Popular Scientific Theory

The Everything Theory

A Brief Description of Many Physics Theories

By Nikki Stone – May 6th, 2020

Scientific Theory

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle

The problem with quantum experiments is the seemingly unavoidable tendency of humans to influence the situation and velocity of small particles. This happens by observing the particles, and it has quantum physicists baffled. Physicists have created machines like particle accelerators that remove human influence from the tests of accelerating a particle's energy.

When examining the same particle, physicists say that we cannot help but affect quanta or quantum particles' behavior. The light that Physicists use to help them see objects they observe does influence the behavior of Photons; for example, the most mynute amount of light that has no mass or electrical charge can still influence a particle's trajectory, changing its velocity and speed.

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.

Werner Heisenberg was a physicist that theorized that our observations of any experiment affect the behavior of any given subject. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle might sound challenging to understand; the name itself is kind of intimidating. However, it is easy to comprehend, and once we do, we will understand the fundamental principle of quantum mechanics.

Let us pretend we are blind, and over time with practice, we can determine the distance to an object by throwing something at it, like a ball. If, for example, we throw the ball at a nearby object, the ball will quickly return to us. And furthermore, we will know that the object is close to us. If we throw the ball at a chair across the street from us, it will take longer to return, and we will know that the chair is further away.

The problem is that when if we throw a ball at a chair, the ball can sometimes knock the chair down, and still, the ball may have enough force and momentum to return the ball back to us. We might have known the location of the chair when we first throw the ball, but if the chair has been knocked back or fallen down, we would have no way to know the chair's location at this point in time. We could calculate the velocity of the ball after we hit the chair, but we have no idea what the speed of the ball was before it hit the chair.

Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle reveals this problem. Knowing the velocity of an object, we measure it, but by measuring it, we are forced to effect it to affect it.

The same principle applies in observation; by observing an object, we inadvertently affect its position.

The uncertainty of an object's position and velocity makes it difficult for a physicist to determine much about the item.

Of course, physicists are not precisely throwing medicine balls at quanta to measure them, but even the slightest interference can cause the microscopic particles to behave differently.

Physicists are forced to create experiments based on the thought of the observations from the real experiments conducted in a quantum field. These experiments in thought are meant to prove and or disprove the Theory.

The Many-Worlds Theory

The Many-Worlds theory.

This Theory was introduced to us in 1957 by Hugh Everett III.

The Theory was founded upon until another physicist, Max Tegman, created the quantum suicide experiment, helping to support the Theory.

In the Many-Worlds theory, the world splits into a copy of itself for each possible outcome to an action. This is a quick process Everett called decohesion.

It would be like we have two choices in front of us, but rather than making a choice, the universe splits apart so that each action is taken.

The Many Worlds theory has many rules; one such rule is as the universe splits into all the choice options, the individual is unaware of the other versions and choices of the other universe.

This states that the individual who makes choice A be it a right choice or not, is unaware of the version of themself that made choice B instead, and also the opposite is true.

Quantum Suicide:

The same is true for the case of Quantum Suicide.

When A man pulls the trigger of a gun, there can only be two possible outcomes: The gun will fire, or the gun does not fire. So, if the man pulls the trigger, either he will live, or he will die. Each time the man pulls the trigger, the universe will split to accommodate each possible outcome of the firing of the weapon. When and if the man dies, the universe is no longer able to split based on just pulling the trigger; now, the possible outcome for death is reduced to a factor of 0. However, with Life, there are still two chances: The man either continues to live, or the man dies.

When pulling the trigger and the universe split in two, the version of the man who lived will be unaware that he has died in a different choice or understanding of the split in-universe. So he would continue to live and will again be confronted by the two choices, have the chance to pull the trigger again. Furthermore, each time he pulls the trigger, the universe will also split, with the version of the man who lives continuing and still completely unaware of all the deaths in the split or parallel universes.

