On Feb 26, 10:34 am, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
But isn't the EPR experiment a way of avoiding a past constraint. The
past constraint is just that the net angular momentum is zero, so there
is no constraint on the polarization of either photon. When one is
measured it can
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 25, 2010, at 1:56 AM, Charles charlesrobertgood...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Feb 23, 8:42 pm, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I think
it's an example of the radiation arrow of time making a
On Feb 25, 2010, at 1:56 AM, Charles charlesrobertgood...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Feb 23, 8:42 pm, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I think
it's an example of the radiation arrow of time making a time-reversed
process impossible - or maybe just vanishingly improbable. Bruce
On Feb 25, 6:41 am, Jesse Mazer laserma...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, this is the mainstream point of view, not unique to Price. It's
generally thought that reason we see an arrow of time at the macroscopic
level--including the arrow of time inherent in the fact that we can look at
records in the
On Feb 26, 6:38 am, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
One approach to the problem that I heard regarding the arrow of time
relates to the fact that storing information (either by the brain or
in a DNA molecule in the course of evolution) requires the expendature
of energy. The
Charles wrote:
On Feb 25, 6:41 am, Jesse Mazer laserma...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, this is the mainstream point of view, not unique to Price. It's
generally thought that reason we see an arrow of time at the macroscopic
level--including the arrow of time inherent in the fact that we can look at
On Feb 25, 2010, at 2:46 PM, Charles charlesrobertgood...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Feb 26, 6:38 am, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
One approach to the problem that I heard regarding the arrow of time
relates to the fact that storing information (either by the brain or
in a DNA
On Feb 26, 10:34 am, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
But isn't the EPR experiment a way of avoiding a past constraint. The
past constraint is just that the net angular momentum is zero, so there
is no constraint on the polarization of either photon. When one is
measured it can
On Feb 26, 2:05 pm, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
Isn't the AOT explained in terms of probability? E.g. There are far
more combinations for a system to be disordered rather than ordered,
as such the universe overall will tend to fall into these more likely
configurations. You
Charles wrote:
On Feb 26, 2:05 pm, Jason Resch jasonre...@gmail.com wrote:
Isn't the AOT explained in terms of probability? E.g. There are far
more combinations for a system to be disordered rather than ordered,
as such the universe overall will tend to fall into these more likely
On Feb 26, 6:19 pm, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
That isn't an explanation for the AOT, it's a consequence of it. An
explanation for the AOT would require showing *why* the universe is in
an improbable state in the past.
If it were in an improbable state in the future, the
Schulmann has written a nice little book about this considering both a
classical and quantum universe.
/Time's Arrows and Quantum Measurement/. L. S. Schulman. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1997
Thank you, if I have worlds enough and time (and money) I will get a
copy.
Charles
--
On Feb 26, 10:34 am, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
But isn't the EPR experiment a way of avoiding a past constraint. The
past constraint is just that the net angular momentum is zero, so there
is no constraint on the polarization of either photon. When one is
measured it can
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:02 AM, Charles charlesrobertgood...@gmail.comwrote:
The point about amplification is that all normal detection events
require amplification, such as photographic film, photomultipliers and
so on. We never detect a quantum event directly, but rather the result
of
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Jesse Mazer laserma...@gmail.com wrote:
Roger Penrose also devotes chapter 7 of his book The Emperor's New Mind
to the topic of Cosmology and the Arrow of Time (parts of which can be
viewed at
I hope you don't mind if I don't quote the entire exchange, which is
now rather long. Unfortunately I only have a short time in which to
reply, as well, so excuse the brevity!
I was under the impression that Price was NOT arguing for any special
kind of retrocausation, but I may have
On Feb 23, 8:42 pm, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I think
it's an example of the radiation arrow of time making a time-reversed
process impossible - or maybe just vanishingly improbable. Bruce Kellet
has written a paper about these problems, see pp 35.
On Feb 23, 7:13 pm, Jesse Mazer laserma...@hotmail.com wrote:
Such a theory would also have to explain why we are not able to use things
like the delayed choice quantum eraser to actually send information backwards
in time--for example, we can't look at the screen behind a double-slit and
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 22:58:20 -0800
Subject: Re: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds
From: charlesrobertgood...@gmail.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
On Feb 23, 7:13 pm, Jesse Mazer laserma...@hotmail.com wrote:
Having read the book a while ago, my memory is that Price offered this
idea
On Feb 23, 8:42 pm, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
No, it's an anti-neutrino and an electron colliding with a proton to
produce a neutron (the inverse of beta decay). But an electron
approaching a proton interacts via the EM field and a photon will be
emitted - yet, in the beta
I'm afraid I don't have time to give a detailed answer to everything
you've said, but thank you for the response. I will respond to a
couple of points (see below).
On Feb 24, 5:06 pm, Jesse Mazer laserma...@gmail.com wrote
:
When you mention hidden variables, I assume you mean that particles
On Feb 22, 8:12 pm, rmiller rmil...@legis.com wrote:
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jason Resch
Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2010 11:38 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds
Certainly
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 2:20 PM
To: Everything List
Subject: Re: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds
On Feb 22, 8:12 pm, rmiller rmil...@legis.com wrote:
From
On Feb 23, 6:08 pm, rmiller rmil...@legis.com wrote:
Huw Price suggests that our view of causality is strongly influenced
by the way we're embedded / oriented in space-time. He points out in
Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point that the laws of physics are
almost entirely time-symmetric, with
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:42:54 -0800
Subject: Re: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds
From: charlesrobertgood...@gmail.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
On Feb 23, 6:08 pm, rmiller rmil...@legis.com wrote:
If we accept what the laws of physics appear to say,
that nature
-Original Message-
From: everything-list@googlegroups.com
[mailto:everything-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 11:43 PM
To: Everything List
Subject: Re: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds
Good point, but among the many fates there is always
On Feb 23, 7:13 pm, Jesse Mazer laserma...@hotmail.com wrote:
Having read the book a while ago, my memory is that Price offered this idea
as a conceptual argument for how one *might* explain things using the EPR
experiment, but I don't think he ever would have said that this idea makes
On Feb 23, 7:57 pm, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Retro causation solves the EPR problem (i.e. provides a local
explanation of the correlations without hidden variables). See Vic
Stenger's book Timeless Quantum in which he uses this kind of
explanation to good effect. The
Jesse Mazer wrote:
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 21:42:54 -0800
Subject: Re: Many-worlds vs. Many-Minds
From: charlesrobertgood...@gmail.com
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
On Feb 23, 6:08 pm, rmiller rmil...@legis.com wrote:
If we accept what the laws of physics appear to say
Charles wrote:
On Feb 23, 7:57 pm, Brent Meeker meeke...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Retro causation solves the EPR problem (i.e. provides a local
explanation of the correlations without hidden variables). See Vic
Stenger's book Timeless Quantum in which he uses this kind of
explanation to good
To me, the Many-Minds interpretation requires significant changes in frames
of reference. Suppose you view a particular world out of many as a
2-dimensional surface. Layers of surfaces comprise the local environment of
a particular section of Many Worlds. Now think of a behavior pattern as a
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 8:07 PM, rmiller rmil...@legis.com wrote:
To me, the Many-Minds interpretation requires significant changes in
frames of reference. Suppose you view a particular world out of many as a
2-dimensional surface. Layers of surfaces comprise the local environment of
a
32 matches
Mail list logo
