Hmmm… quantum particles traveling back in time through a wormhole
This week has been absolutely crazy. When people say that the truth is stranger than fiction, they’re telling the truth. What you are about to read is the absolute truth. I know in the past, I’ve written some columns that were pretty farfetched and didn’t make much sense. Of course, most of you won’t know that, because there are only about 10 people that read my column.
Two University of Queensland in Australia physicists, Martin Ringbauer and Tim Ralph, have simulated a way that quantum particles could travel through a wormhole back in time. They used photons (single particles of light) to simulate quantum particles traveling through time and to study their behavior. This set me to thinking.
OK, all photons travel at the speed of light. They are considered among the subatomic particles. Photons are bosons, having no electric charge or rest mass, and one unit of spin; they are field particles that are thought to be the carriers of the electromagnetic field. Plus, it has become one of the central dogmas of theoretical physics since about the mid-20th century that these experiments demonstrate that the very question of which route an electron takes through such an apparatus does not make sense. Anyway, it is an empirical fact that the x-spin of an photon can take only one of two possible values, which for present purposes may be designated +1 and −1; the same is true of the y-spin.
In the meantime, my grandson Anthony is staying with my wife and me for a couple of weeks like he does every year about this time. He likes to spend time with us because he gets all the Pepsi and ice cream he can ingest. Tonight as we sat watching TV, “South Park” came on. My wife made him change the channel because we don’t want him to act like the characters on the show. What he said next threw us for a loop.
“If I can’t watch that, can I watch Celebrity Wife Swap?”
The very next morning my friend Joe and his mother gave me a Caterpillar 12 Road Grader. This thing is 30-something feet long and weighs about 30 tons. I could drive this thing right through my house with no difficulty. It holds 70 gallons of fuel. Let’s see, 70 gallons at about $4 a pop equals a little under $300. Oh yeah, I can afford that. I won’t need the $800 tires or the five gallons of oil it needs. Oh, and where am I going to park it? If I tried to park it on the street by my house, the Winters PD would shoot me. Well, I took it anyway because it made him happy.
OK, everybody that knows me is aware of my experiments with the global economy. Well, I haven’t had too much luck with that yet. To make matters worse, I read that in a recent paper, Apostolos Serletis & Asghar Shahmoradi, 2005, investigate the demand for money in the United States in the context of two seminonparametric exible functional forms.
The Fourier, introduced by Gallant (1981), and the Asymptotically Ideal Model (AIM), introduced by Barnett and Jonas (1983) and employed and explained in Barnett and Yue (1988). They estimate these models subject to regularity, as suggested by Barnett (2002) and Barnett and Pasupathy (2003), using methods suggested by Gallant and Golub (1984). They make a strong case, using (for the 1st time) parameter estimates that are consistent with global regularity, for abandoning the simple sum approach to monetary aggregation, on the basis of low elasticities of substitution among the components of the popular M2 aggregate of money.
Well, ain’t that just the craps! Now maybe you can see what I mean by “crazy week.” I’m getting too old for this stuff!