due to their pursuit of Aura strength. It is my belief that there is a force caused by this shuffling. Possibly caused by a nuclear force upon the particle's rebinding to the whole once more.
So since more particles of the apple are rebinding closer to the earth side of the apple's center this causes a break in the equilibrium that was there while the stork was not broken.
Another way to see this movement is to look at how bee's find their pollen to make honey. Scouts go out, find the pollen and then come back and do a little dance to let the rest of the bees know where the flowers are. After this all the honey collecting bees know where they want to go.
The real difference here though is that each particle knows exactly where they want to go, they don't need to be shown, but they do have to obey some unknown statistical law which is probably linked to chaos theory.
Some Diagrams attached.
Planet/Asteroid gets caught by Star Gravity
[ Invalid Attachment ]
Apple Falling to Earth's Surface
[ Invalid Attachment ]
-
You have a very interesting theory. I can see your thinking and how it might work. But why did you invent a new substance? We already have lots of things around that behave like your Aura. For example, the electromagnetic field extends outward in space forever, just as does gravitational force. If you simply assigned a property to the electromagnetic field that looks like your Aura; then you can have your gravity [:)]
-
Hi Vern
I am sure I made a few mistakes, but I am so glad that I managed to get the essence through.
I really like your suggestions, and I welcome any changes to the theory, the more brains
that contribute the better!
-
I just changed the title now to be more appropriate to my content
-
I wasn't suggesting that there are mistakes in your concepts; I was just thinking that they might be more acceptable if they didn't introduce new and undetectable things. I guess we all look at the ideas of others and see if they can fit into our own ideas. If I modify your Aura to be the electromagnetic field that we already know about then add the Aura as a property of that field; it looks pretty much like gravity.
-
Hi Vern
Ok, perhaps I can ask you to clarify something for me, I would be grateful.
In Quantum mechanics, I know that particles of an object 'jiggle about' and appear/reappear spontaneously.(well not spontaneously anymore if the theory is correct :) )
If I get your drift, then what you are saying is that this is already known to happen in the electromagnetic field? (I was actually not sure which medium this what happening when I initially posted).
If this is the case, then it would certainly be a way to go, and the aura property could just be a simple property that causes
the particles to statistically appear closer to the center of an object's electromagnetic field when they go on their quantum
journeys, and hence a planet getting pulled into a star seems to move and stretch in that direction because more and more particles are appearing in that direction.
Could you please clarify I have understood you?
-
If I get your drift, then what you are saying is that this is already known to happen in the electromagnetic field? (I was actually not sure which medium this what happening when I initially posted).
I suggested the electromagnetic field as a candidate because both the electric and the magnetic field extend outward in space forever diminishing as the square of distance. That extending outward forever is also a property of gravity. So add your aura as a property of the electromagnetic field and you have gravity.
Then we have to say that massive objects emit the fields constantly; that doesn't seem too far a stretch.
-
Ok, that sounds good, I like that.
So we can say that at this point we believe it is the electromagnetic field of an object that is casuing these predicted "Aura" zones.
Furthermore, one thing I just realized is that this means Black Holes must have an incredibly strong electro-magnetic field.
Also what this means, is that if we could decrease the electromagnetic field strength of an object, then we could also decrease it's pull of gravity?
Also this means that if there are any large objects with small magnetic fields then these objects should have a weak force of gravity as well, since a passing object's particles would have a low probability of entering it's Aura.
Does this sound like we are on the right track?
-
I don't know if I can contribute much, but it looks like you're thinking. We know that the electromagnetic field as it was described by James Clerk Maxwell is not quiet complete because it doesn't predict quantum phenomena. Dr. Robert kemp wrote a paper (http://photontheory.com/Kemp/Kemp.html) in which he tried to add that feature to Maxwell's equations. That might be a direction that you could take your aura.
Maxwell’s equations must be modified so that they incorporate the quantum concept. Such that Maxwell's equations allow points in space to reach electromagnetic saturation as well as have a finite electromagnetic amplitude. Maxwell did not apply the quantum concept to his theory because the quantum phenomenon was not discovered until after his death. Maxwell’s equations are quantized by revealing that the electromagnetic change of a photon saturates to a quantized value within the wavelength of a photon. Hypothesized is an electromagnetic saturation constant that is a constant that couples both the changing electric and magnetic fields together and allows the fields to reach maximum electromagnetic amplitude in space. The electromagnetic saturation constant is completely necessary to link the quantum energy concept to Maxwell’s changing electric and magnetic fields. Electromagnetic saturation is shown to be the cause of Planck’s constant and the electronic charge constant.