With this Theory, he would continue to live or exist in the quantum realm of the split universe, and this is called Quantum immortality.

So in this Theory, why are all the attempted suicides immortal?

What is interesting about the Many-Worlds interpretation is that according to the Theory, in some parallel universe, they are. However, we do not believe this to be the case because the splitting of the universe is not only dependant on our life or death choices, we are observing, in this case, and, only bystanders and the rules of probability are a factor when the firearm goes off in our version of the universe, we have no way to change the end result, and are stuck with the consequences, even if we chose to pick up the gun and fire it our version of the universe will continue to remain in its original state.

Once a man is dead, there can be no further outcomes from pulling the trigger; the choice of he is living or is dead is again reduced to 0.

The Copenhagen Interpretation

The Many-Worlds theory supposes that the universe splits to accommodate each one for each possible outcome of any given action. The We as the observer is removed from the equation and can not influence the result.

However, the Many-Worlds theory turns a widely accepted theory of quantum mechanics on its ear. Moreover, in an unpredictable quantum universe, this is saying something.

For the last century, the most accepted explanation for why the same quantum particle may behave in different ways.

Physicist Niels Bohr first posed the Copenhagen interpretation in 1920. It says a quantum particle does not exist in one state or another but all of its possible states at once. Only when we observe its state is that a quantum particle is essentially forced to choose one probability, and that is the state that we observe is a forced state, due to the fact the particle is forced to make a choice in its movement, and that choice, some states that we observe.

Since they can be forced into the different observable states each time, this is why quantum particles behave erratically.

The state of existence in all possible states at one time is called coherent superposition. The total of all possible states in which an item can exist in a wave or particle form from Photons that travel in both directions at once. The object's wave function.

When we can observe an object, the superposition collapses, and the item is sent into the state of its wave function.

Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics has become A famous thought experiment involving a cat and a box. It is called Schrödinger's cat, and it was first introduced by the Viennese physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935.

Schrödinger put a cat in a box with some radioactive material and a Geiger counter in this experiment. Once the Geiger counter sensed the decay of radioactive material, it triggered a hammer to break a flask containing hydrocyanic acid, which, when released, would kill the cat.

In order to eliminate the uncertainty of the cat's fate, the experiment was to take place within a short period of time, one hour, long enough so that some of the radioactive material could start to decay, but also a short enough period of time, that maybe none of the material would decay.

Schrödinger's experiment: The cat was placed in a box. During the time the cat was in the box, the cat existed in an unknown state.

Since we could not observe the cat, we could not say whether the cat was dead or alive. It existed in a state of both Life and death.

It is like quantum physics' answer to the Zen question: If a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it, did it make a sound?

Since the Copenhagen theory says that, when observed, an object is forced to take one state or another.

The Implications of Quantum Physics

In classical science and Newtonian physics, the theories proposed that quantum physics is insane. Even Erwin Schrödinger called his cat experiment "ridiculous." However, from what science has observed, the laws that govern the world we see every day do not hold on the quantum level.

Quantum physics dating back only to about 1900.

The theories that have been posted on the subject are all just theories. There are theories that have different explanations for the things that take place at the quantum level.

What history will show is correct.

Perhaps the one theory that proves to be the true explanation for quantum physics has not been posted at this time.

The one who will propose it may not be born yet. However, given the logic that this field of study has established, is it possible that all theories explaining quantum physics are equally valid simultaneously.

The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics is perhaps the most comforting Theory out there.

Explaining that particles exist in all states at once is its incoherent superposition, our understanding of the universe is put slightly askew but is somewhat comprehensible. It makes humans the cause of an object is determined shape.

Although scientists find the particle's ability to exist in more than one state very frustrating, and that our observations affect the particle.

At least it does not continue to exist in all states while we are looking at it.

Everett's Many Worlds interpretation theory.

This Theory takes all our power away over the quantum universe.

Instead, it states we are merely observers of the split that takes place with each possible outcome.

