Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1/2/2014 10:55 PM, Jason Resch wrote: I sort of see the opposite trend. More and more physicists are looking for an information based fundamental theory. But where is the information coming from? If no where or nothing, this is just a form of idealism. Of course in a block uni

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1/2/2014 10:55 PM, Jason Resch wrote: What do you think about the idea that the whole course of the universe was set at that (near) singularity at the beginning of the universe? What do you mean by universe? Clearly we don't remain (or aren't in) just a single possible ((future)

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 1:46 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/2/2014 10:38 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:20 AM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 1/2/2014 7:37 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 8:35 PM, LizR wrote: >> >>> On 3 January 2014 14:31, meeke

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1/2/2014 10:38 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:20 AM, meekerdb > wrote: On 1/2/2014 7:37 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 8:35 PM, LizR mailto:lizj...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 3 January 2014 14:31, meekerdb m

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 12:20 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/2/2014 7:37 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 8:35 PM, LizR wrote: > >> On 3 January 2014 14:31, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> >>> Then I'll start by saying I don't reject MWI, I just have >>> reservations about it, not

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1/2/2014 7:37 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 8:35 PM, LizR mailto:lizj...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 3 January 2014 14:31, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: Then I'll start by saying I don't reject MWI, I just have reservations about it, not so

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1/2/2014 5:35 PM, LizR wrote: On 3 January 2014 14:31, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: Then I'll start by saying I don't reject MWI, I just have reservations about it, not so much that it's wrong, but that it doesn't really solve the problems it claims to - which

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 8:35 PM, LizR wrote: > On 3 January 2014 14:31, meekerdb wrote: > >> >> Then I'll start by saying I don't reject MWI, I just have reservations >> about it, not so much that it's wrong, but that it doesn't really solve the >> problems it claims to - which implies criticism

Re: What are wavefunctions?

Brent, Aside from the above two caveats, that seems a good summary of the problems with the MWI, (which I was vaguely aware of before, but am now far less vaguely). I'm not sure what to think about the FTL aspects, as I said I don't understand the MWI explanation of EPR. If you (or anyone) can el

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 3 January 2014 14:31, meekerdb wrote: > > Then I'll start by saying I don't reject MWI, I just have reservations > about it, not so much that it's wrong, but that it doesn't really solve the > problems it claims to - which implies criticism of the position that MWI > has solved all the problem

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1/2/2014 11:54 AM, LizR wrote: On 3 January 2014 07:07, Jason Resch > wrote: You can find out more and find out exactly where is is but to do that you're going to need to get your hands dirty and perform a experiment, then the squared wa

Re: What are wavefunctions?

2014/1/2 John Clark > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > >> >> >>> The wave function says everything there is to be said about how something is right now. >>> >>> >> The wave function says nothing about where the electron is right now, >>> the square of the wave func

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > >>> The wave function says everything there is to be said about how >>> something is right now. >>> >> >> >> The wave function says nothing about where the electron is right now, >> the square of the wave function (I'm not being pedantic the

Re: What are wavefunctions?

Brent, No, they aren't hidden variables. Not at all. Read my new topic post "Another shot at how spacetime emerges from quantum events" for the detailed explanation. Edgar On Thursday, January 2, 2014 3:16:13 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 1/2/2014 8:44 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > The spi

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1/2/2014 8:44 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: The spin orientation of the two particles is fixed in their mutual frame when they are created. No, if that were the case it would be a hidden variable and the measurement statistics would necessarily satisfy Bell's inequality. Brent -- You received

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 3 January 2014 07:07, Jason Resch wrote: > > >> You can find out more and find out exactly where is is but to do that >> you're going to need to get your hands dirty and perform a experiment, then >> the squared wave function collapses from everywhere to one specific dot on >> a photographic

Re: What are wavefunctions?

