On Sunday, February 14, 2021 at 3:47:04 PM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote:
> 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 > I meant to write, " ... You claim AG can be observed AT POINTS X and Y by copies of AG, ... ." 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/0df25e1b-de6b-408e-b487-b06e8a3db61cn%40googlegroups.com.
