Not intending to insult, but overall your response is an good example of Trump Physics. For example, you discuss measuring spin, Up or Dn, while denying you know what measurement is. You claim AG can be observed in X or Y by copies of AG, by a wave which by definition has no definite location. You ignore or to flat-out admit that the HUP implies the failure of classical determinism. And so forth. AG
On Sunday, February 14, 2021 at 4:17:31 AM UTC-7 [email protected] wrote: > On Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote: > > *> Prior to the discovery of the HUP it was believed that unlimited >> precision of initial conditions was possible, depending only on the advance >> of technology. Now, with the HUP, we know this is not the case.* >> > > You don't need infinite precision to state that an electron is spinning up > or down and right or left, it would only take two bits of information to > do so, and yet we are unable to obtain those two bits; we can choose to > determine with absolute certainty if the electron is spinning right or left > but then we'd have no idea about the up or down spin, it would be > completely 50-50; or we can determine with absolute certainty if the > electron is spinning up or down but then we'd have no idea about the left > or right spin. We can do one or the other but not both. Why? Is it because > there is some physical mechanism that prevents us from having both bits of > information and thus making complete predictions impossible, or is it > because until it is measured (whatever the hell that is) the electron > simply doesn't have both properties? Many Worlds is a realistic > interpretation of quantum mechanics, it says particles always have a > definite spin, regardless of if it is "observed" or not, in fact the > electron has every spin not forbidden by the laws of physics, and the same > thing is true for a position and momentum, and the change in energy over a > time interval, although Intelligent entities in any one branch of the > multiverse may forever lack the ability to obtain all that information. > Copenhagen is not a realistic interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, it says > these properties don't even exist until they are measured, and they can't > give a precise or even approximate meaning to what they meant by "measured". > > >> *> Consequently, determinism is no longer a viable interpretation* >> > > We know from experiment that Bell's inequality is violated and Bell > proved if it is violated then the universe cannot be: > > 1) Local > 2) Deterministic > 3) Realistic, > > At least one of those three things must be false. However Many Worlds > Insists that it is all 3. It can get away with that because Bell assumed > the collapse of the wave function is a real physical phenomenon in his > derivation of this inequality, Copenhagen makes the same assumption, so it > must junk at least one of those 3, maybe more. But Many Worlds says the > wave function never collapses so it can have all 3. > > Bell on Bell’s theorem: The changing face of nonlocality > <https://arxiv.org/pdf/1501.03521.pdf> > > > *It occurred to me that when solving Schroedinger's equation, one needs >> initial conditions. * > > > It's not just Schroedinger's equation even in Newtonian physics and even > if you know every single one of the physical laws involved perfectly you > can't make predictions at all, not even approximate ones, if you have no > idea about initial conditions. You can't predict where a pendulum will be > three seconds from now if you have no idea where it is right now. > > *> Even if matter waves are ignored in the interpretation of >> superposition, a deep mystery remains; why do those waves in the double >> slit experiment always result in particle detection at the screen? * > > > Because of Fourier analysis we know that even the most complex waves can > be decomposed into an infinite sum of far simpler waves, and one of those > simpler waves is Alan Grayson seeing an electron at point X, and another of > those simpler waves is Alan Grayson seeing an electron at point Y. Many > Worlds insist that a particle is just a convenient fiction used by beings > in any particular branch of the multiverse, aka a simpler decomposition of > the Universal Wave Function. Many Worlds says that matter, and > fundamental reality in general, consists of waves not particles. > John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis > <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> > > , > > -- 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/5b701323-1e5c-47e8-afe7-68b35b72c0cfn%40googlegroups.com.