Jason, I think it preferable to discuss posts under the relevant topic. That's why I started a new topic. It doesn't make sense for me for a single thread to morph to many new unrelated topics. That is why your original post on this subject would have made more sense to be posted under my new t

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 12:21 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > I would add a (*) on "observer role". In MWI the observer plays no >> special function in the evolution of the wave function. This is not the >> case for many interpretations where the

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > No, please carefully read my new topic post "Another shot at how spacetime > emerges from quantum events" > Okay. Just as a tip, which I think will make things a little easier for others to follow a conversation, is to generall

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 02 Jan 2014, at 15:11, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Jason, >> >> Great! An amazing post! You seem to have correctly gotten part of the >> theory I proposed in my separate topic

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > I would add a (*) on "observer role". In MWI the observer plays no > special function in the evolution of the wave function. This is not the > case for many interpretations where the observer plays some special > privileged role, such as havin

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > No, please carefully read my new topic post "Another shot at how spacetime > emerges from quantum events" where I explain this process in detail. You > will see why it doesn't lead to MW but instead to many fragmentary > spacetime

Re: What are wavefunctions?

Jason, No, please carefully read my new topic post "Another shot at how spacetime emerges from quantum events" where I explain this process in detail. You will see why it doesn't lead to MW but instead to many fragmentary spacetimes (entanglement networks) which link and align via shared events

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 02 Jan 2014, at 15:11, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Jason, >> >> Great! An amazing post! You seem to have correctly gotten part of the >> theory I proposed in my separate topic

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 02 Jan 2014, at 15:11, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, Great! An amazing post! You seem to have correctly gotten part of the theory I proposed in my separate topic "Another stab at how spacetime emerges from quantum events." Please r

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > Great! An amazing post! You seem to have correctly gotten part of the > theory I proposed in my separate topic "Another stab at how spacetime > emerges from quantum events." Please refer to that topic to confirm... > > Do you under

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > Great! An amazing post! You seem to have correctly gotten part of the > theory I proposed in my separate topic "Another stab at how spacetime > emerges from quantum events." Please refer to that topic to confirm... > > Do you under

Re: What are wavefunctions?

Jason, Great! An amazing post! You seem to have correctly gotten part of the theory I proposed in my separate topic "Another stab at how spacetime emerges from quantum events." Please refer to that topic to confirm... Do you understand how the fact that the spins are determined in the frames o

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 4:33 AM, LizR wrote: > On 1 January 2014 21:34, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/31/2013 7:22 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 1 January 2014 13:54, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> Of course in Hilbert space there's no FTL because the system is just >>> one point and when a measurement is pe

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 01 Jan 2014, at 09:34, meekerdb wrote: But if you want to get FTL, that's possible if Alice and Bob are near opposite sides of our Hubble sphere when they do their measurements. They are then already moving apart faster than c and will never be able to communicate - with each other, bu

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 01 Jan 2014, at 00:05, meekerdb wrote: On 12/31/2013 9:54 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:12 PM, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > There are at least two possible answers to the bell inequalities: 1. Nonlocal influences Th

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 31 Dec 2013, at 22:11, meekerdb wrote: On 12/31/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Dec 2013, at 23:32, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 2:20 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:45 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 1:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 20

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 31 Dec 2013, at 21:52, meekerdb wrote: On 12/31/2013 1:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: A entire parallel universe as big as our own that you can never go to or even see is about as far from being local as you can get. Differentiation/splitting of "universes" is a local phenomenon. It is no

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 31 Dec 2013, at 21:19, meekerdb wrote: On 12/31/2013 1:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Dec 2013, at 20:00, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 3:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But that's essentially everything, since everything is (presumably) quantum. But notice the limitation of quantum

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1 January 2014 21:34, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/31/2013 7:22 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 1 January 2014 13:54, meekerdb wrote: > >> Of course in Hilbert space there's no FTL because the system is just >> one point and when a measurement is performed it projects the system ray >> onto a mixture of

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/31/2013 7:22 PM, LizR wrote: On 1 January 2014 13:54, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/31/2013 3:24 PM, LizR wrote: On 1 January 2014 12:05, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: Mark A. Rubin

