> On 14 Feb 2019, at 05:40, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List > <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > Two fascinating (and very different) approaches are presented to derive > Quantim Mechanics main practical tool (e.g. Born's rule). Wonder what some of > the physicists on here think about this research? > > I find the argument that no laws is the fundamental law... and that the > universe and its laws are emergent guided by subtle mathematical statistical > phenomena, at the same time both alluring and annoying.... it is somehow > unsatisfactory.... like being served a quite empty plate with nice garnish > for dinner. > > One example of emergence from chaotic conditions is how traffic jams (aka > density waves) can emerge from chaotic initial conditions, becoming self > re-enforcing within local domains of influence... for those unlucky to be > stuck in them. Density wave emergence is seen across scale, for example the > spiral arms of galaxies can be explained as giant gravitational pile ups with > some fundamentally similar parallels to say a rush hour traffic jam, except > on vastly different scales of course and due to other different factors, in > the galactic case the emergent effects of a vast number of gravitational > inter-actions as stars migrate through these arms on their grand voyages > around the galactic core. > > This paired with the corollary argument that any attempt to discover a > fundamental law seems doomed to the infinite regression of then needing to > explain what this foundation itself rests upon.... leading to the "it's > turtles all the way down" hall of mirrors carnival house... head-banger. > > Perhaps, as Wheeler argued, the world is a self-synthesizing system, and the > seeming order we observe, is emergent... a law without law. > > Here is the link to the article:
It does not give enough explanation. From what I see there, this has already been found by Paulette Destouches-Février in the 1950s. I don’t see if it is really different from Graham, or Preskill, and of course, it still assume the quantum, which is better to avoid when using (even implicitly) mechanism, at least if the goal is some conceptual understanding. I will reread and search for more explanation. If you find the paper convincing or really original, don’t hesitate to try to make it clearer for others. The fact that P = A^2 is the only solution for probability +total indetermination does not explain how to provide a realist account of the measurement. Bruno > > > > The Born Rule Has Been Derived From Simple Physical Principles | Quanta > Magazine > <https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-born-rule-has-been-derived-from-simple-physical-principles-20190213/> > > The Born Rule Has Been Derived From Simple Physical Principles | Quanta > Magazine > The new work promises to give researchers a better grip on the core mystery > of quantum mechanics. > > > <https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-born-rule-has-been-derived-from-simple-physical-principles-20190213/> > > > -- > 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To post to this group, send email to email@example.com > <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.