Jump to content

Duda Jarek

Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Duda Jarek

  1. I have finally worked out mathematical framework up to Euler-Lagrange for this ellipsoid field/liquid crystal like approach:

    - field of 3 distinguishable axes using 3x3 matrices preferring fixed set of eigenvalues,

    - hedgehog of one of 3 axes for 3 leptons - charges governed by Maxwell equations, with magnetic dipole moment due to hairy ball theorem,

    - then expanding to 4x4 matrices we get second set of Maxwell equations for GEM ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitoelectromagnetism ).


    The approach generalizes Faber's from vector to matrix field.

    Electromagnetic (A vector, F tensor) are no longer just (connection Gamma, curvature R), but additionally include dependence of rotated shape (eigenvalues).

    This way we can get vacuum dynamics of 3 strengths: EM >> pilot wave >> GEM.


    Below is the main diagram with concepts.

    I have submitted to arxiv but is "on hold" as usual, so I have put it here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353932148_Framework_for_liquid_crystal_based_particle_models

    It is initial version I will work on especially:

    - the details of potential to choose is the main open question, and very difficult one - it contains weak/strong interactions,

    - explaining gravitational mass - spatial curvature caused e.g. by energy density, activation of potential,

    - finally numerics first aiming agreement with electron, 3 leptons, hopefully enforcing intrinsic periodic process: de Broglie clock.

    Would gladly discuss/collaborate.


  2. Sure, as you mention, these ways have various costs based on physical limitations - market should stabilize on the cheapest ways up to profitability level, which grows with gold price.

    The problem is that potentially infinite number of various cryptocurrencies do not have such physical limitations - hence can grow to consume just all available resources ...

    ... unless being banned like https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/26/iran-bans-bitcoin-mining-as-its-cities-suffer-blackouts.html

  3. Sure electricity cost is lower, but total cost (including e.g. hardware) market is willing to pay for $100 banknote is ~$99 ... giving the miner/investor $1 profit, at $99 cost for civilization ... plus e.g. these $37-49 "in health and climate damage" externalities.


    Sure mining of gold/silver also has externalities - which should be included in evaluation of such investement, compensated e.g. through taxes to those who pay them ... but

    1) In contrast to massive hashing, our civilization needs these metals e.g. to make electronics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold#Electronics   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver#Electronics

    2) in contrast to potentially infinite number of various cryptocurrencies which can consume all available resources, real mining has reasonable physical limits for used resources.

  4. As suggested, I have searched for "BTC cost of mining", getting https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-05-25/bitcoin-s-btc-cost-to-society-is-impossible-to-ignore


    One 2020 study, based on energy required per coin, estimated that each $1 of Bitcoin value created was responsible for $0.49 in health and climate damages in the U.S. and $0.37 in China.

    These are additional externalities, one type of many completely ignored by miners.

    Your estimation seems to correspond to energy cost only, but even miners themselves have more costs - especially hardware (which will not satisfy other utility, which manufacturer did not produced other electronics), also e.g. human costs and many others.

    The rules of market say that total amortized costs paid by investors/miners should stabilize at paying ~$99 worth various resources for $100 banknote ... and looking at bitcoin price and its energy consumption in one plot, they have nearly identical trends: annual energy consumption in TWh is ~price / $100.

  5. Sure, maintaining Bitcoin's last 6 year 2x growth/year for the next 6 years is hopefully impossible (but looks like many speculators believe it will happen).

    But there are thousands of cryptocurrencies, also "evolving" to consume succeeding resources (e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/may/26/new-cryptocurrency-chia-blamed-for-hard-drive-shortages ) ...

    So what percentage of world resources could be stable attractor for crypto consumption - somehow balancing observed pursue for individual gains? Balancing with what?

  6. The general issue is that we don't have "mind of a civilization wanting the best for it" ... but rather individuals pursuing individual gains.

    E.g. if getting opportunity to get $100 banknote by burning $99 worth resources (e.g. through calculating hashes), we can see individuals massively do it - for $1 individual profit, no matter it means $99 resource loss for civilization.

  7. Many countries have low fertility problem of decreasing (TFR<2.1) and aging population ... beside developing countries - which will reduce fertility when most children start surviving to become an adult, also with education.

    Sure food production might become a huge problem due to climate change ... another huge problem is drinking water e.g. https://www.unicef.org/stories/water-and-climate-change-10-things-you-should-know


    ps. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate



    https://www.nature.com/articles/nature08230 :


  8. 19 minutes ago, exchemist said:

    Population growth is another.

    Population growth seems prevented by just children survivability, improved live quality - see e.g. some Hans Rosling talks like


    19 minutes ago, exchemist said:

    Climate change and pollution are far more pressing concerns than bloody bitcoin

    Exponentially growing additional waste makes fight with climate change even more hopeless ... 1 individual can easily exceed a million times required consumption here - it doesn't matter that 99% of population care and save resources, if 0.001-th percentile can saturate close to 100% of world resource usage.

