On Tuesday, March 10, 2020 at 6:04:19 AM UTC-5, Lawrence Crowell wrote: > > On Monday, March 9, 2020 at 11:54:15 PM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Monday, March 9, 2020 at 7:52:00 PM UTC-5, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >>> >>> >>> I will have to write more if possible. I am not sure that all of physics >>> is derived from Gödel’s theorem. I see is as more that from classical >>> to quantum mechanics there is a sort of forcing, to borrow from set theory, >>> to extend a model with undecidable propositions. Where this undecidable >>> matter enters in is with the problem of measurement and decoherence. >>> >>> >>> >> There is nothing in any quantum mechanics theory that goes beyond a >> formulation in terms of a quantum Turing machine. >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Turing_machine >> >> Quantum Turing machines can be related to classical and probabilistic >> Turing machines in a framework based on transition matrices >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_matrix>. That is, a matrix can >> be specified whose product with the matrix representing a classical or >> probabilistic machine provides the quantum probability matrix representing >> the quantum machine. This was shown by Lance Fortnow >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lance_Fortnow>. [ >> https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0003035 ] >> >> Actually it can all be reduced to the SKIP calculus. >> >> >> *SKIP: Probabilistic SKI combinator calculus* >> <https://poesophicalbits.blogspot.com/2013/06/skip-probabilistic-ski-combinator.html> >> >> Add to the *S*, *K*, and *I* combinators of the SKI combinator calculus >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKI_combinator_calculus> the *P* >> combinator: >> >> *S**xyz* = *xz*(*yz*) >> *K**xy* = *x* >> *I**x* = *x* >> *P* = *K* or *KI* with equal probability (0.5) >> >> It follows that *P**xy* evaluates to *K**xy* or *KI**xy*, then to *x* or >> *I**y* = *y* with equal probability. >> >> There is nothing "uncomputable" in any of this. >> >> @philipthrift >> > > Except predicting the outcome of any quantum measurement in a > deterministic manner. > > LC >
Hopelessly pursuing a theory for that is just *a religious fantasy* too many physicists believe in. It is a rabbit hole going to nowhere. @philipthrift -- 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/5a5fb049-bc93-40eb-99dc-e9875f26e02a%40googlegroups.com.