So, in essence, our Many Worlds theory, the theory of cause and effect, goes out the window.

This makes the Many Worlds interpretation somewhat disturbing.

If it is true, then some universe parallels like the one we currently inhabit Hitler could have successfully conquered the known world. However, in the same token, in another universe, the United States never dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The Many Worlds theory also certainly contradicts Occam's razor's idea that the simplest explanation is the correct one.

A strange concept in the Many Worlds theory is that time does not exist in a coherent, linear motion. Instead, it jumps and restarts, existing as branches, not lines.

These branches are as numerous as any number of choices and consequences to all of the actions that have ever been of all time.

The field of theoretical physics has already progressed dramatically since its inception a century ago.

Although he had his theory of the quantum world, he may or may not have accepted the Many Worlds theory.

"If you are not shocked by quantum theory, you have not understood it." quoted Bohr.

How Occam's Razor Functions

The simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

We have all heard it before "The simplest explanation is usually the right one" It is a standard deduction, the basic principles of this Theory.

Occam's razor is used in many ways in our society. To deduce a problem or situation and eliminate the unnecessary. How we use this principle is not how it was meant to be used. There are two things considered the basis of Occam's razor, and they were written in Latin.

They represent the basis of our investigation of the universe and the way we see our environment. It is based upon Occam's razor.

Our world would be very a different place without Occam's razor.

Let us look and Germs and Plants; they can carry out complex tasks such as infection and photosynthesis. We value these simple models. Moreover, when it comes to human-made systems, we tend to base structures upon what we already know works the most straightforward explanation, like computer memory modeled on our brain processes.

One of the critical things that Occam's razor reveals is the subjectivity with which we view the universe. Sure the sky is blue, and we know it is Blue by looking at it, but the shade of blue that we see could be very different from what another sees.

Anyone who has ever debated over is the phone's color, black or dark blue, can appreciate this world view and the bias of our worldview and how it affects our decisions.

In this article, we examine the ability of Occam's razor to become twisted and distorted, those who prize it and those who shun it.

However, first, who exactly came up with this simple, yet complex idea?

William of Occam

So who is this Occam fellow?

Occam is a town in England, not a man. More specifically, it is the town where William of Occam lived and was born in 1285 and lived until 1349, during the time when surnames were uncommon, and their place knew people of provenance.

He was a philosopher and a monk, a man who took his vow of poverty very seriously, meaning he lived using what was necessary. One might get the impression that this vow of poverty was a form of simplicity that gave William his big idea.

The basis of this theory was already established thought by this time.

By creating a simple sentence of logic, he ensured its safe passage into modern times. It kind of makes us wonder what great wisdom was not similarly packaged and is lost forever, doesn't it?

The Greek philosopher Aristotle was attributed to the idea that perfection equals simplicity and vice versa. Aristotle was known for the phrase, "Perfect nature is, the fewer means it requires for its operation."

Just a glance at how we approach the scientific investigation, and the fact that Occam's razor has survived shows us that this idea still exists.

While William did not come up with the principle of Parsimony, it positively influenced his life. Not only did William live under his vow of poverty, but he also wrote on the matter. His order of Monks disagreed with Pope John XXII over the issue, but the Pope could not stand for this and had some of the Monks expelled from the order. He went to Munich, where he was protected from the sympathetic Emperor Louis IV, the Bavarian ruler of the greater Munich area.

After William was kicked out of the church, he wrote a paper on Pope John for being a Heretic.

Albert Einstein's fluctuations in the space-time continuum were chosen based on Occam's razor.

Occam's Razor and the Scientific Method

Occam's razor is based on that simplicity equals perfection. It perfectly fits the scientific method, the series of steps scientists take to prove or disprove something. Indeed, we could make the case that the scientific method was built upon Occam's razor.

However, Occam's Razor can be stretched or bent to fit all sorts of ideas. It is important to remember, Occam's razor proves nothing. It serves instead as a tool or a guide to help that when there are two explanations for the same story, the simplest one tends to be the right one.

