The flaw that I see in common in many of these philosophical arguments over this topic is this: You assume the only acceptable answer is universal. I can work with that flaw and say: the only acceptable answer is that it is arbitrary and often practical for humans and other creatures and non-intelligent entities to behave “as if” they are themselves objects which interact with what they treat “as if also” objects. Objects with gaps inbetween them.

The flaw that I see in common in many of these philosophical arguments over this topic is this:

You assume the only acceptable answer is universal.

I can work with that flaw and say: the only acceptable answer is that it is arbitrary and often practical for humans and other creatures and non-intelligent entities to behave “as if” they are themselves objects which interact with what they treat “as if also” objects.

Objects with gaps inbetween them.

——

Invisible stuff also interacts as if there are gaps. Do not electromagnetic forces interact as if separate and then differently when not?

======

There is because of friction and slide at interfaces. Child’s play

=====

You can view electrons as if marbles rolling. Marbles that are “in the gap” between pizza and plate.

===

Implied in “no gap” is: “No gap worth mentioning”. It is a matter of practicality, not absoluteness.

——

Indeed you can. And you can treat a probability cloud as an object with which below a certain probability, it isn’t there.

What’s there when probability is below a particular point?

Gap.

=====

They are. I think you’re arguing that there’s “no nothing” and I’m not arguing that. But that something is still a gap until it interacts with the other things or has some establishable relationship.

Interfaces (boundaries) help form gaps between objects. You find interfaces in renormalization in QM. It always seemed like a “cheat” but it’s not. it just means that you can use real measurements now and again to keep your otherwise measurement-free theory in line.

——

Now, if you can MEASURE, there’s a point “just beyond” that measurement.

What’s beyond that measurement? Gap.

—–

Look at how semiconductors work., messing around with an electron hole. What a ridiculous notion but it works.

=====

Gaps at that scale usually in terms of discrete energy levels rather than location.

“The energy level differences in Lutetium-177. Note how there are only specific, discrete energy levels that are acceptable. While the energy levels are discrete, the positions of the electrons are not.”

So, energy band gaps are pretty well mapped out for a lot of objects, whose locations are tricky to pinpoint.

=====

Quantum (quanta) are discrete rather than continuous.
Discrete means boundaries. Outside of boundaries are gaps.

Fuzzy interfacing to gap? Sure.

=====

Good question. I saw once a study where they temporarily got a superfluid below 0K using a magnetic flip trick and it showed anti-grav fx. I should find it again.

=====

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


nine + = 17

Leave a Reply