On Tuesday, October 23, 2018 at 10:33:13 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 23 Oct 2018, at 11:20, Philip Thrift <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, October 23, 2018 at 1:41:06 AM UTC-5, scerir wrote: >> >> >> *The original 'cat' was, of course, Einstein's 'gunpowder' paradox.* >> >> *'The system is a substance in chemically unstable equilibrium, perhaps a >> charge of gunpowder that, by means of intrinsic forces, can spontaneously >> combust, and where the average life span of the whole setup is a year. In >> principle this can quite easily be represented quantum-mechanically. In the >> beginning the psi-function characterizes a reasonably well-defined >> macroscopic state. But, according to your equation [i.e., the Schrödinger >> equation], after the course of a year this is no longer the case. Rather, >> the psi-function then describes a sort of blend of not-yet and >> already-exploded systems. Through no art of interpretation can this >> psi-function be turned into an adequate description of a real state of >> affairs; in reality there is no intermediary between exploded and >> not-exploded.' * >> >> *Letter from Einstein to Schrödinger, dated 8 August 1935. in Fine, A. >> The Shaky Game: Einstein, Realism, and the Quantum Theory, University of >> Chicago Press, Chicago (1986). Letter from Einstein to Schrödinger, dated 8 >> August 1935.* >> >> >> > > *Through no art of interpretation can this psi-function be turned into an > adequate description of a real state of affairs; * > > > The quote above is taken from the letter Einstein wrote above.
(I guess this is from AG). > > It is a description of (interfering physically) many “real” state of > affairs. That is what is strange in QM: it describes an evolving wave of > “possibilities”. > > Without collapse, you can only obtain what the observer can predict and > observe from inside those possibilities. Actuality is a possibility (a > consistent set of propositions) seen from inside. > > > > > *in reality there is no intermediary between exploded and not-exploded.’* > > > > There are many intermediaries. Like some measure on the histories where it > exploded, and histories where it did not. It can explode in all histories > or in none, or in x percent of them. That does not give the measure per se, > without defining histories and the mean of self-reference to define a > “possibility seen from inside”. > > > > > > > > > > This is interesting. > > Einstein (but other physicists too) avoiding retrocausality and > stochasticity, like vampires avoiding sunlight and running water. :) > > > The Price-Wharton take: https://arxiv.org/abs/1307.7744 (Dispelling the Quantum Spooks -- a Clue that Einstein Missed?) > He was wise, imo. He did not pushes the relativity far enough, probably > because it took the mind-body relation from granted. > > Assuming mechanism, it is a fact that the arithmetical reality emulates > all observers view of consistent “histories” of some sort. > > The existence of a physical universe looks like a miracle to me, and I > prefer to invoke miracle only in the last resort, and that feeling is > amplified when you study the (negative) mathematics trying to see the limit > of the art of prestidigitation of the digital. It is not computably > bound-able. > > I don’t yet see the trick, but computer science and mathematical logic put > a lot of light for this inquiry. > > Bruno > > > > Matter is a mystery. Why so many particles (the awfully named The Standard Model)? I think of [ http://www.toomanynotes.com/Amadeus.htm ] replace "notes" with "particles" ] ... EMPEROR: Exactly. Very well put. Too many notes. MOZART: I don't understand. There are just as many notes, Majesty, as are required. Neither more nor less. EMPEROR: My dear fellow, there are in fact only so many notes the ear can hear in the course of an evening. I think I'm right in saying that, aren't I, Court Composer? SALIERI: Yes! yes! er, on the whole, yes, Majesty. MOZART: But this is absurd! EMPEROR: My dear, young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Cut a few and it will be perfect. MOZART: Which few did you have in mind, Majesty? EMPEROR: Well. There it is. - pt -- 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.