What is implied in this principle is that simple explanations come from the evidence we already know to be accurate by experience, like the information processed by our senses, we know birds sing because we can hear them sing, we know candy is sweet because we can taste it, things that can easily be explained using empirical evidence tend to trump explanations based on the evidence we cannot sense.

Here is a classic example of the use of Occam's razor. A pair of physicists, Lorentz and Einstein whom both concluded that mathematically, the closer to light speed we get, the more time slows down. Both of them came to the same conclusion from their calculations, but Einstein's explanation was different from Lorentz's. Lorentz concluded that it was changed that takes place in the "the ether." The problem is science does not hold that "the ether" exists, and therefore it was a problematic element in the equation.

Einstein's theory used no reference to "the ether, and his description eventually won over the other.

Occam's razor had gained acceptance in the academic realm, resulting in the principle being distorted over time.

A physicist, Ernst Mach, used Occams razor as part of parcel evidence saying "research should use the simplest methods to arrive at conclusions" must exclude from that process any evidence that is not empirical. This is based on positivism, the idea that if something cannot be proven empirically, it does not exist.

Some as dull logic, this kind of thinking is viewed as dull logic, dividing different theories. Both opposing theories use Occam's razor to disprove each other's ideas.

Occam Programming Language

Occam's razor will be used in the 80s for computer programming. Computer language programming is an enormous undertaking, and programmers need to use the most straightforward route to create an executable program.

Occams programming language was developed in 1983 by David May.

May started this language to keep the structure as simple as possible.

Who Uses Occam's Razor?

Einstein would use Occam's razor, most scientists can, to help them through large equations; scientists often use Occams razor to get quickly get from point A to point B within a set of data. After all, the easiest and most of the time, the fastest route between two points is a straight line.

Occam's razor is a tool and sometimes is used as evidence itself. Some people tend to believe in only what they can see or calculate, or be proven by science.

However, a confirmed skeptic will tell us that he only uses Occam's razor as a tool for considering different explanations. Skeptics genuinely take for granted the ability of Occam's razor to pick the simplest explanation but do not use it to discount other, more complex answers. Some facts might come to light later. That shows a more accurate explanation. True skeptics should always aim to keep an open mind.

There are, however, some skeptical people and scientists alike who wield the razor-like sword.

These people will use it for their own theories and again use it to disprove others' theories. There are problems with using Occam's razor as a tool to prove or disprove an explanation. One, determining whether something is simple (say, empirical evidence) is subjective, meaning it is up to the individual to interpret its simplicity. Two, no evidence supports the notion that simplicity equals truth.

It is important to remember that Aristotle's idea says that perfection is found in simplicity is a human-made idea. It is not supported by math or physics, or chemistry. However, it has some as factual.

Some say that Occam's razor proves their ideology is correct. After all, isn't it a more straightforward explanation to say that God created the universe, and everything in it, than saying everything was created by the Big Bang

?That explanation still supports that God exists; he created the Big Bang to get things rolling before he created Life, who is to say? Atheists do not believe in God.

Atheists use Occam's razor with the Aristotle ideals of Simple=Perfection.

What if there were no God? If then, would the universe and everything in it would be much easier to explain, right?

The problem with the argument is that what constitutes simplicity is subjective. Furthermore, that rationally, we can not show that anything could be any simpler.

We can, however, see that there are some redundancies on levels we can observe, but we cannot positively identify that these are not necessary on the whole. Photosynthesis, for example, is a reasonably complex mechanism. Does this mean it is not the most straightforward possible means of achieving food production in a plant? We have yet to develop a more straightforward process to achieve the same result in the system.

All things said, at this point, we should have an idea of the way that Occam's razor works and is used in Theory to further another Theory and deduct one possible answer over another.

Is Occam's razor a good idea?

