> On 24 Sep 2019, at 00:05, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 9/23/2019 2:05 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 11:01:46 AM UTC-6, Brent wrote: >> >> >> On 9/22/2019 11:36 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, September 22, 2019 at 10:55:35 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 9/22/2019 8:52 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >>>> Of course they are mathematically possible. You just need to start with >>>> the right axioms. Everything mathematically possible that is not self >>>> contradictory (including a flat Earth and flying pigs). >>>> >>>> Brent >>>> >>>> I don't see dark bands as mathematically possible since these regions have >>>> 100% destructive interference. AG >>> >>> They have destructive interference in a universe that satisfies quantum >>> mechanics. How do you know there isn't a universe that satisfies Newtonian >>> mechanics? or Harry Potter mechanics? Or Aristotelian mechanics? >>> >>> Brent >>> >>> So now you're saying that everything conceivable is possible. But isn't >>> that what you criticized Jason for? AG >> >> Yes, I did. And above I'm criticizing you for not recognizing the >> difference between nomologically impossible in this universe under the >> physics as we understand it, and Tegmark's everything mathematically >> consistent happens in some universe. >> >> Brent >> >> In fact I looked up "nomologically" and I'm not clear as to your meaning. >> Jason said "everything conceivable", so you pointed out what amounts to >> destructive interference and flying pigs as things that don't happen in our >> world. Why do that, and then turn around and mention universes where QM >> doesn't work. Let's just say that Jason didn't misuse the term, and leave it >> at that. AG > > Jason may well believe that everything conceivable happens. After all he's > on the "everything" list. But he's wrong to think that quantum mechanics > endorses that assumption.
It is part of the wave equation. Indeed, von Neumann saw this so clearly that he added the postulate of collapse, which contradicts the SWE, and introduce a dualism between observer and the thing observed. Bohr too insisted that quantum mechanics cannot apply to the macroscopic world. The many world is just Dirac's principle of superposition, without adding a collapse postulate. Bruno > > Brent > > > -- > 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] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/33149062-5335-b370-8faa-013da94ceacb%40verizon.net > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/33149062-5335-b370-8faa-013da94ceacb%40verizon.net?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/681CA56A-1A5B-4DD6-8992-FAA8C926630E%40ulb.ac.be.
