On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:52 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think every macro system, although comprised of a huge number of > individual constituents, is in one definite state;
No object large enough to see with your unaided can is in one definite state, that is to say can be described with a single quantum wave function, with the possible exception of a Bose–Einstein condensate , and even then it would be so small it would be at the limits of visibility. And you're not going to see one in everyday life unless you visit a lab that can cool things down to less than a millionth of a degree above absolute zero that is needed to make a Bose–Einstein condensate . Incidentally unless ET exists and is also interested in physics research that lab you're visiting is the coldest place in the universe . > > > the lack of ISOLATION is the condition for the existence of this macro > definite state. A baseball made of 10^25 atoms has 10^25 times more ways to interact with the environment than a single atom does, so we'd expect to see a baseball in just one state about 10^25 times less often than we do in a single atom. > > > The concept of Multiverse and Many Worlds come from entirely different > contexts and theories, > I don't think anybody was even talking about the Multiverse before 1957 when Hugh Everett introduced the idea of Many Worlds, and Evert's idea won't work without the Multiverse. That doesn't sound entirely different to me. > > > For example, we know that irrational numbers exist > Do we? We know that mathematicians can use the language of mathematics to write stories about irrational numbers , but nobody has ever seen a irrational number of anything in the physical world. And we know that a English professor can write stories about The Lord Of The Rings, but noddy has ever seen Frodo Baggins or The Shire. > *> if your conjecture were true, it would be impossible for irrational > numbers to exist, since recurring repetitions of subset strings would be > impossible to avoid.* > If the conjecture is true then there might be a infinite number of Turing Machines in the Multiverse but they couldn't communicate with each other and none of them would have a infinite amount of tape. So any real Turing Machine in the Multiverse is certain to eventually stop, not for any software reason but because of hardware failure. Eventual any real Turing machine will get a command like "move the read/wright head one box to the left write a 1 in the box and then change to state 6.02*10^23" but it will be unable to move one box to the left became it is already at the end of the tape and there is no more matter in the observable universe to extend it. If no physical process can produce them that seems to me a pretty good indication that the physical universe doesn't need irrational numbers (or even real numbers). Many Worlds is a theory about physics not mathematics so the philosophic debate about the existence or nonexistence of irrational numbers has no bearing on existence or nonexistence of Many Worlds. > John K Clark -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