  9. 24 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

    No, it is not.

    What do you mean? People buy hardware and use energy just to get money (for otherwise meaningless activity) ... until reaching profitability level, like burning $99 worth resources to get $100 banknote.


    In contrast, mining other resources like gold is not otherwise meaningless ( https://www.mecmining.com.au/top-5-uses-of-gold-one-of-the-worlds-most-coveted-metals/ ).

    But most importantly it is limited - in contrast to unlimited number of cryptocurrencies they can create, it is impossible to maintain exponential growth of gold mining ... while cryptocurrencies can use literally all available resources, growing exponentially until saturating on 100% of world energy production cap.

  10. Exactly - pathological mechanisms can develop when society no longer needs to focus on survival - perfect connection, thanks!

    Thousands, hundreds of years ago most of society had to focus on crucial activities like food production.

    With efficiency growth, now nearly nobody cares about food producers minorities, leaving place for growth of various activities with questionable effects for well being, survival of our civilization.

    Crypto is the next level - literally giving a person $100 banknote for burning $99 worth of resources - leading to exponentially growing movement of resource burning ... like if Calhoune mouses start burning provided food.

    How long can a civilization survive when reaching such higher level Calhoune-type mechanism?

  11. Regarding Fermi paradox, naive estimations suggest that statistically lots of civilizations should develop in the Universe ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation , maybe overestimated), the Universe has ~13.8 billion years, so older civilizations should differ by millions, thousands of years - be super advances ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale ) ...

    But we don't see any, suggesting e.g. that civilizations finally die - it would be valuable to try to understand the reasons, e.g. to try to prevent such destiny for ours if possible (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doomsday_Clock )


    Returning to cryptocurrencies example, they have very strong positive feedback mechanisms - the higher the price:

    Hence we can observe very clear 2x per year exponential growth of energy consumption, it is capped by 100% of world energy production - will at most saturate there for cryptocurrencies.

    What lower percentage of world energy production could they stabilize at? What could balance such strong positive feedback?

  12. Let me remind that this thread is not supposed to be about bitcoin, but about Fermi paradox:


    Bitcoin was only example of such positive feedback mechanism leading to exponential growth - such that if continuing last 6 year trend to next 6 years, would reach half of world energy production, what some might find disturbing.

    There are already thousands of cryptocurrencies, and it is not that humans have to be smarter or more reasonable than such hypothetical civilizations, but we are not talking about a few years, but rather thousands.

    So on what percentage of world energy production cryptocurrencies should finally stabilize at - in a decade, century ... ?

    What other exponential growing positive feedback mechanisms of using resources on otherwise meaningless activities like hashing could you think of?

    2 hours ago, Sensei said:

    specialized mining devices

    Chip manufacturers, due to growing financial incentives, decide to produce bitcoin miners instead of standard electronics - couldn't it lead e.g. to shortages of electronics?


    Natural route of evolution of this technology would be creation of satellites which would be placed on orbit and get much more energy directly from the Sun.

    Interesting, but how would it prevent from cryptomining simultaneously also in other places?

    Or couldn't such supercomputer search e.g. for cure for cancer etc. instead of calculating hashes?

  13. There is strong positive feedback: the higher the price, the more people are focused, it becomes profitable to mine on a growing percentage of electronics, chip manufacturers have growing incentive to switch to miner production, the higher influence this society has ...

    Sure it is bounded by 100% of world energy production - so definitely in 7 years it will have to slow down, at most saturating to 100%.

    But is 100% of world resources for cryptominig a reasonable level?

    If not, on which lower level it could stabilize itself? Beside 100% boundary, what are other mechanisms to slow down such exponential growth?

    From perspective of Fermi paradox, how universal is such resistance - what percentage of civilizations could stop all such positive feedback mechanisms before being reaching self-destruction?

  14. Bitcoin energy consumption below from https://cbeci.org/, nearly exactly 2x growth per year - in 6 years should grow for 1% to ~60% of world energy production.

    Sure, I believe that for some calculating hashes might be the highest value of life, but if indeed approaching 100% of civilization resources, it might mean its end (?)

    Are there strong enough mechanisms to balance this positive feedback on some reasonable level? If not, how strong scenario is it for Fermi paradox?



  15. Imagine civilization gets a positive feedback mechanism for wasting resources, like cryptocurrencies: “one gets $100 banknote if burning $99 worth resources”, leading to exponential growth of waste at individual gains.

    We can observe exponential growth of their energy consumption, worsening shortages of electronics, simultaneously these cult-like societies are growing in power/influence, can buy politicians (e.g. El Salvador) … further taking control of chip manufacturers and power plants, in a few years growing to 50%, 90%, 99% of world energy production?

