Quantum Consciousness?

[Tmaq]

And translations don't change a vector.

That's an interesting question in itself - and it turns out that the whole field of Riemannian geometry (and therefore general relativity) is founded on the possibility that translation DOES change a vector.

I thought we were talking about the euclidian example of the strip, not one being accelerated or spun relativistically, or in high gradient gravitational fields. IOW, I was seeking a physical, not abstract, example.

Have you heard about the notion that our memories and imagination occur in a hyperbolic space, which is why we actually can picture infinity, and seem to have little limit to how much we can stuff into our kinesthetic and conceptual maps (we have limits on the amount of information, but not on the represented size and shape of the internal maps we use to coordinate it all.)

-Tom

[Atheist Statist]

I thought we were talking about the euclidian example of the strip, not one being accelerated or spun relativistically, or in high gradient gravitational fields. IOW, I was seeking a physical, not abstract, example.

The strip isn't Euclidean. What's your question?

[tism]

But such QM entanglement changes are like the static on one TV screen connected in an undetectable but orderly way to the static on another TV. They are all connected...but it just makes one random pattern into a different random pattern. Information cannot be passed FTL, but random influences can.

Another analogy is the /dev/random device on a computer. You can influence its output by feeding it bits of (random) data, but you cannot predict its output without knowing the secret state. It works like a random mapping, cryptographically scrambling bits around but preserving the entropy which they carry.

[Guest]

Another analogy is the /dev/random device on a computer. You can influence its output by feeding it bits of (random) data, but you cannot predict its output without knowing the secret state. It works like a random mapping, cryptographically scrambling bits around but preserving the entropy which they carry.

No that's a bad analogy - because the whole idea is that a quantum system has no such "secret state".

[Tmaq]

I thought we were talking about the euclidian example of the strip, not one being accelerated or spun relativistically, or in high gradient gravitational fields. IOW, I was seeking a physical, not abstract, example.

The strip isn't Euclidean. What's your question?

The strip itself is embedded in a euclidean space, and hence that piece of paper is euclidean, barring reletavistic effects depedent on its location.

What isn't euclidean is the geometry of transformations restricted to the strip, but thats a purealy mathematical abstraction.

The normal vector and the non-euclidean geometry resulting from scooching the vector around the strip...aren't a PHYSICAL example of such a rotation.

Indeed, when the normal vector rotates twice during one curcuit of the strip, it first must pass through a 360 degree rotation...at which point it is identical to its original state, the OPPOSITE of what I was talking about.

I was seeking a physical example of something which must rotate twice to return to its original state.

-Tom

[Atheist Statist]

The strip itself is embedded in a euclidean space, and hence that piece of paper is euclidean, barring reletavistic effects depedent on its location.

No. Lots of spaces can be embedded in Euclidean spaces but are not themselves Euclidean - for example, a 2-sphere in R^3. Relativistic effects aren't relevant.

What isn't euclidean is the geometry of transformations restricted to the strip, but thats a purealy mathematical abstraction.

The normal vector and the non-euclidean geometry resulting from scooching the vector around the strip...aren't a PHYSICAL example of such a rotation.

Indeed, when the normal vector rotates twice during one curcuit of the strip, it first must pass through a 360 degree rotation...at which point it is identical to its original state, the OPPOSITE of what I was talking about.

Again you confuse the strip with its embedding here. The normal vector isn't a vector in the strip - it's a vector in R^3. The relevant vector would be a vector that points across the strip. That vector, when parallel-transported once around the strip, reverses direction.

I was seeking a physical example of something which must rotate twice to return to its original state.

Well that would be the electron, no? Short of that, cutting a little mobius strip out from some paper and playing with arrows is the best you're going to get. SU(2) geometry is non-intuitive to our little brains.