Re: Coherent states of a superposition

2019-01-20 Thread agrayson2000
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 9:56:17 AM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 18 Jan 2019, at 18:50, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 12:09:58 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 17 Jan 2019, at 14:48, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday,

Re: Coherent states of a superposition

2019-01-20 Thread agrayson2000
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 11:54:43 AM UTC, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 9:56:17 AM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 18 Jan 2019, at 18:50, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 12:09:58 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:

Re: Coherent states of a superposition

2019-01-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
> On 18 Jan 2019, at 18:50, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 12:09:58 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 17 Jan 2019, at 14:48, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 12:36:07 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 17

Re: Discrete theories of space

2019-01-20 Thread agrayson2000
On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 5:20:16 PM UTC, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 5:42:12 AM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com > wrote: >> >> Since it seems conceptually impossible to model a theory with DISJOINT >> discrete spatial units, thus requiring the units to be

Re: Coherent states of a superposition

2019-01-20 Thread 'scerir' via Everything List
> Il 20 gennaio 2019 alle 12.56 agrayson2...@gmail.com ha scritto: > > > > On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 10:46:01 AM UTC, scerir wrote: > > > > > > > > [BRUNO writes] It has a non null amplitude of probability of being > > here and there at the same time, like having a

Re: Coherent states of a superposition

2019-01-20 Thread agrayson2000
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 10:46:01 AM UTC, scerir wrote: > > > [BRUNO writes] It has a non null amplitude of probability of being here > and there at the same time, like having a non null amplitude of probability > of going through each slit in the two slits experience. If not, you can’t

Re: Coherent states of a superposition

2019-01-20 Thread agrayson2000
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 12:10:25 PM UTC, scerir wrote: > > > Il 20 gennaio 2019 alle 12.56 agrays...@gmail.com ha > scritto: > > > > On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 10:46:01 AM UTC, scerir wrote: > > > [BRUNO writes] It has a non null amplitude of probability of being here > and there

Re: Discrete theories of space

2019-01-20 Thread Philip Thrift
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 2:16:56 AM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 5:20:16 PM UTC, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 5:42:12 AM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com >> wrote: >>> >>> Since it seems conceptually impossible

Re: Coherent states of a superposition

2019-01-20 Thread 'scerir' via Everything List
[BRUNO writes] It has a non null amplitude of probability of being here and there at the same time, like having a non null amplitude of probability of going through each slit in the two slits experience. If not, you can’t explain the inference patterns, especially in the photon

Re: Planck Length

2019-01-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
> On 19 Jan 2019, at 01:42, Lawrence Crowell > wrote: > > On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 6:31:06 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 17 Jan 2019, at 09:22, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Monday, January 7, 2019 at 9:25:16 PM UTC, John Clark wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at

Discrete theories of space.

2019-01-20 Thread John Clark
On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 5:22:25 PM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: > *T* > > > *his by Carlo Rovelli:> https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.02382 > > concludes:> "Notice that nowhere in the > basic equations of the theory a time coordinate t or a space coordinate x >

Re: Coherent states of a superposition

2019-01-20 Thread 'scerir' via Everything List
> Il 20 gennaio 2019 alle 13.25 agrayson2...@gmail.com ha scritto: > > > > On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 12:10:25 PM UTC, scerir wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Il 20 gennaio 2019 alle 12.56 agrays...@gmail.com ha > > scritto: > > > > > > > > > > > > On

Re: The semantic view of theories and higher-order languages

2019-01-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
> On 19 Jan 2019, at 00:14, John Clark wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 8:30 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: > > >Nwe cannot assume, neither a physical universe, nor analysis or set theory. > >Since recently, I have realised that we cannot even assume the induction >

Re: Planck Length

2019-01-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
> On 19 Jan 2019, at 11:36, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 2:36:23 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 18 Jan 2019, at 15:44, Philip Thrift > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 7:36:34 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 17 Jan