-
A few more notes on Aura Theory, and Dark Matter
The Aura theory states that when two objects are attracted to each other via gravity, it is a mechanism that is happening on the particle level. This is because any object's particles will have a higher probability of moving into a stronger aura zone, possibly as an effect caused by an objects electromagnetic field.
If you could watch a planet getting sucked in by a star, in slow motion, on an atomic scale it would look as if the planets atoms were acting sort of like a slinky toy and moving towards the higher Aura stengths bit by bit.
This slinky movement is a constant force, which on earth makes objects want to move towards the centre at 10ms2. The force of this movement causes newtonian momentum and hence a force downards.
If you could take a snap shot of any object moving through space, you would never have all the object's atoms in the photograph, this is because at any one time a percentage of the object's particles are on a quantum journey into a higher aura.
Why should particles want to act this way? Does this have anything to do with Dark Matter?
My belief is that particles want to actively pursue higher aura zones because it might be a property of the universe that can be seen in the forces of dark matter. An explanation...
Suppose a scientist understands that there is not enough matter in a faraway galaxy or galaxy group to hold it together. He realizes that the gravity inside it is too strong to be only attributed to the observable matter.
This actually happens alot and science today recognizes that there is more matter there then they can see, and they call this dark matter.
My take on this is that if the scientist could count the number of particles inside the galaxy, he would notice that the number is constantly changing, this is because particles from elsewhere in the universe are popping in and out of it's aura. This constant shuffling between all the galaxies in the universe causes more matter to appear than should be there and hence explains why it might seem there is more gravity then should be there, but if you could take a complete snap shot of the entire universe you might just find that the number of particles in the whole universe is unchanging, just shuffling.
So dark matter is just normal matter that has popped into the galaxies Aura and caused a bit more gravity then popped out again while other ones were popping back in.
A small diagram to help
[ Invalid Attachment ]
We have established that we believe the auro is a property of an object's electromagnetic field.
A strong aura will be positively pursued by any object's particles. We know that particles have to leave home base because this is a law of the universe that states there is not enough matter to make up for all the gravity, so every particle keeps shuffling around to higher auras to make up.
We could work out the probability of where the particle might land up anywhere in the universe by formluating an equation that takes into consideration both distance and electromagnetic field strength of surrounding objects plus the object itself. Distance is included because I feel the particles will have a higher probability of popping into a closer aura than a further one.
-
A note on Antigravity, and Dark Energy
Many scientists today feel that antigravity and dark energy is real, for this reason I would like to try give an approach from the Aura theory.
We have established that an object's electromagnetic field could cause the auro property that is predicted by Aura theroy.
If the electromagnetic field was somehow reversed, then the object's aura would be turned inside out and would essentially be very weak closer to the centre of the object and very strong further away, obviously the strength will diminish with distance.
I feel any object that gets too close to an antigravity source will experience a strange but expected phenomenon. It's particles will be attracted to the higher strength auras which now lie further away from the antigravity source centre, so the object appears to be repelled. I use the word 'appears' because I believe the object is not being repelled it is simply pursuing higher auras which now lie further away from the antigravity source's centre.
What is happening at a particle level?
As Aura theory states, the particles have a high probability of moving into a high strength aura zone and vica versa, hence as the object approaches the centre of the antigravity source, more and more of its particles will appear on the opposite side of the object, slowly causing newtonian momentum which eventually changes the objects trajectory to move away from the antigravity.
What does this have to do with Dark Energy?
A bit of background.
Dark energy was discovered when scientists realized the universe's expansion was not slowing down as predicted by earlier scientists, but was in fact speeding up. They believe there is a strange energy causing this acceleration and they call it dark energy.
Aura theory predicts 2 possibilities for the explanation of dark energy.
First is that the universe's acceleration is a byproduct of antigravity left over from the big bang, possibly due to a massive antigravity source that lies at the centre of the universe.
Secondly it is equally possible that there is a strong electromagnetic field surrounding the universe, left over from the big bang as well and everything is being attracted towards it.
-
Have you thought about predictions about future discoveries that your concept might could provide? Can we use the aura concept to make a predicton?
-
Well, one thing it might predict is that a pure vacuum will never be sustainable.
Aura theory predicts that if you could simulate a pure vacuum, you might be able to pull it off for a short amount of time, but you will never be able to sustain it because there will always be particles popping in and out of it.
