My son the mathematician

[Liz R]

Here is his first co-authored paper (at the age of 20).

Topology and its Applications 

Volume 254 
, 1 
March 2019, Pages 85-100

Extending bonding functions in generalized inverse sequences
Iztok Banič, 
 
SimonGoodwin and 

MichaelLockyer 

 


(he's the one in the middle)

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0166864118304449


-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: Black holes and the information paradox

[Liz R]

I thought QM was deterministic, at least mathematically - and I guess in 
the MWI?

I mean everyone can't have forgotten quantum indeterminacy when discussing 
the BHIP, surely?

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: What is the largest integer you can write in 5 seconds?

[Liz R]

I have a simpler answer!

"the largest integer you can write in 5 seconds"

...can be written in 5 seconds.

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: What is the largest integer you can write in 5 seconds?

[Liz R]

Graham's number tetrated Graham's number times? That took about 5 seconds, 
does it come close?

On Wednesday, 6 March 2019 07:06:24 UTC+13, John Clark wrote:
>
> It's easy to prove that the Busy Beaver Function grows faster than *ANY* 
> computable function because if there were such a faster growing function 
> you could use it to solve the Halting Problem. So if you're ever in a 
> contest to see who can name the largest integer in less than 5 seconds just 
> write BB(9000) and you'll probably win.
>
> John K Clark
>
>

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Is Google groups shutting down?

[Liz R]

If so is the EL going somewhere else?

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: How can a grown man be an atheist ?

[Liz R]

On Saturday, 28 December 2013 06:18:26 UTC+13, Edgar L. Owen wrote:


 Many worlds is probably the most outlandishly improbable theory of all 
 time, and should have been laughed out of existence as soon as it was 
 proposed. Do


Fortunately, science is not decided on what seems probable to humans, or we 
would never have realised that there is anything except the Earth and some 
lights in the sky. The MWI is very far from the most outlandishly 
improbable theory of all time, I can name a dozen ontological theories that 
are more outlandish without even asking WIkipedia, such as the idea that 
the world was created by the shenannigans of various gods.

you actually understand what it says or implies? Basically that every 
 quantum event that ever occured in the history of the universe spawns an 
 entire new universe of all its possible outcomes and every event in every 
 one of those new universes does the same. This immediately exponentially 
 escalates in the first few minutes of the universe into uncountable new 
 universes and has been expanding exponentially ever since over 14.7 billion 
 years! Just try to calculate the


The MWI is a straight interpretation of our best theory of matter - an 
interpretation that removes any extra assumptions (wave function collapse, 
pilot waves, wave-particle duality etc). It is simply what the relevant 
equations say, converted without interpretation to human language (if one 
leaves aside the actual phrase many worlds, which is misleading). The 
equations imply that all possible outcomes occur for a given quantum event, 
or to be exact that the entities we regard as particles are in fact waves, 
capable of interfering with themselves, but only detectable (I suppose 
entanglable would be a better word) by a process of localisation that is, 
I'm told, neatly explained by decoherence. This implies that the universal 
wavefunction is constantly spreading and differentiating. This is generally 
characterised as parallel universes coming into existence but that isn't 
a completely accurate description (and in any case it is quite possible 
that space and time are emergent properties of the universal wavefunction).
 

 number of new universe that now exist. It's larger than the largest number 
 that could ever be imagined or even written down. There is not enough paper 
 in the universe, or enough computer memory in the entire universe to even 
 express a number this large! Doesn't anyone ever use common sense and think 
 through these things to see how stupid they are? And it violates all sorts 
 of conservations since energy eg. is multiplied exponentially beyond 
 counting. Geeez, it would be impossible to come up with something dumber, 
 especially when it is completely clear that decoherence theory falsifies it 
 conclusively.


If that was a correct description of the MWI, you might have a point, but 
it isn't. Oddly enough clever people *have* thought about this, some of 
them on this very list. Have you read The Fabric of Reality by David 
Deutsch? That's what Americans would call MWI 101 or The MWI for 
dummies. If you have, you will know that the MWI posits a continuum of 
worlds which can only ever differentiate, not split or branch or any 
of the other common misconceptions. The fact that the universe can generate 
greater and greater detail indefinitely (or possibly only to certain 
physical limits, like the Bekenstein bound) is no more surprising than the 
fact that in GR a finite universe can expand to infinite size (under 
certain conditions), or that the centre of a black hole (according to GR) 
is a singularity of infinite density. These are all properties of the 
continuum, a mathematical object that may or may not describe space-time 
(if it doesn't, it does so to very high precision, apparently many orders 
of magnitude smaller than the Planck length). The idea that the MWI 
violates the conservation of energy was laid to rest a long time ago. A 
simple example is a quantum computer factoring a 500 bit number. The 
equations of QM say that this is physically possible, even if we have 
trouble doing it in practice - it requires 500 qubits to be suitably 
prepared and then shaken down somehow (with Shor's algorithm, I think) to 
obtain the result. QM says this happens by generating a superposition of 2 
to the power of 500 quantum states, which according to my trusty calculator 
is quite a lot. These superpositions are in fact capable of decohering into 
2^500 possible states, although Shor's algo or whatever ensures that 
99.999...% of these give the right answer. The question is, how or where do 
all these states exist? QM says they all exist right here, in our 
universe (which the MWI claims is a convenient fiction, of course) - but 
how can 2^500 states exist at the same time for the same qubits (which are 
normally atoms, but could in theory be photons, electrons, etc) ? Where is 
the calculation performed? This is a massive parallel 

Re: Unexpected Hanging

[Liz R]

If someone told me that I was going to be hung, I can assure you I would be 
expecting it every day. I wouldn't bother with any logical analysis.

(The unexpected exam, on the other hand...)


On Thursday, 12 September 2013 21:33:24 UTC+12, telmo_menezes wrote:

 Time for some philosophy then :) 

 Here's a paradox that's making me lose sleep: 
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexpected_hanging_paradox 

 Probably many of you already know about it. 

 What mostly bothers me is the epistemological crisis that this 
 introduces. I cannot find a problem with the reasoning, but it's 
 clearly false. So I know that I don't know why this reasoning is 
 false. Now, how can I know if there are other types of reasoning that 
 I don't even know that I don't know that they are correct? 

 Cheers, 
 Telmo. 


-- 
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.