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1 January 2014 13:54, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/31/2013 3:24 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 1 January 2014 12:05, meekerdb wrote: > >> Mark A. Rubin >> (Submitted on 14 Mar 2001 (v1 ), >> last revis

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/31/2013 3:24 PM, LizR wrote: On 1 January 2014 12:05, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: Mark A. Rubin (Submitted on 14 Mar 2001 (v1 ), last revised 10 May 2001 (t

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 1 January 2014 12:05, meekerdb wrote: > Mark A. Rubin > (Submitted on 14 Mar 2001 (v1 ), > last revised 10 May 2001 (this version, v2)) > > Bell's theorem depends crucially on counterfactual r

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/31/2013 9:54 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:12 PM, John Clark > wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Jason Resch mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com>> wrote: > There are at least two possible answers to the bell inequalities:

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 4:24 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > >> I sorta like the MWI but apparently you are not a fan because if what >>> you say is true then the MWI is dead wrong. >>> >> >> > Explain why the following table shows that MWI is loca

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> I sorta like the MWI but apparently you are not a fan because if what >> you say is true then the MWI is dead wrong. >> > > > Explain why the following table shows that MWI is local, and realistic > on the wave function and universal wave fu

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/31/2013 1:57 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Dec 2013, at 23:32, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 2:20 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:45 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/30/2013 1:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 3:

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/31/2013 1:51 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: A entire parallel universe as big as our own that you can never go to or even see is about as far from being local as you can get. Differentiation/splitting of "universes" is a local phenomenon. It is not instantaneous at all. In an EPR experiment

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/31/2013 1:37 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 30 Dec 2013, at 20:00, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 3:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But that's essentially everything, since everything is (presumably) quantum. But notice the limitation of quantum computers, if it has N qubits it takes 2^N compl

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 31 Dec 2013, at 18:24, John Clark wrote: On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > There is no faster than light influences in QM. You need to have an explicit physical collapse to have that. In the MW, the non locality is only apparent. So it's all only apparent. I h

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 12:12 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > There are at least two possible answers to the bell inequalities: >> 1. Nonlocal influences >> > > There are not "at least two" there are exactly two, but yes, things might > not be l

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > There is no faster than light influences in QM. You need to have an > explicit physical collapse to have that. In the MW, the non locality is > only apparent. > So it's all only apparent. I hate it when people say X is a illusion without ev

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > There are at least two possible answers to the bell inequalities: > 1. Nonlocal influences > There are not "at least two" there are exactly two, but yes, things might not be local. >2. Mutliple outcomes for each measurement > Yes, things m

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 23:32, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 2:20 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:45 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 1:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 3:57 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 12:04 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon,

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 22:00, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> That means you think things are realistic, and that means I know for a fact your thinking is wrong, not crazy but wrong. We know from experiment that Bell's inequality is violated, and th

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 21:49, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:09 PM, meekerdb wrote: > If an influence can go backward in time as well as forward then it can effectively have FTL influence, We already know for a fact that faster than light influences exist, and this has nothin

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 20:00, meekerdb wrote: On 12/30/2013 3:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But that's essentially everything, since everything is (presumably) quantum. But notice the limitation of quantum computers, if it has N qubits it takes 2^N complex numbers to specify its state, BUT you

Re: What are wavefunctions?

Even if this connection between entanglement and wormholes holds up, I don't think it automatically means quantum physics is nonlocal and we must discard the many-worlds claim to preserve locality. Keep in mind that in general relativity nothing can actually pass from one end of an Einstein-Rosen b

Re: What are wavefunctions?

