> On 15 Nov 2019, at 11:02, 'scerir' via Everything List > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Il 15 novembre 2019 alle 1.20 Lawrence Crowell >> <[email protected]> ha scritto: >> >> On Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 4:25:16 PM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: >> The problem with physics is physicists ! Yeah, that's my conclusion after >> many years of studying, arguing and reading. Many, perhaps most, attribute >> ontological character to what is epistemological; namely the wf. This leads >> to all kinds of conceptual errors, and ridiculous models and conjectures -- >> such as MW, particles being in two positions at the same time, radiioactive >> sources that are simultanously decayed and undecayed, and so forth. The wf >> gives us information about the state of a system and nothing more. Sorry to >> disappoint. AG >> >> As I see it the wave function is epistemological on Mondays, Wednesdays and >> Fridays, but ontological on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sundays. On Shabbat it >> is neither. >> >> LC > "Interpretations of quantum mechanics, unlike Gods, are not jealous, and thus > it is safe to believe in more than one at the same time. So if the > many-worlds interpretation makes it easier to think about the research you’re > doing in April, and the Copenhagen interpretation makes it easier to think > about the research you’re doing in June, the Copenhagen interpretation is not > going to smite you for praying to the many-worlds interpretation. At least I > hope it won’t, because otherwise I’m in big trouble." -Peter Shor > >
But you can’t have both interpretation absolutely true together, so this is just the instrumentalist position, which is not available in fundamental science, even if useful in practice. An architect can believe that Earth is flat, and still believe that Earth is round when he take a plane for her holiday. She will still have some image making this consistent (like Earth is a big ball, locally flat), and similarly, the metaphysician search a big picture which makes coherent its change of theory during the week. He has too, as it is its job. Then with mechanism, we get the “absolute truth”, indeed, each Turing universal theory will do the job. And physics is explained by the “theology of the machine”, indeed, the neoplatonist one recanted through the Church-Turing thesis works very well … until now. Unfortunately, it raises the old Platonic doubt about a PHYSICAL reality out there. It is in the mind of the universal machine, yet, with a testable quantum-like (already) statistics. We lust just do the experiences asked by the universal machine, and listed by the theorem prover of the self-referential sensible and intelligible “matter”. It fits well up to now, and do solve the epistemological vs ontological question. Bruno > > > -- > 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/1479970207.492172.1573812175360%40mail1.libero.it > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1479970207.492172.1573812175360%40mail1.libero.it?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/F02780A9-8DD8-4FAF-96C7-1C6C695D2064%40ulb.ac.be.
