tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post7758293198912980552..comments2019-11-10T11:03:27.193-08:00Comments on Dark Buzz: Quantum physics is not in crisisRogerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03474078324293158376noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-20569157289982515922019-08-22T16:36:50.167-07:002019-08-22T16:36:50.167-07:00Roger, Math isn't mechanics, not even close. Q...Roger, Math isn't mechanics, not even close. Quantum mechanics is as profound an understanding of reality as behaviorism is of the human psyche, meaning, not at all. When you gloss over and discard actual mechanics in the name of probability, it means you don't know how the damn thing works, you just know what it most likely will do as you track the outcomes and your algorithm becomes your 'reality'. This is very much like Gregor Mendel's fruit fly experiments which do not explain at all why fruit flies are different colors generally, just that they are in predictable ratios. If science hadn't kept prodding at the issue, we would still be just treating genetics as 'ratios of outcomes' and never have dug deeper into the foundations of life and discovered the underlying DNA and how genetics roughly functions. <br /><br />But don't take my word for it. <br /><br />Hence most physicists are very satisfied with the situation. They say: "Quantum electrodynamics is a good theory, and we do not have to worry about it any more." I must say that I am very dissatisfied with the situation, because this so-called "good theory" does involve neglecting infinities which appear in its equations, neglecting them in an arbitrary way. This is just not sensible mathematics. Sensible mathematics involves neglecting a quantity when it turns out to be smallâ€”not neglecting it just because it is infinitely great and you do not want it!<br /><br /> P. A. M. Dirac, Directions in Physics (1978), 2. Quantum Electrodynamics<br /><br />So it appears that the only things that depend on the small distances between coupling points are the values for n and j-theoretical numbers that are not directly obseroable any- way; everything else, which can be observed, seems not to be affected. The shell game that we play to find n and j is technically called "renormalization." But no matter how clever the word, it is what I would call a dippy process! Having to resort to such hocus-pocus has prevented us from proving that the theory of quantum electrodynamics is mathematically self-consistent. It's surprising that the theory still hasn't been proved self-consistent one way or the other by now; I suspect that renormalization is not mathematically legitimate. What is certain is that we do not have a good mathematical way to describe the theory of quantum electrodynamics: such a bunch of words to describe the connection between n and j and m and e is not good mathematics.<br /><br /> Richard Feynman, QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter (1985), Chap. 4. Loose Ends<br /><br />Oh dear. Well, I guess when you conflate actual 'mechanics' with sleight of mathematical hand, who the hell needs good theory. CFTnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-61350260306000936792019-08-22T12:11:23.762-07:002019-08-22T12:11:23.762-07:00I agree with the part I quoted, and with his defen...I agree with the part I quoted, and with his defense of textbook quantum mechanics. I disagree with his endorsement of strings.Rogerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03474078324293158376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-40192951410077840632019-08-22T10:34:55.739-07:002019-08-22T10:34:55.739-07:00Dear Roger,
>> ``I mostly agree with him.&#...Dear Roger,<br /><br />>> ``I mostly agree with him.''<br /><br />Please explain the ``mostly.'' Yes, it's necessary, now.<br /><br />>>``... or the foundations are wrong, or some such nonsense.''<br /><br />Explain yourself.<br /><br />Best,<br /><br />--Ajit<br />Ajit R. Jadhavhttps://ajitjadhav.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-52804531819197431682019-08-22T09:34:42.810-07:002019-08-22T09:34:42.810-07:00I think quantum theory is a perfectly good scienti...I think quantum theory is a perfectly good scientific theory, but it is so counterintuitive that it must be wrong.<br /><br />And I think when they find out that quantum computers cannot be scaled up, they will realize that this is because quantum theory is wrong.Craignoreply@blogger.com