Opposition to Occam's Razor

Have we ever wondered what William would make of using his principle to try and disprove God? Since he was a monk. He probably would disagree and point out that the razor is not a proof-finding theory. Furthermore, for this very reason, some groups say that it does not have a good use at all and to stay away from its theories. Others will use Occam's razor; on a daily basis and do not like how other groups use it to discount theories.

Some believe the razor serves no purpose at all.

Religion is based on faith. The world is based on a creator, or God defies Occam's razor. The idea is inherently irrational, after all. What is more, we have no empirical evidence of the existence of God. However, religious thinkers point out that evidence of God's presence is all around; just look at the trees, the air, and human humans themselves.

Occam's razor is sometimes used against skeptics who disagree with conspiracy theorists, stating that the razor is proof that conspiracists are way too reaching in their explanations.

Let us take the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The idea that a single, overzealous Communist gunman killed him is a much simpler explanation than the Theory he was murdered by a Government or CIA. That would have involved treachery on levels unseen in U.S. history to that point.

Nevertheless, does one explanation become more straightforward than another? Does this mean one is a better answer than the other? Anyone can produce much circumstantial evidence that points to many different plots. Nevertheless, according to Occam's razor, this additional evidence would be irrelevant in the lone gunman theory. Occam's razor is only serving to the wild misconceptions of this debate when it is used to discount anyone's theories.

There are many limitations to Occam's razor and how it is used.

Quantum Theory

Quantum Theory is the Theory that radiant energy is emitted and absorbed in units, or quanta, rather than in a steady stream. The quantum theory revolutionized physics in the early 1900s; its introduction is often considered the beginning of modern physics. The quantum theory has inspired some of the most brilliant scientific works of the 20th century. Several Nobel Prizes have been awarded for achievements related to the Theory.

Max Planck, a German physicist, originated the quantum theory in 1900. Specific studies made of radiant energy led Planck to conclude that radiant energy is not emitted in a stream like water comes from the faucet, but in spurts (which he called quanta) like bullets from a machine gun. His Theory startled the scientific world, which had accepted the concept of classical physics that the emission and absorption of energy, like all other physical processes, continuously takes place.

In 1905 Albert Einstein helped establish the quantum theory with his explanation of the photoelectric effect, the introduction of electrons to a metal surface and exposing it to light.

Einstein will show that light energy is concentrated into particles of quanta.

(According to classical physics, the power of a light wave, like the energy of a water wave, should be evenly spread over the wave.) Today physicists usually treat light as a wave in processes that involve its transmission and as quanta, called photons, in operations that involve its emission or absorption.

The quantum theory has led to important discoveries about photoelectricity, photochemistry, the specific heats of solids, the structure of atoms and certain activities of atoms, and many other findings of matter and energy. The science that applies the quantum theory to matter is called quantum or wave mechanics.

The Theory of Relativity

Relativity, a theory of space and time determined by physical measurements. The origin of this theory date back to the principles of relative motion formulated by science in the 17th century. In the present day, the Theory is mostly the work of Albert Einstein (1879-1955). Einstein's Theory of space and time are relative concepts, and measurements of space and time depend on the observer's state of motion.

Einstein's Theory is two-part: 1. the special, or restricted, Theory, which concerns measurements made by observers moving at constant velocity concerning each other; and (2) the general Theory, which expands the particular Theory to include measures by observers whose relative velocity is changing. The general Theory applies the principles of relativity to gravitation. In 1905 The Special Theory of relativity was published, and the general Theory, in 1916.

Einstein's Theory of relativity has been of great importance in modern physics. For example, the particular Theory showed scientists that it is possible to unleash the energy contained in the nucleus of the atom. The Theory has influenced all branches of physics dealing with electromagnetic radiation and high-speed particles. It has had a profound effect on astronomy and the related science of cosmology, which attempts to explain the origin and structure of the universe.

