On 11-05-2022 07:30, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 3:16 PM smitra <smi...@zonnet.nl> wrote:

On 11-05-2022 06:01, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 1:51 PM smitra <smi...@zonnet.nl> wrote:

On 09-05-2022 00:42, Bruce Kellett wrote:

Such models are certainly inconsistent with the SE. So if your
concern
is that the SE does not contain provision for a collapse, then
you
should doubt other theories that violate the SE. You can't have
it
both ways: you can't reject collapse models because they violate
the
SE and then embrace other models that also violate the SE.
Either the
SE is universally correct, or it is not.

What matters is that such models can be
formulated in a mathematically consistent way, which
demonstrates that
there is n o contradiction. The physical plausibility of such
models
is another issue.



As Brent has also pointed out, there amount of information in the
visible universe is finite.

That does not limit the number of branches. A finite universe does
not
limit the number of points in a line.

There is no such thing as a mathematical continuum in the real
physical
world.

Can you prove that? There is no evidence that space and time are
discrete.

In physics we only have a continuum in the scaling limit where we've scaled the microscopic distances away to zero. Whenever we do a computations where it really matters whether or not the continuum is real, we end up having to impose a short-ditance cut-off and can only remove this cut-off via a renormalization procedure. See also page 12 of this document:

https://webspace.science.uu.nl/~hooft101/lectures/basisqft.pdf

"Often, authors forget to mention the first, very important, step in this logical procedure: replace the classical field theory one wishes to quantize by a strictly finite theory. Assuming that physical structures smaller than a certain size will not be important for our considerations, we replace the continuum of three-dimensional space by a discrete but dense lattice of points. In the differential equations, we replace all derivatives ∂/∂xi by
finite ratios of differences: ∆/∆x
, where ∆φ stands for φ(x + ∆x) − φ(x) . In Fourier
space, this means that wave numbers ~k are limited to a finite range (the Brillouin zone),
so that integrations over ~k can never diverge.
If this lattice is sufficiently dense, the solutions we are interested in will hardly depend on the details of this lattice, and so, the classical system will resume Lorentz invariance and the speed of light will be the practical limit for the velocity of perturbances. If necessary, we can also impose periodic boundary conditions in 3-space, and in that case our system is completely finite. Finite systems of this sort allow for ‘quantization’ in the
old-fashioned sense: replace the Poisson brackets by commutators. "



There are only a finite number of distinct quantum states
available for a finite universe.

Who proved that the universe was finite?


If it's infinite, one can focus on only the visible part of it.

This is clear for states below some
total energy E. But there is an upper limit to the total energy due
to
gravitational collapse when the energy exceeds a certain limit.

But one can also consider observers and then
each observer has a some finite memory so there are only a finite
number of branches the observer can distinguish between.

That does not follow.


If there are only a finite number of states the entire universe can
be
in, then that's also true for observers.

That simply begs the question.


Finite or infinite universe, observers are always finite.

Saibal

Bruce

 --
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLR%2Bakx3k3W3QXHHPCgnYaUZ%3Dp6m8uoxS0RKiyp8Xaw6oQ%40mail.gmail.com
[1].


Links:
------
[1]
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLR%2Bakx3k3W3QXHHPCgnYaUZ%3Dp6m8uoxS0RKiyp8Xaw6oQ%40mail.gmail.com?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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/bece38b298ad4930234d13a404e9a9c8%40zonnet.nl.

Reply via email to