Even if you could simulate this vacuum billions of light years from any known object, it still would not stay pure. There is an infinitely small probability that an objects particles billions of light years away will pop into this vacuum, but because object's are made of so many particles it will eventually become unpure.It might again become pure when the particles pop out, but it will never be a sustainable pure vacuum.
-
Well; that prediction is okay but how would anyone ever test for that. There are at least six theories of gravity floating around in the mainstream scientific community now and all of them predict the same thing. Gravity will be present in a vacuum. [:)]
Note: There are five string theories and the General Theory of Relativity that folks are playing with now.
-
I am looking on the net now, and I seem to find a couple of articles that point in a similar direction to my thinking, I'll try to get some insight from their knowledge...
-
I cleaned up my original post to try to get the essence of the theory through more clearly.
-
Hmmm.... While I think the term 'aura' might put some people off there is a possibility here. Could gravity be seen as being an interaction between particles that alters the probability wave of the other?
Well, frankly, it must do so. I'll have to think on this. Is it to do with the electromagnetic field? What experiment could measure this?
-
Hi angst
Thank you so much for your input!. And thank you for taking time to read the theory!
I have been thinking of some experiments, I will post some of these soon.
-
An experiment for Aura theory
As an experiment, I would propose a modified version of the current setups used to search for gravitational waves.
First a simple background on the search for gravitational waves
In 1957, two years after the death of Einstein, an amazing scientist called Hermann Bondi conducted a thought experiment that would impact the study of gravity with some force.
Bondi reasoned that beads placed on a stick could potentially be moved to and fro by a gravitational wave. When this happens each bead creates a minute amount of heat.
Bondi reasoned that this suggested gravity has a real physical meaning, and therefore could be monitored with experiments.
Ever since Bondi's thought experiment, there have been many attempts to observe the effects of gravitational waves. The most common setup is what is called an L-Shaped detector like LIGO.
Below is an picture of Ligo (Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory)
[ Invalid Attachment ]
LIGO (Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory)
LIGO Home page : http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/cit_local.html
Basically they have extremely accurate lasers and they measure the amount of time it takes these lasers to traverse through the structure.
They suspect that a gravitational wave from a supernova (or another catastrophic effect in the galaxy) might pass through the L-Shaped structure and cause it to bend by a minute fraction.
Their accurate lasers would pick up this slight bend and that would be the first evidence of a gravitational wave. I understand they are still waiting for evidence.
The experiment for Aura theory
I suggest a slightly modified version.
Suppose you could set up an extremely accurate square box that is suspended in midair with wire. Each side is the same length as the others, down to the last atom. (Note that the LIGO detectors can detect changes less than a single atomic length, in fact they claim they can measure a single proton length change)
Now if you could time how long it takes light to go from the top to the bottom of the box and back again, then you would be setup already.
Aura theory predicts that if the reading is accurate enough, the observer would notice tiny fluctuations in the length of the square box.
This is going to be caused by a constant and minute imbalance between the particles at the top side of the box and the particles at the bottom side (facing earth).
Aura theory predicts that there will always be a higher probability of more particles being present at the bottom of the box(lengthening it).
These particles must at some stage return back to where they came, but they will be replaced by other particles. This constant motion is thought to cause a fluctation in the length of the box.
I am quite confident that the equipment today is accurate enough, since LIGO claim to be able to measure fluctations of a single proton in length.
A diagram of the box
[ Invalid Attachment ]
-
Sand Timer Thought Experiment for Aura theory
Where does this experiment come from?
This is a thought experiment for Aura theory inspired by Einstein's real experiment that proved the existence of the atom.
In 1905 Einstein proved the atom was real, by describing the motion of pollen grains that danced about in calm water. The essence of this was the in depth explanation of the (then) mysterious Brownian motion discovered by botanist Robert Brown in 1828.
Einstein said, that because the water was calm, there must be something else in the water jiggling and bumping into the grains to make them dance, and hence the atom was proven to be real, a tiny physical entity.
The Sandtimer Thought Experiment
Suppose you have two identical,sealed sandtimers. These are identical in every way, from the number of grains to the number of atoms and particles in each sandtimer, and the placement of all other particles is identical in every way.
Now, you flip both of these over at exactly the same nanosecond and watch the grains fall through.
Do you think that each timer would have the exact same grain(s) falling through at any given time?
Do you think that both sand timers would be perfectly synchronized in every single possible way?
