tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post1185336863380873903..comments2018-11-15T00:49:16.144-08:00Comments on Dark Buzz: All physical processes are localRogerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03474078324293158376noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-82736710729971790442018-07-11T12:12:55.269-07:002018-07-11T12:12:55.269-07:00Dear MD Cory,
No not really.
--Ajit
Dear MD Cory,<br /><br />No not really.<br /><br />--Ajit<br />Ajit R. Jadhavhttps://ajitjadhav.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-40264361835514532472018-07-10T17:16:59.441-07:002018-07-10T17:16:59.441-07:00Strictly, QM gives expectations and not single pre...Strictly, QM gives expectations and not single predictions.MD Coryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05342743632013663077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-37924785011105712592018-07-10T17:15:41.766-07:002018-07-10T17:15:41.766-07:00That's a stupid comment. Watch the video or go...That's a stupid comment. Watch the video or go away.MD Coryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05342743632013663077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-21545535894232228272018-07-10T14:17:52.825-07:002018-07-10T14:17:52.825-07:00What do you mean by, "Space and time are prob...What do you mean by, "Space and time are probably emergent, so it's a dead end to go in circles with such assumptions."?<br /><br />By "probably" do you mean 99.9% likely?<br /><br />50% likely?<br /><br />10% likely?<br /><br />How are you calculating your probabilities. Please remember that physics requires calculations.Golden Number Ratiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06047804495884984100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-13511518425974331152018-07-10T08:45:18.878-07:002018-07-10T08:45:18.878-07:00Space and time are probably emergent, so it's ...Space and time are probably emergent, so it's a dead end to go in circles with such assumptions.<br /><br />The Doom of Space Time - Arkani-Hamed<br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyRO8Wv4BaYMD Coryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05342743632013663077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-72117983134536328842018-07-10T01:14:40.119-07:002018-07-10T01:14:40.119-07:00Good post.
Let me note a bit about a point regard...Good post.<br /><br />Let me note a bit about a point regarding space and time.<br /><br />---<br /><br />The ``directionality'' of time is often well appreciated, may be because of its connection with the second law of thermodynamics. <br /><br />However, there is another, closely related aspect which hardly, if ever, get appreciated: <br /><br />You can have a choice for moving in space, but you have no such choice as far as ``moving'' in time is concerned. <br /><br />With space, you can freely choose the starting point and the ending point. You can also freely choose the entire path connecting the two. (Or at least, you can think of a physical occurrence for the travel of an arbitrary particle along such a path.)<br /><br />But you have no such choice with time. You cannot pick up a starting instant if it has already gone into the past, and you must helplessly await the arrival of an ending instant if it belongs in future. Also, the idea of multiple paths does not make sense because time is uni-dimensional.<br /><br />These are crucial differences. You can spend energy in space travel (for doing work against fields). But spending energy to visit an arbitrary instant of time is not at all an option available to you.<br /><br />The idea of space-time continuum has fewer merits than disadvantages; the two are not, physically speaking, at a par with each other.<br /><br />---<br /><br /><br />Best,<br /><br />--Ajit<br />Ajit R. Jadhavhttps://ajitjadhav.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-34922838409908531042018-07-09T15:52:33.089-07:002018-07-09T15:52:33.089-07:00Read this first: https://motls.blogspot.com/2016/1...Read this first: https://motls.blogspot.com/2016/12/consistent-histories-arent-inconsistent.htmlMD Coryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05342743632013663077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-24713795160893250592018-07-08T17:20:20.073-07:002018-07-08T17:20:20.073-07:00Dear MD,
You write, "I recommend you read O...Dear MD, <br /><br />You write, "I recommend you read Omnès: https://press.princeton.edu/titles/5525.html"<br /><br />Why? Does he correct Heisenberg?<br /><br />""In relation to these considerations, one other idealized experiment (due to Einstein) may be considered. We imagine a photon which is represented by a wave packet built up out of Maxwell waves. It will thus have a certain spatial extension and also a certain range of frequency. By reflection at a semi-transparent mirror, it is possible to decompose it into two parts, a reflected and a transmitted packet. There is then a definite probability for finding the photon either in one part or in the other part of the divided wave packet. After a sufficient time the two parts will be separated by any distance desired; now if an experiment yields the result that the photon is, say, in the reflected part of the packet, then the probability of finding the photon in the other part of the packet immediately becomes zero. The experiment at the position of the reflected packet thus exerts a kind of action (reduction of the wave packet) at the distant point occupied by the transmitted packet, and one sees that this action is propagated with a velocity greater than that of light. However, it is also obvious that this kind of action can never be utilized for the transmission of signals so that it is not in conflict with the postulates of the theory of relativity.<br />(The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory, W. Heisenberg, 1930. p.39)""<br /><br />What are your opinions on Heisenberg? Or is it your position that physicists are to be ignored, and we should just google philosophers to find out about quantum mechanics?Golden Number Ratiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06047804495884984100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-52733213704363845492018-07-08T17:05:16.803-07:002018-07-08T17:05:16.803-07:00Dear MD Cory,