    Can such positive feedback be always balanced at a reasonable level, instead of approaching 100% of resources of civilization? In other words: could it lead to fading out end of civilization – as a way for “It is the nature of intelligent life to destroy itself” explanation of Fermi paradox? How frequent could it be? What are the chances for our civilization?

  16. The "observing average trajectory" experiment is only against "photon is huge because of going all trajectories in interference" type of claims - no, only its wave part of duality, "pilot wave" travels all the trajectories.

    The particle part of duality, the corpuscle, seems to travel single trajectory - especially for charged indivisible electron, but it seems also true for (tough to split) photon - the question is about size of this part.


    Attosecond chronoscopy seems very useful to test such models of photons as wavepacket also of EM field.

    But generally I still miss concrete experimental arguments to estimate this size.

  17. Oh, so you refer not to attosecond chronoscopy, but to "Observing the Average Trajectories of Single Photons in a Two-Slit Interferometer" https://science.sciencemag.org/content/332/6034/1170.full - it is for single photons.

    On the left you have source of single photons from one of two slits. In the center you have calcite (birefringent crystal) which encodes which-way information in photon polarization. On the right you have measurement of both position and polarization. This is weak measurement: weak enough not to destroy interference, but allowing to obtain averaged trajectories from statistics.


    They write these trajectories agree with dBB:


    Single-particle trajectories measured in this fashion reproduce those predicted by the Bohm–de Broglie interpretation of quantum mechanics (8), although the reconstruction is in no way dependent on a choice of interpretation.


  18. They mostly use ultrashort pulse laser or electron wavepackets, plus techniques like frequency comb to get these amazing time resolutions.

    I don't think we can assume that they use single e.g. photon source (?), however, they use single photon atomic transitions - to be able to assume that only one was absorbed.

  19. 15 minutes ago, martillo said:

    "A single photon passing through a double-slit experiment lands on the screen with a probability distribution given by its interference pattern determined by Maxwell's equations.[61]  However, experiments confirm that the photon is not a short pulse of electromagnetic radiation; it does not spread out as it propagates, nor does it divide when it encounters a beam splitter.[62]

    from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon - [62] is Saleh, B.E.A. & Teich, M.C. (2007). Fundamentals of Photonics. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-35832-9.

    Could anybody elaborate on this not being a short pulse of electromagnetic radiation?

    So what happens during these observed delays e.g. of photoemission?


    If it is about interference like Mach-Zehnder, there is both EM wave governed by Maxwell equations, and quantum amplitude governed e.g. by Schrodinger -  "pilot" wave for psi=sqrt(rho) exp(-iS/hbar) Madelung substitution( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_wave_theory#Mathematical_formulation_for_a_single_particle ).
    For let say Mach-Zehnder interference, there is no doubts that "pilot" wave of quantum amplitudes propagates through both trajectories.

    However, the question is about corpuscular part of wave-particle duality, does it also propagate through both trajectories, or maybe only through one like in this diagram (from http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V16NO2PDF/V16N2CRO.pdf ) :


    In case of interference of electron, it is elementary charge - cannot split in two, in experiments it is always nearly point-like charge ... also, scenarios with electron going through lower or upper arm differ by electric field around such setting influencing surrounding atoms - they are very different.
    For single photons, there are e.g. these experiments measuring averaged trajectories of interfering photons: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/332/6034/1170.full


    There are also experiments being able to use both wave and particle part of duality simultaneously, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afshar_experiment

    So while quantum amplitude of single photon: the wave part of wave-particle duality seems to form e.g. plane waves, the corpuscular part seems to travel through a concrete trajectory (e.g. from the screen to our eyes).

  20. While there are still needed theoretical models e.g. of single photon, this ~decade old attosecond chronoscopy brings hope to finally verify them experimentally - gathered: https://scholar.google.pl/scholar?cites=15193546925951882986&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en
    E.g. 2020 "Probing molecular environment through photoemission delays" https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-020-0887-8


    Attosecond chronoscopy has revealed small but measurable delays in photoionization, characterized by the ejection of an electron on absorption of a single photon. Ionization-delay measurements in atomic targets provide a wealth of information about the  timing  of  the  photoelectric  effect,  resonances,  electron  correlations  and  transport.


  21. Physics is much more than clicks of detectors - we have also lasers e.g. with attosecond-scale pulses, resonators ...

    ... or delays also in atomic processes, like observed ~21 attosecod delay in photoemission ( https://science.sciencemag.org/content/328/5986/1658 ) - EM radiation, being mainly response to electron dynamics, propagates ~6nm during this time.


    So what exactly happens during such 21as of production of EM field of single optical photon?

    This is "what happens in the center of star" type of question - we might be never able to directly measure its details, but should have self-consistent models of what actually happens there - based on general knowledge e.g. of electromagnetism, verified by indirect consequences.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.