My belief is that the answer is 'NO' to both questions.( I suggest chaos theory or a sort of entropy at work here)
So if we consider the experiment before us :
-Both sandtimers are identical in every way, down to the last particle
-Both sandtimers were flipped over at exactly the same nanosecond
-Both sandtimers were sealed so that no particles could escape
-The sandtimers were observed to not be synchronized, even though every single particle of matter was synchronized at the beginning.
This suggests that there must be something else inside changing the placement of the particles
that is causing the timers not to be synchronized, what could this be? suggestions please?
[ Invalid Attachment ]
-
One possible observation....
Since the timers were identical and sealed, there could not be any 'normal' entry or exit of particles from the Timers.
This suggests that a number of particles did in fact shuffle inside each timer by other means than normal physics.
I believe that this is an effect of the particles escaping in their quantum journeys and a small percentage of them are coming back in a place closer to the earth's centre, which would be the bottom of the sand timer. This effect is statistical and hence is different for each timer and might describe why they seem to not be synchronized.
I also feel that if you could 'tag' each particle as it fell through the throat of the timer, you might notice that a tiny percentage of the particles at the bottom of each timer are missing tags! (This suggests a tiny percentage of particles went from the top to the bottom without actually going through the throat).
-
To all who read this :: Please reply and let me know if you think I am on the right track and where I might be able to improve some parts of the conept?
-
I think the sand timers might work as an analogy but it would never be possible to obtain useful information from the experiment. There are too many variables that are not controllable to the degree that would be necessary.
Your ideas are pretty distant from the mainstream ideas; I don't see your ideas as being any less likely to represent reality, however. Modern physicists who study gravity now use variations of string theory to explain it. I see those theories as good mathematical exercise and not much else.
-
I must agree with your opinion on String Theory. I really dont see why they need to use so many extra dimensions, just for something that in the future will ultimately be linked to quantum theory anyway and probably wont need fancy maths.
Often these effects(such as gravity) have got a simple explanation behind them, but we tend to over complicate whats really there.
The Sandtimers definitely could never be replicated for real, only in the imagination(Thought Experiment AKA Gedanken experiment). But it does get the brain ticking a little [:)]
-
I think your light in the box idea might be doable. You would need the maths for any test since you would have to compare measured values to predicted values.
I was interested to see if your theory could fit into a concept that I have been evaluating. This opening post explains it.
Imagine a universe made of electric and magnetic forces alone. We will show how Maxwell's account of nature operating within this universe can produce all else including gravity and the nuclear forces. In this imaginary universe all the rules of nature are just as we observe them in our own universe. A person placed in this new universe could not determine whether they were in this imaginary universe or our own. (http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=19366.0)
-
I will certainly have a good look at that!
-
I will certainly have a good look at that!
Good; we might be able to find an all invasive property of electromagnetic fields that can permeate all matter [:)]
-
Your theory on a photon only universe looks nice, it could work.
With regard to gravity, I would like to propose a 'to-be-discussed' method on how it might be working.
(I hope I get this right, let me know where I can improve it, ok?)
Ok, so if we say everything is made up of photons, then how does gravity work in this world?
My belief is that it would be a similar effect to Aura theory, I'll explain in the reference frame of a photon only universe.
When an object emits energy, this energy must be in the form of photons. We already know that photons travel as a wave until they are consumed at which point they change into a particle.
My belief is that when the wave is consumed and changes into a particle, it must have a very small effect on the object that emitted it(kind of like particle pairs that can change their spin instantly). This effect "IS" what we call gravity, and there can be a number of different possible ways in which this is caused, I shall discuss this later...
First of all, before we discuss the ways that photons changing from wave to particle affect the emitting object, we must look at the bigger picture and see if this is in fact logical.
My view is a simple one, the larger and closer the object that your photon waves crash into, the more particles will be consumed, and hence a larger effect on the emitting object,and a larger force of gravity.
Gravity is usually associated with the mass of an object, but einstein proved that mass and energy are equivalent, so gravity could just as well be caused by the energy emitted.
So what I am really saying is that when an apple falls from a tree, the photon waves facing earth are getting consumed very rapidly and causing a rapid acceleration of the apple. The photon waves not facing earth, well they just go into space. What is important here is that when the photons get consumed they must cause some kind of kinetic energy transfer to the apple.(probably happening on the side facing away from earth (ie an acceleration from behind like an engine))
Possible mechanisms of photon gravity
1 - Antiphoton
-It is possible that as a photon wave gets consumed and turns into a photon particle, it creates an antiphoton on the exact opposite side of the object that emitted the photon wave. This antiphoton particle might somehow cause the emitting object to move in the direction of the object which consumed its waves. (maybe by annihilating a random photon immediately on the opposite side of the emitting object, Or by affecting relativity and causing the deep pits in spacetime that einstein predicted, only this time an incline is seen on the opposite side of the emitting object as opposed to a decline on the facing side of the emitting object).