Re: Solomonoff induction and mechanism

2019-01-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
> On 16 Jan 2019, at 05:05, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 06:14:14PM -0800, Mason Green wrote: >> Solomonoff’s method of induction seems like a good fit for a mechanist view >> of things. For instance, it could be used to assign a relative probability >> to the universe

Re: Discrete theories of space

2019-01-20 Thread Lawrence Crowell
On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 5:42:12 AM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > Since it seems conceptually impossible to model a theory with DISJOINT > discrete spatial units, thus requiring the units to be juxtaposed, do such > theories acknowledge difficulty of motion between the units,

Re: UDA and the origin of physics

2019-01-20 Thread Bruno Marchal
> On 15 Jan 2019, at 12:56, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, January 15, 2019 at 5:33:01 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 14 Jan 2019, at 20:27, Brent Meeker > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On 1/14/2019 3:22 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> The physics comes from the first

Re: Discrete theories of space

2019-01-20 Thread Philip Thrift
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 9:14:39 AM UTC-6, Lawrence Crowell wrote: > > On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 5:42:12 AM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com > wrote: >> >> Since it seems conceptually impossible to model a theory with DISJOINT >> discrete spatial units, thus requiring the units to be

Re: Discrete theories of space.

2019-01-20 Thread John Clark
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 2:03 PM Philip Thrift wrote: >> Experiments involve space and time, if those equations involve neither I >> don't see how you could ever test them to see if they're correct; and if >> you can't do that then it's not science, it's just philosophy. And >> philosophers have

Re: Discrete theories of space.

2019-01-20 Thread Philip Thrift
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 9:23:09 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote: > > On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 5:22:25 PM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > *T* >> >> >> *his by Carlo Rovelli:> https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.02382 >> > concludes:> "Notice that nowhere in

Re: Discrete theories of space

2019-01-20 Thread agrayson2000
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 3:14:39 PM UTC, Lawrence Crowell wrote: > > On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 5:42:12 AM UTC-6, agrays...@gmail.com > wrote: >> >> Since it seems conceptually impossible to model a theory with DISJOINT >> discrete spatial units, thus requiring the units to be

Re: UDA and the origin of physics

2019-01-20 Thread Philip Thrift
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 8:52:54 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 15 Jan 2019, at 12:56, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, January 15, 2019 at 5:33:01 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> > On 14 Jan 2019, at 20:27, Brent Meeker wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On

Re: Discrete theories of space.

2019-01-20 Thread Philip Thrift
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 2:56:19 PM UTC-6, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 2:03 PM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > >> Experiments involve space and time, if those equations involve neither >>> I don't see how you could ever test them to see if they're correct; and if >>> you

Re: Discrete theories of space.

2019-01-20 Thread John Clark
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 4:31 PM Philip Thrift wrote: > *>>> What we call space (x,y,z) is just what we measure with a ruler.* >>> *What we call time t is just what we measure with a clock.* >>> >> >> >>True, and thus space and time have well defined definitions. And >> that's why we can't do

Re: Discrete theories of space.

2019-01-20 Thread Philip Thrift
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 4:37:35 PM UTC-6, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 4:31 PM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > >> *>>> What we call space (x,y,z) is just what we measure with a ruler.* *What we call time t is just what we measure with a clock.* >>> >>> >>True,

Re: Discrete theories of space.

2019-01-20 Thread John Clark
On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 5:55 PM Philip Thrift wrote: > As for LQG's "quantum geometry" being empirical, as I posted before > > *Glimpses of Space-Time Beyond the Singularities Using Supercomputers* > https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.01747 > I see nothing empirical in that, it's a supercomputer

Re: Planck Length

2019-01-20 Thread Lawrence Crowell
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 9:16:01 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 19 Jan 2019, at 01:42, Lawrence Crowell > wrote: > > On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 6:31:06 AM UTC-6, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 17 Jan 2019, at 09:22, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Monday, January