...yrtemmys emit rO -- 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 everyth

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:00 PM, John Clark wrote: > >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> That means you think things are realistic, and that means I know for a fact your thinking is wrong, not crazy but

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 5:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/30/2013 2:20 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:45 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/30/2013 1:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 3:57 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/30/2013 12:04 P

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/30/2013 2:20 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:45 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/30/2013 1:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 3:57 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/30/2013 12:04 PM, Jaso

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:45 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/30/2013 1:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 3:57 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/30/2013 12:04 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:41 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/30/2013 11:17

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/30/2013 1:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 3:57 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/30/2013 12:04 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:41 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/30/2013 11:17 AM, Jas

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:00 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > >> That means you think things are realistic, and that means I know for a >>> fact your thinking is wrong, not crazy but wrong. We know from experiment >>> that Bell's inequality is viol

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 3:57 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/30/2013 12:04 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:41 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/30/2013 11:17 AM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/30/2013 3:09 A

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> That means you think things are realistic, and that means I know for a >> fact your thinking is wrong, not crazy but wrong. We know from experiment >> that Bell's inequality is violated, and that means that locality or realism >> or both MUS

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/30/2013 12:04 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:41 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/30/2013 11:17 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/30/2013 3:09 AM, Bru

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:09 PM, meekerdb wrote: > If an influence can go backward in time as well as forward then it can > effectively have FTL influence, > We already know for a fact that faster than light influences exist, and this has nothing to do with any theory, it was found experimentall

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:41 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/30/2013 11:17 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/30/2013 3:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> But that's essentially everything, since everything is (presumably) >> quantum. But

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/30/2013 11:17 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/30/2013 3:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But that's essentially everything, since everything is (presumably) quantum. But notice the limitation of quan

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:00 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/30/2013 3:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > But that's essentially everything, since everything is (presumably) > quantum. But notice the limitation of quantum computers, if it has N > qubits it takes 2^N complex numbers to specify its sta

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/30/2013 3:09 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: But that's essentially everything, since everything is (presumably) quantum. But notice the limitation of quantum computers, if it has N qubits it takes 2^N complex numbers to specify its state, BUT you can only retrieve N bits of information from it

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 08:49, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 9:05 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 11:43 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 6:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote: That is the only way to make progress. Propose theories, and falsify them. Ockham says between theories tha

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 03:59, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 6:52 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 3:31 PM, Jason Resch wrote: Everett's idea is more properly a theory. It explains the phenomenon of collapse without supposing it is the other ideas of QM that try to inte

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 30 Dec 2013, at 00:52, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 3:31 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:29 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 2:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, D

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 29 Dec 2013, at 23:29, meekerdb wrote: On 12/29/2013 2:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:45 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, D

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 29 Dec 2013, at 21:42, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 3:29 PM, LizR wrote: > violations of Bell's inequality can also be explained by time symmetry (Huw Price and John Bell, private communications). I have no idea what that private communication is, but I do know that time

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 29 Dec 2013, at 21:29, LizR wrote: Not quite, violations of Bell's inequality can also be explained by time symmetry (Huw Price and John Bell, private communications). + very special initial boundary conditions, which leads to a selection principle in the MW. It is a bit like in Bohm, e

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 29 Dec 2013, at 21:05, John Clark wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote >> Are faster-than-light influences involved? > No. That means you think things are local. >> 2. When it is determined whether or not Schrodinger's cat is alive or dead? >> The cat is

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/29/2013 9:05 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 11:43 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 6:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote: That is the only way to make progress. Propose theories, and falsify them. Ockham says between theories that ma

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 11:43 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 6:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > That is the only way to make progress. Propose theories, and falsify > them. Ockham says between theories that make equal predictions, simpler > ones are better, and it for theories of equal simpl

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/29/2013 6:59 PM, Jason Resch wrote: That is the only way to make progress. Propose theories, and falsify them. Ockham says between theories that make equal predictions, simpler ones are better, and it for theories of equal simplicity, ones that can explain more are also better. Anti-rea

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 6:52 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 3:31 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:29 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/29/2013 2:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM,

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/29/2013 3:31 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:29 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/29/2013 2:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM, Jason

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 5:29 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/29/2013 2:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/28/2013 4:45 PM,

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/29/2013 2:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:32 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:45 PM, Jason

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 1:47 AM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/28/2013 4:45 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:12 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >>> On 12/27/2013 10:31 PM

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 3:05 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote > > >> Are faster-than-light influences involved? >>> >> >> > No. >> > > That means you think things are local. > > >> 2. When it is determined whether or not Schrodinger's cat is alive o

Re: What are wavefunctions?

