Posted: Jul 22, 2010 8:32 pm
twistor59 wrote:...Clever People wrote:It follows that a generic eigenstate of A is not an eigenstate
of A′. If the observer O measures the area and obtains
the minimal value A0, the state of the gravitational
field will be projected on an eigenstate of A. This, in
turn, is not going to be an eigenstate of A′. If then the
observer O′ measures the area, he will therefore find the
state in a superposition of eigenstates of A′. That is to
say, the theory predicts that, for him, the surface does
not have a sharp area. If the experiment is repeated several
times, O′ will observe a probability distribution of
area values. The mean value of the area can be Lorentz
contracted, while the minimal nonzero value of the area
can remain A0.
Clever stuff.
Ignoring unitarity for a mo', something that calculates a probability of an area value that is statistically smudged and observer dependent looks like the beginning of tiling a landscape to me.
GLAST was renamed to the Fermi Telescope and its 1st year of ops. helped test any energy relation for c with no positive result, as yet: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/GLAST ... _year.html