2 - Conservation of photon energy
This is a strange one, but it essentially implies that as a photon wave gets consumed by the consuming object, it converts to kinetic energy on the emitting object. Similar to antiphoton, but this time there is just a pure energy transfer, and no antiphotons around. I believe that when one energy gets converted to another that it does not have to happen in the same location, it might happen lightyears away for all we know :) , and it has been proven that quantum messages get sent much faster than the speed of light(as with particle spin pairs changing spin instantly). In fact some believe up to 10 million times faster.
I might add one or 2 more in the next few days...
-
That's interesting speculation; I guess it is as good as what I've done so far. My first pass was to consider the saturation property of photons as the seat of gravity. A photon's central point would reach saturation at an offset toward increasing field strength of other photons.
-
A note on Antigravity, and Dark Energy
First is that the universe's acceleration is a byproduct of antigravity left over from the big bang, possibly due to a massive antigravity source that lies at the centre of the universe.
Secondly it is equally possible that there is a strong electromagnetic field surrounding the universe, left over from the big bang as well and everything is being attracted towards it.
There is no "center" of the universe. At least there is no remotely sensible hypothesis that includes one. And if there were, it would not be close enough to have any effect or we could detect it.
If the universe had an edge, it would also be too distant to have any effect or we could detect it. Either a center or an edge would produce a violation of general relativity.
-
A note on Antigravity, and Dark Energy
First is that the universe's acceleration is a byproduct of antigravity left over from the big bang, possibly due to a massive antigravity source that lies at the centre of the universe.
Secondly it is equally possible that there is a strong electromagnetic field surrounding the universe, left over from the big bang as well and everything is being attracted towards it.
There is no "center" of the universe. At least there is no remotely sensible hypothesis that includes one. And if there were, it would not be close enough to have any effect or we could detect it.
If the universe had an edge, it would also be too distant to have any effect or we could detect it. Either a center or an edge would produce a violation of general relativity.
The centre of the universe is real.
Just because we dont have the technology to see the centre of the universe it doesnt mean it doesnt exist. Also since everything is expanding outwards, many scientists believe that if we trace this expansion backwards we will find the centre. And when we do find the centre it will probably be a white hole.
This is according to M-theory(membrane theory) that predicts our universe as a soap bubble, and we are created by a split in another universe, caused by a black hole. The black hole resides in our parent universe, but all the matter that goes in gets pushed out the other side through a white hole, which is a "large antigravity source", and this is predicted to be found according to M-theory.
-
Discussing a centre and an edge to the Universe is a Gross Oversimplification of the whole thing. Why should there be either?
Black Holes are not necessarily very massive - there are probably millions and millions of them. How would one of them cause the whole Universe to form?
-
That is how M-theory works.We live in a multiverse according to the theory. Black holes expel matter out the other end, creating a new bubble universe. Like when a soap bubble splits in half.
BTW there is a TNS podcast named "Naked_Scientists_Show_05.01.30.mp3" , it is on the website somewhere. It has an interview with a scientist talking about M-Theory.
-
Suppose you have two identical, sealed sandtimers. These are identical in every way, from the number of grains to the number of atoms and particles in each sandtimer, and the placement of all other particles is identical in every way.
Not possible, it violates Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
Now, you flip both of these over at exactly the same nanosecond and watch the grains fall through.
Do you think that each timer would have the exact same grain(s) falling through at any given time?
Do you think that both sand timers would be perfectly synchronized in every single possible way?
My belief is that the answer is 'NO' to both questions.( I suggest chaos theory or a sort of entropy at work here)
So if we consider the experiment before us :
-Both sandtimers are identical in every way, down to the last particle
Not possible for the reason up. If you made them with greater and simpler grains, for example little steel balls, then they would be synchronized, in the limits of experimental errors of measure.
-
I think the sandtimer experiment wouldn't work even in classic theory (absent Heisenberg). As soon as the experiment starts the two timers will experience different electromagnetic fluctuations in the space they occupy. The differences will be amplified through time and the timers will gradually drift apart.
You might have better luck counting state changes in caesium atoms. But, even then, you can never get exactly the same experience for each atom.