John, No. See the explanation in my new topic "Another shot at how spacetime emerges from computational reality" and you will (hopefully) see why those problems are avoided... Edgar On Sunday, December 29, 2013 3:05:24 PM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 3:29 PM, LizR wrote: > violations of Bell's inequality can also be explained by time symmetry > (Huw Price and John Bell, private communications). > I have no idea what that private communication is, but I do know that time is NOT symmetric. John K Clark -- You recei

Re: What are wavefunctions?

Not quite, violations of Bell's inequality can also be explained by time symmetry (Huw Price and John Bell, private communications). On 30 December 2013 09:05, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote > > >> Are faster-than-light influences involved? >>> >> >>

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 6:15 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> Cramer's transactional interpretation is non-local. >> > > Not really. It's slower-than-light, but retro. > If you can reach the finish line of a race before you even hear the starting gun I'd say you're pretty damn fast. >From Wikipedia: "

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote >> Are faster-than-light influences involved? >> > > > No. > That means you think things are local. >> 2. When it is determined whether or not Schrodinger's cat is alive or >> dead? >> > > >> The cat is always either dead or alive. It's j

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/28/2013 6:41 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:32 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/28/2013 4:45 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:12 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 12/27/2013 10:31 PM, Jaso

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 8:32 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/28/2013 4:45 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:12 PM, meekerdb wrote: > >> On 12/27/2013 10:31 PM, Jason Resch wrote: >> >> To that I would add the purely epistemic "non-intepretation" of Peres >>> and Fuchs. >>

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/28/2013 4:45 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:12 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 12/27/2013 10:31 PM, Jason Resch wrote: To that I would add the purely epistemic "non-intepretation" of Peres and Fuchs. "No interpretation needed"

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 7:12 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 12/27/2013 10:31 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > > To that I would add the purely epistemic "non-intepretation" of Peres >> and Fuchs. >> > > "No interpretation needed" -- I can interpret this in two ways, one way is > to just take the math and equ

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/27/2013 10:54 PM, LizR wrote: On 28 December 2013 19:37, Jason Resch > wrote: On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 1:26 AM, LizR mailto:lizj...@gmail.com>> wrote: On 28 December 2013 18:39, Jason Resch mailto:jasonre...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Fr

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/27/2013 10:31 PM, Jason Resch wrote: To that I would add the purely epistemic "non-intepretation" of Peres and Fuchs. "No interpretation needed" -- I can interpret this in two ways, one way is to just take the math and equations literally (this leads to Everett), the other is "shut

Re: What are wavefunctions?

It's not my theory, it's Bruno's. But in my reality I have often run simulations in which the computed time of events was not in the same order as the time of their computation. Brent On 12/28/2013 1:46 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Brent, Maybe in your theory of reality but not in mine... Edgar

Re: What are wavefunctions?

On 12/28/2013 1:46 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Dec 28, 2013, at 10:11 AM, spudboy...@aol.com wrote: One interpretation by some physicists with Cramer's transactional model, implies that information is coming from the future, and handshaking with the paste to create

Re: What are wavefunctions?

is as well. Cramer's transactional interpretation is non-local. Jason -Original Message- From: LizR To: everything-list Sent: Sat, Dec 28, 2013 1:26 am Subject: Re: What are wavefunctions? On 28 December 2013 18:39, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 10:28 PM, LizR wrote: On 2

Re: What are wavefunctions?

Brent, Maybe in your theory of reality but not in mine... Edgar On Saturday, December 28, 2013 4:39:18 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 12/28/2013 4:54 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Jason, > > Clock time is emergent from comp but comp takes place sequentially in > P-time, which is effectivel

<    1   2   3   4   >