On Sunday, November 16, 2014 2:48:33 AM UTC, [email protected] wrote: > > > > On Saturday, November 15, 2014 10:55:45 PM UTC, Russell Standish wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 02:40:39PM -0800, [email protected] wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Friday, November 14, 2014 10:09:09 PM UTC, Russell Standish wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > The Multiverse equivalent of conservation of energy is unitarity of >> > > the evolution of Schroedinger's equation. Or equivalently, that the >> > > Hamiltonian is Hermitian. >> > > >> > >> > So conservation of energy is a concept that undergoes complex >> translations >> > to something completely different. And 'locality' is the concept that >> has >> > to have a 1:1 mapping from QM one world to the other. And of course >> that >> > selection of that 1:1 mapping is the only reason we need to have a >> > multiverse with the properties it has. That mapping decision. >> > >> > So what is the reasoning why locality has to be mapped as that, and >> > conservation of energy is good to map to alien structure. >> > >> > There isn't a reasoning Russell is there? It's just an arbitrary >> > preference, or more feasibly it's just what happens to be 'intuitive'. > > p.s.
> >> >> Conservation of energy is a consequence of Emmy Noether's theorem >> relating time translation invariance to energy conservation. >> > a relation in a theorem doesn't advance the theorem. Conservation of energy derives all kinds of ways I think. The value of the theorem is not advanced by this. Because it can come about trivially. I'm sure it doesn't here, but it isn't difficult to envisage trivial translations of something conserved stepwise which is what invariance would be doing, to something else conserved block-wise. > >> The equivalent theorem in the quantum setting derives unitarity of the >> SE from time translation invariance. > > I don't know the equation, but is this derivation one that involves establishing the linearity of the qm equation first? Does the unitarity of the SE if assumed correct rule out the wave function collapse that is empirically observed? Even if assumed correct it doesn't. Because at different scales a continuous conception can be discrete, and vice verca. Digital is analogue at another level. Everything is quanta yet porcelain is smooth. Nothing is settled by this, unless there is an additional proof that there be no finer structure involving breaks. Another problem is that energy is conserve in discrete units. Where does that feature get eliminated? So we've still got the collapse in play even on the strongest form here. But take away the assumption of correctness and we are back to an empirial observation that is repeated countless times, can be predicted, and so on. There are no credible grounds to over ride something like that on the strength of a theorem that says something should be linear or whatever. What is ohbseved robustly is not trumped easily. You'd need extraordinary evidence and proof. And a knock down better sciene that followed, that science advanced and more high potential and in a higher gear. These theories Russell sterilize Science. And have left it stalled for more than 50 years. Nothing has been advanced. As a result everything is ginding to a halt. Everything. Because for 50 years empirical approaches have kept it all going. But they start to get runaway complexity and unresolved disagreements in fields start to fracture fields apart. Empiricism is going to stop or stop adding value unless big breathrough theory starts appearing again. That drive predictions through the levels and clean the house. So that's what we're getting for this tiny little argument. Empirical observed phenomena dismissed. Muliverses put in place. Science ground to a halt. No sign of things getting other than worse ahead. Nice. -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