The body of scientific principles developed before Einstein's time is referred to as classical physics. When applied to everyday situations, these principles are still valid. The Theory of relativity differs significantly from classical physics when dealing with objects moving at too high speed, with powerful gravitational fields, or with the universe on a broad scale.

Background of the Theory

In 1687, Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727) formulated the fundamental laws of classical physics used in mechanics, and This is the study of forces and the motion they impart to bodies. The laws of classical mechanics conform to a principle of relative motion. According to this principle:

The motions of bodies within a given frame of reference are the same relative to each other, whether the frame of reference is at rest or moves uniformly—that is, at a constant speed and in a straight line. Example: A passenger in a smooth-riding train cannot tell whether it is moving or how fast it moves if he looks only at objects inside the train. This is because everything in the parade, including the passenger, is moving at the same speed. Only by looking out the window at some fixed object can he detect motion. However, if the movement is not uniform, if the train increases or decreases its speed or goes over a rough roadbed, the passenger can feel the motion. Similarly, he can feel motion when the train rounds a curve.

The absolute velocity of an object cannot be determined by measuring the momentum from a place (like earth) that is itself moving. Only relative speed can be measured. Example: The absolute velocity of a rocket launched from the ground depends on the motion provided by its engine and the movement of the earth through space. Measuring the velocity of the rocket by determining the time it takes the rocket to travel from one position to another as observed from the ground gives only the velocity of the rocket in relation to the earth. Determining the absolute velocity of an object is possible only if it can be measured from some non-moving point.

Newton regarded space as to stationary and immovable. He believed that it served as a fixed frame of reference from which all motions could be determined. For the next two centuries, most scientists agreed that Newton's views were correct.

By the mid-19th century, there was substantial evidence that light was made up of waves. To physicists, it seemed apparent that if light consisted of waves, the waves must be transmitted by some medium, just as sea waves are transmitted by water and the vibrations we call sound are transmitted by air. They thus assumed that all of space must be filled with an invisible substance through which light and other kinds of electromagnetic radiation travel. They called this substance the ether.

This theory provided an explanation of light that agreed with the laws of classical mechanics. It also offered the fixed frame of reference, the absolute and immovable space, that Newtonian physics and cosmology required. Nevertheless, the more physicists studied the hypothetical ether, the less real it became. They could find no way to detect it experimentally. It seemed to have no properties except the ability to transmit electromagnetic waves.

Scientists reason that the earth moves through the ether, the speed of light should be different in different directions, just as the speed of water waves measured from a moving ship is faster or slower depending on whether the waves are moving in the direction of the ship's motion or against it. In 1887 Albert Michelson and Edward Morley did an experiment with an instrument capable of measuring the predicted change in the speed of light resulting from the earth's motion in space, but no such difference was detected.

Furthermore, other experiments seemed to indicate that the speed of light was independent of the motion of the light source. However, common sense and classical physics said that a moving source's light should share the motion of the original. Einstein resolved the incompatibility of light with the laws of classical mechanics by taking a new viewpoint.

The Special Theory of Relativity

Einstein formulated his special Theory of relativity on the assumption of two things:

1.The general law of physics are the same for all observers moving with a uniform motion relative to each other.

2.the speed light travels in a vacuum is a universal constant, the same for observers regardless of their relative motion to the light source.

The first statement incorporates the relativity principle of classical mechanics but is more comprehensive. Einstein was thinking of mechanical laws and the rules governing light and other electromagnetic phenomena.

The second statement means that it is futile for an experimenter to determine his velocity through space using a beam of light as a gauge. It is pointless because regardless of the speed of the observer, his measurement of the speed of light will always give the same value. This statement implies that nature offers no absolute reference system for the comparison of time or distance.

The movements of the stars and all the galaxies can be described only with respect to each other, for in space, there are no fixed directions and no boundaries. Space is not a substance but is merely the order or relation of things concerning each other. Without things occupying it, space is nothing.

