« Happy Thanksgiving | Main | In Which I Bravely Submit Myself as a Subject for Medical Testing »

November 24, 2007

Confused Americans for Truth - Don't Look at the Universe or it May Go Away

by Ferdinand T Cat

Whenever I see a story like this, I immediately become suspicious. The headline is Mankind shortening the universe's life, and the thrust of the story is that because quantum theory implies that observation affects the state of subatomic particles, the way we're observing distant galaxies may be changing the universe into a state that isn't going to last nearly as long as it would have otherwise. It's based on comments made to New Scientist magazine by physicist Lawrence Krauss and cosmologist James Dent.

In this case, the article is full of words like suggests and alleges, which means that the writer and his sources realize their conclusions are built upon some pretty rapidly shifting sand. The shiftiest part of the sand relates to the quantum Zeno effect. The quantum Zeno effect occurs when measuring the states of particles prevents them from decaying in the normal manner. Krauss and Dent applied this idea to the universe, and concluded that the 1998 study which indicated the existence of dark energy could have caused the universe to switch into an unstable state.

This is pretty far-fetched. The quantum Zeno effect applies to certain particles being measured in certain ways. There is no evidence it has any application to dark energy, which is a relatively new discovery that we only barely understand. It's always dangerous to assume that what works for one thing is going to work for everything. For example, cats have been observing humans for centuries, and it hasn't had any effect on the aging process. There's no quantum Zeno effect there. Conversely, when Bruce watches The Gremlin do her homework, she's less likely to decay into a giggle fit. This, however, has nothing to do with quantum mechanics or observer effects.

The situations in which the quantum Zeno effect have been observed (e.g. here and here) involve close interaction between the observed particle and the observation apparatus. This is definitely not the case when looking at stars through a telescope, where the close interaction is between the telescope and the photons from something that happened millions of years ago. To say that we have observed dark energy is like looking at a light bulb and saying that you've just observed electricity.

So, what can we conclude from all this? Well, I could conclude that Lawrence Krauss and James Dent are very sloppy scientists; however, it's possible that they started out as careful researchers and decayed into sloppy scientists because they haven't been subjected to enough observation. Or, it could be that they only appear to be sloppy because of the way they were observed by Roger Highfield, who wrote the original article on which this story is based. Highfield talks about computations and equations, but he may have been making unjustified assumptions about something intended to be wild speculation. See how murky things can get when you start looking at things from a quantum-theoretical point of view?

Personally, I'm not worried about any of this, but just in case, I'm going to go check my food dish and let somebody know if it's decayed from a full state to an empty state while I wasn't watching.

Respectfully submitted,

Ferdinand T. Cat

Trackposted to Perri Nelson's Website, Is It Just Me?, Rosemary's Thoughts, Faultline USA, The Uncooperative Radio Show!, The Pink Flamingo, Phastidio.net, Right Voices, and Adeline and Hazel, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

# At Sat 5:43 PM | Permalink | Trackback URI | Comments (3) | More Confused Americans for Truth | Tags:

Trackback Pings

» Dr Jan Adams Speaks like a Politician from Truth in Cosmetic Surgery Blog
In the video clip, Harvey Levin really should limit his discussion in medical matters. For him to say the operation should have taken four hours is pretty irresponsible. We don't even know what exactly the operation entailed as of yet, but a breast r... [Read More]

Tracked on November 28, 2007 7:48 AM

Comments

It seems to me that much of what passes for science (at least what the media calls science these days) is actually nothing but speculation. Cosmology is one area where we've been subjected to speculation masquerading as science for decades.

Of course, we need to make sure that the same people that hyped global warming into an environmental crisis don't get a hold of this idea. After all, it will simply prove that mankind's existence is bad for the universe at large and that we must all be exterminated in order to preserve the universe.

Isn't that they way they think anyway?


Posted by: Perri Nelson at November 24, 2007 5:51 PM

Does this mean I shouldn't howl at the moon any more? That's gonna be hard....


Posted by: No Apology at November 24, 2007 7:20 PM

"There is no evidence it has any application to dark energy, which is a relatively new discovery that we only barely understand."

Not only that but "dark energy" and "dark matter" have yet to be actually discovered. The existence of these phenomena are inferred as a means of filling the holes in other theories, explaining observed phenomena that do not fit with general relativity, for example.

Inferring the existence of "dark matter" and "dark energy" and theorizing about their effects is NOT observing them, simply cogitatin' and musin' about things some folks imagine exist.

If my daydreams could effect a change in reality, I'd have been Superman at age 6.


Posted by: David at December 4, 2007 9:22 AM

Leave a comment

HTML is not allowed in comments; however, if you put in a raw URL (http://www.somewhere.com/page.html) it will automatically be converted to a link.. Also, it is likely your comment will not appear unless you refresh the page manually after posting it.

Leave a comment