It appears that Maudlin does not ha...Dear MD Cory,<br /><br />It appears that Maudlin does not have a Ph.D. in physics? Why should we listen to him regarding physics?Golden Number Ratiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06047804495884984100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-24001665580816346212018-07-08T16:57:11.113-07:002018-07-08T16:57:11.113-07:00Why? What does he state? Please summarize. Thanks...Why? What does he state? Please summarize. Thanks!Golden Number Ratiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06047804495884984100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-8459377660841431002018-07-08T16:18:21.774-07:002018-07-08T16:18:21.774-07:00I recommend you read Omnès: https://press.princeto...I recommend you read Omnès: https://press.princeton.edu/titles/5525.htmlMD Coryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05342743632013663077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-52925060642784088632018-07-08T16:14:39.751-07:002018-07-08T16:14:39.751-07:00Took me 5 seconds to type "Tim Maudlin" ...Took me 5 seconds to type "Tim Maudlin" and click on comments for the second article down: http://blog.darkbuzz.com/2017/10/experts-dispute-meaning-of-bells-theorem.html#comment-formMD Coryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05342743632013663077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-34543385189592044942018-07-08T16:11:58.190-07:002018-07-08T16:11:58.190-07:00BTW, read this: https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.0974BTW, read this: https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.0974MD Coryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05342743632013663077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-56144666033055125612018-07-08T15:54:05.900-07:002018-07-08T15:54:05.900-07:00Are you stating that Werner Heisenberg was wrong?
...Are you stating that Werner Heisenberg was wrong?<br /><br /><br />"In relation to these considerations, one other idealized experiment (due to Einstein) may be considered. We imagine a photon which is represented by a wave packet built up out of Maxwell waves. It will thus have a certain spatial extension and also a certain range of frequency. By reflection at a semi-transparent mirror, it is possible to decompose it into two parts, a reflected and a transmitted packet. There is then a definite probability for finding the photon either in one part or in the other part of the divided wave packet. After a sufficient time the two parts will be separated by any distance desired; now if an experiment yields the result that the photon is, say, in the reflected part of the packet, then the probability of finding the photon in the other part of the packet immediately becomes zero. The experiment at the position of the reflected packet thus exerts a kind of action (reduction of the wave packet) at the distant point occupied by the transmitted packet, and one sees that this action is propagated with a velocity greater than that of light. However, it is also obvious that this kind of action can never be utilized for the transmission of signals so that it is not in conflict with the postulates of the theory of relativity.<br />(The Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory, W. Heisenberg, 1930. p.39)"Golden Number Ratiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06047804495884984100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-74395105130732453682018-07-08T15:25:28.427-07:002018-07-08T15:25:28.427-07:00I spent the last two hours searching. Are you sur...I spent the last two hours searching. Are you sure this debate happened? Links please, for the world to see?Golden Number Ratiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06047804495884984100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-83689668693488020042018-07-08T15:17:09.560-07:002018-07-08T15:17:09.560-07:00Link please?Link please?Golden Number Ratiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06047804495884984100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-60689573762938139372018-07-08T13:12:02.279-07:002018-07-08T13:12:02.279-07:00Tim and Roger debated in the comments to this blog...Tim and Roger debated in the comments to this blog. Do a search.MD Coryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05342743632013663077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-69217722036106909422018-07-06T15:43:52.305-07:002018-07-06T15:43:52.305-07:00Is this page wrong?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...Is this page wrong?<br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality<br /><br />If it is wrong, how might you correct it?Golden Number Ratiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06047804495884984100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-12732303782220524762018-07-06T14:27:57.946-07:002018-07-06T14:27:57.946-07:00What is your take on Tim Maudlin and John Bell in ...What is your take on Tim Maudlin and John Bell in this lecture?<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg5z_zeZP60Golden Number Ratiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06047804495884984100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-82880630881041469752018-07-06T14:06:30.399-07:002018-07-06T14:06:30.399-07:00Consider a single photon the Young double-slit exp...Consider a single photon the Young double-slit experiment. Does the photon pass through both slits at the same time? Golden Number Ratiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06047804495884984100noreply@blogger.com