Einstein developed mathematical equations to be applied to mechanical and electromagnetic problems as part of the Special Theory. These equations modified the Newtonian laws of mechanics and formed the framework for relativistic mechanics, which has been of great importance in nuclear and elementary particle physics. Some of the principles deduced from the equations can be stated as follows:

1.A clock moving at a uniform velocity concerning an observer keeps time slower than a clock at rest.
2.Length changes with velocity. Specifically, a measuring rod, or any other object, moving with respect to an observer, shrinks in the direction of its motion.
3.The energy content of an object increases as its velocity increases. It is impossible to accelerate a body to the speed of light because an infinitely vast energy supply would be needed as the body reached the speed of light.
4.Mass and energy are equivalent. All matter can be converted into energy, and energy can be converted to matter.

The statement that mass and energy an equivalent came from the important equation:

E = mc²

The equation states that the energy (E) contained in any particle of matter is equal to the mass (m) of the particle multiplied by the square of the velocity of light (c). The equation provided the answer for such long-standing problems in physics as to how the sun and stars can radiate light and heat for billions of years and how radioactive substances such as radium can emit particles with very high energy.

In Newtonian physics, time and space are separate things; in relativistic physics, on the other hand, space and time are closely connected. The Russian mathematician Hermann Minkowski (1864-1909) simplified the method of solving many types of problems in special relativity by developing a geometry of four dimensions in which time is related to length, width, and depth—the three dimensions of space in classical physics. The resulting four-dimensional space is called the space-time continuum, or simply space-time. Einstein further developed the idea of space-time in the general Theory of relativity.

Numerous experiments and observations have supported the validity of the Theory of special relativity. For example, the increase of the energy of bodies moving at high speed is fundamental to the design of particle accelerators (atom smashers), in which atomic particles have attained velocities greater than 99.9995 percent of the speed of light. Time dilation (the slowing downtime) for fast-moving objects has been observed in subatomic particles called muons. These particles are commonly created when cosmic rays from outer space strike atoms high in the atmosphere. Muons are extremely unstable and decay into other particles so quickly that, without time dilation, they would all decay a short distance into the atmosphere. However, because of time dilation, muons are observed to reach the earth's surface.

The General Theory of Relativity

The Special Theory of relativity:

This theory applies only to observers moving with uniform velocity in relation to each other. Einstein expanded this Theory into a general theory that also applies to observers with nonuniform, or accelerated, relative motion. The General Theory of relativity has strongly influenced developments in advanced physics, geometry, and astronomy. The Theory is of particular importance in cosmology.

As an essential part of the Theory, Einstein developed a theory of gravitation fundamentally different from that created by Newton. The concept of gravitation in the general Theory of relativity is primarily based on the principle of equivalence. According to this principle, it is not possible by experiment to distinguish between the effects caused by the acceleration of a system and those caused by gravitation—the results are equivalent to each other.

For example, a person in an elevator that accelerates upward will sense that the floor pushes up against him. This effect results from the tendency of the person's body to resist acceleration. However, the same product would be produced if the elevator were stationary and the pull of gravity increasing—there is no way to distinguish between the two effects.

Einstein saw that this equivalence could be explained by relating gravitation to the space-time continuum's geometrical properties. According to the General Theory of relativity, space-time is distorted by the presence of matter: specifically, gravitating bodies bend the space-time continuum. As an object moves through the space-time continuum, it follows the curvature of space-time. The resulting motion of the object is interpreted in classical physics as gravitational attraction.

Einstein developed a set of equations to describe how space-time is distorted by matter. These equations make use of a geometry developed by the 19th-century German mathematician Georg F. B. Riemann. In Riemannian geometry, there are no straight lines but only curves. Therefore, the space described by the general Theory of relativity is a curved space without straight lines.

Einstein proposed three relativistic effects that could be measured to test the general Theory. These effects were the bending of light by a gravitational field, the shifting of the planet Mercury's orbit around the sun, and the gravitational redshift of light (the change in the wavelength of light as it enters or leaves a gravitational field).

