On 12/27/2013 7:26 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net
<mailto:edgaro...@att.net>> wrote:
Jason,
Answers to your 3 questions.
1. No.
If there are no faster-than-light (FTL) influences, then how does your interpretation
address the EPR paradox ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox )? As a previously
mentioned, according to Bell's theorem, there is only one known solution to the paradox
that does not involve FTL influences, and that is Everett's theory of many-worlds.
That's not really true. If you look at the wikipedia table that you cited,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics you see that Popper's,
time symmetric, many-minds, consistent histories, and the relational interpretation are
all local, i.e. no FTL. To that I would add the purely epistemic "non-intepretation" of
Peres and Fuchs.
2. Determined by which observer? The cat is always either dead or alive.
It's just a
matter of someone making a measurement to find out.
So are you saying that before the measurement the cat is neither alive nor dead, both
alive and dead, or definitely alive or definitely dead? If you, (and I think you are),
saying that the cat is always definitely alive or definitely dead, then about about the
radioactive atom? Is it ever in a state of being decayed and not decayed? If you say no,
it sounds like you are denying the reality of the superposition, which some
interpretations do, but then this leads to difficulties explaining how quantum computers
work (which require the superposition to exist).
Superposition is just a question of basis. An eigenstate in one basis is a superposition
in another.
3. Of course quantum computers are possible. Simple examples already exist,
but
fundamentally all computations take place in logical information space, as
I've
described before in a number of posts.
If a quantum computer can factor a randomly generated semi-prime of 1,000,000 digits,
where is the computation for this being performed? This is a computation that is so
complex that no conventional computer (even the size of the universe) could solve this
problem if given a trillion years, yet a device that could fit on your desk could solve
it in less than a second. If the exponentially exploding states in the superposition are
not really there, there is apparently no explanation at all for where the result of the
computation comes from.
However, keep in mind that all this computation takes place in this world, otherwise the
processes could not interfere and converge to a (probable) answer.
Brent
However I don't think the answers to these questions will help you
understand the
theory. Refer to my other topic on this group titled "Yes, my book does
cover
quantum reality", or refer to the book itself, or I can explain further....
Thanks. I may not have time to read your book for some time, so for now I would prefer
to proceed by e-mail, at least until some resolution is reached. I appreciate the time
you have spent so far in answering my questions.
Jason
On Friday, December 27, 2013 9:17:52 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote:
On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Edgar L. Owen <edga...@att.net> wrote:
All,
I'm starting a new topic on wavefunctions in this reply to Jason
because he
brings up a very important issue.
The usual interpretation of wavefunctions are that particles are
'spread
out' in the fixed common pre-existing space that quantum theory
mistakenly
assumes, that they are superpostions of states in this space.
However in my book on Reality in Part III, Elementals I propose
another
interpretation, namely that particles are discrete information
entities in
logical computational space, and that what wavefunctions actually
are is
descriptions of how space can become dimensionalized by decoherence
events
(since decoherence events produce exact conserved relationships
between the
dimensional variables of interacting particles).
I am not sure that I follow, but it sounds like an interesting idea. It
reminds
me of Ron Garret's talk, where he says metaphorically "we live in a
simulation
running on a quantum computer":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEaecUuEqfc
The mathematical results are exactly the same, its just a different
interpretation.
I am not sure if it is possible in any theory consistent with QM to deny
completely the notion of superposition. How can the single-electron
double-slit
experiment be explained without the electron being in more than one
place at the
same time?
I think it would help me understand your interpretation if you answered
the
following questions. According to your interpretation:
1. Are faster-than-light influences involved?
2. When it is determined whether or not Schrodinger's cat is alive or
dead?
3. Are quantum computers possible, and if so, where are all the
intermediate
computations performed?
Jason
However this approach that space is something that emerges from
quantum
events rather than being a fixed pre-existing background to events
enables
us to conceptually unify GR and QM and also resolves all so called
quantum
'paradox' as quantum processes are paradoxical ONLY with respect to
the
fixed pre-existing space mistakenly assumed.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything
List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
