On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 23 Nov 2014, at 18:11, Richard Ruquist wrote: > > Bruno: I doubt a photon needs to double his energy to go through two > slits > > Richard: You should be ashamed > > > That's hardly an argument. > Agreed > > Einstein already understood that if the collapse was a physical > phenomenon, and if special relativity was correct, then locality would make > a wave possibly collapse on two different eigenvector, like sometimes > finding literally the photon going in both hole. In that case, the energy > would be double, and the schroedinger "diffusion" of the wave could be used > to ... create energy. A quantum perpetual machine could be constructed, > and, pace George Levy, but following John Clark's quote of Eddington, we > can stop here ... > Yes. I like Einstein's single pinhole thought experiment the best. The incident photon spreads in spherical waves beyond the hole from ray optics. So if waves could carry energy, the energy density would drop by 1/r^2 where r is distance from the hole. If we wrap the experiment with a spherical detector sheet, the energy density incident on the sheet would be a constant across the spherical sheet and the amount incident on any detector would be a fraction of the photon energy. So there is not enough energy incident on any detector to make a photon of the original energy. That's classical thinking and it is wrong. With MWI thinking, every detector will detect a photon at the same energy and frequency as the original photon but in a different world. So the total energy in the multiverse will locally have increased by the number of detectors times the photon energy. The only way to conserve energy is to detect only one photon of the same energy and frequency as the original photon. But the collapse is not physical, it belongs to the mind of the people, > fungible and then differentiated, in the infinite tensor product, which, > with computationalism, should be a mirror of the fact that we are > indeterminate on infinitely many sigma_1 sentences, where the ortholattice > structure is determined by the logic of self-reference. > My opinion is that collapse is what makes objects physical. Everything else is just math (and deterministic.) So everything that could possibly happen can be computed ahead of time in a block 4 dimensional muliverse that I call the Math Space........ With collapse, the physical space becomes lines in the Math Space. That is not an argument. It is just how I see reality. For a computationalist (who thinks), the collapse is not real, but the wave > is not real too. It is itself the product of a Moiré effect on all > computations. > > I agree. With computationalism nothing is real except the math. All is illusion- maya. So comp must have the support of Hinduism and Buddhism. I prefer to think that both quantum waves and particles are real, but that waves are math objects and particles are physical objects. Again that is not an argument.. My argument is that the block multiverse, if it were to become entirely physical as MWI poses, would require a nearly infinite amount of energy to exist, and more and more as time goes on. That of course is impossible. So MW reality must be illusion. Another way to look at it is that conservation of energy comes from Noether's time symmetry. But there is no need for time in a block multiverse. So there is no need for the conservation of energy. The alternative is some kind of mathematical wave collapse to conserve both energy and quanta, which fortunately results in a unique reality where time matters. I have suggested that if the wave has BEC entanglement properties, that collapse may be instantaneous.But that collapse mechanism uses experiment-derived properties rather than math for lack of any time dependence. Richard > Bruno > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On 23 Nov 2014, at 12:32, Richard Ruquist wrote: >> >> Yes, and as the branches multiply, so does the energy. >> >> >> I doubt this, but eventually this will depend on how we define energy. I >> doubt a photon needs to double his energy to go through two slits, and I >> doubt Shor algorithm needs energy to handle 10^500 parallel superposition >> state. Energy is a local relative (gauge) notion, which I am not sure can >> be easily applied to the whole configuration space, which energy can be put >> a zero. >> >> Of course with computationalism there is only an arithmetical reality, >> and all physicalness is a view from inside. All branches of all >> computations including the one with oracle are run in the arithmetical >> reality, and it is clear, imo, that energy is only an internal relative >> notion. Of course we need to justify why the reversible computations win >> the limit measure "game". >> >> Bruno >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 3:52 AM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 21 November 2014 23:07, Richard Ruquist <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>> It seems, yes. In our branch. But not in the physical reality as a >>>>> whole, where information and energy are constant, and arbitrary I would >>>>> say. >>>>> >>>>> Energy is not constant in the MWI multiverse. >>>> >>>> Energy is not constant in a general-relativistic universe. >>> >>> I believe energy is approximately conserved within a branch of the >>> multiverse, in the MWI view? The "approximately" being because branches are >>> only approximately defined? >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >>> >> >> >> -- >> 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. >> >> >> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ >> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > > -- > 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. > > > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ > > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