Measurements of each of these effects supported the general Theory. The most famous test was conducted during the total eclipse of the sun in 1919. One of the most conclusive tests involves an effect called time delay—a slight delay in the passage of radio signals through a gravitational field. This delay was very accurately measured in the late 1970s by determining when it took radio signals from spacecraft on Mars to reach the earth when Mars was on the opposite side of the sun.

After the General Theory of relativity publication, various new theories of gravitation have been proposed that also incorporate the principle of equivalence. These theories use curved space-time, but they differ from Einstein's Theory in the amount of curvature they predict. Various experiments conducted since the 1960s to measure the effects of the curvature of space-time have tended to support Einstein's theory over the others.

The General Theory of relativity is used in studying the overall structure of the universe. With this theory, scientists have predicted a variety of exotic celestial objects and phenomena, including black holes and gravitational lenses.

Evolution and Theory of Mind

If evolution is correct -- and science holds that traits or abilities found among related species suggest that these traits survived natural selection. Crudely put, the attribute was found beneficial to the survival of the species, and therefore those members who carried the feature lived to reproduce and pass it onto their offspring.

Such is the case with

Theory of mind. Indeed, moves

This ability has served humans as well. Nevertheless, cognitive researchers do not necessarily think that animals like gazelles and lions possess Theory of Mind capability. Most consider humans are higher apes in possession of more advanced intellect. More to the point, if you have looked at lions and considered whether or not they are happy or that they wished it were free, you have just proven yourself capable of the kind of higher-order thinking that Theory of mind is based on.

There are rivals to the Theory of mind in explaining how we learn to predict others' behavior. One of these follows the animal model. The concept of a mental simulation says we expect actions based on our beliefs on what we would do in their shoes.

We use our past experiences to construct mental models of our situation, and We use our brain's power to analyze available information and make our predictions.

Theory of mind goes much farther than mental stimulation in imaging how we read the

Autism and Theory of Mind

The theory of mind differs greatly from other theories in that we can conceive of others' mental states and thinking processes. It states that at some point at a very young age, we become aware that others have completely different beliefs, concepts, and knowledge, and we become aware the knowledge can be categorized. We realize we can lie and fake our emotions. Furthermore, we recognize that other people may feel differently than us, meaning we do not all feel the same thing at the same time; we don't all share the same mental and emotional states and simultaneously. This is our first step toward mental cognition or the process of thinking about thinking.

The skills associated with the Theory of mind do not show themselves in all people; for instance, people with Autism have long been observed to be mind blind, associated with the fact they can not take into consideration others points of view or desires, and this has been linked to the lack of empathy, though that idea has been mostly rescinded in recent years. Science has determined that individuals with Autism or on the spectrum may lack The Theory of Mind skills.

Test have been done with children on the Autistic scale or spectrum, and these tests include false-belief tests.

In an example:

If a child is playing with a toy in their room and they leave their room and place the toy on top of their bed. While the child is gone, her mother comes in, grabs the toy, and puts it into the toy box; when the child returns to the bedroom, where will they look for the toy? Would they ask the Autistic child? Where will the child look for their toy?

A neurotypical child would correctly guess that they would look on the bed for the toy since that is where they left it.

This shows the child has developed an awareness that others may not have knowledge of, a hallmark of the Theory of mind.

Although the other child knows the mother moved the toy, the child that placed the toy on the bed does not. Children on the Autism spectrum generally tend to answer that the child would look in the toy box, that is because they know it was placed there by the mother.

Children with Autism are very prone to fail second-order false-belief tests. These elaborate on the last test, where children are asked what they think a second character feels about another name; for example, what John thinks Todd knows is in his lunch box.

The Theory of mind is a great concept; And perhaps with further study of Autism, we will find more answers to how we are thinking about others.

Networkworldnews.com