Quantum Mess PART 2

The non amateur stuff. Hawking, black holes, that sort of thing

Moderators: joe, Brian, Guy Fennimore

Post Reply
Cliff
Posts: 6598
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:18 pm
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Quantum Mess PART 2

Post by Cliff »

Dear al(L) again
The NS article goes on to make what I find particularly interesting comments by Aephrain Steinberg -University of Toronto about what constitute "observations\measurements".
Whilst Howard Wiseman - Griffith University Australia says quantum phenomena arise from multiple universes.
Wiseman apparently admits multiple universes interacting with each other is strange. However for him parallel universes that consistently obey a set of laws, are less strange than a single universe with exception to rules - as with Copenhagen thinking.
Despite some enthusiasm for supposed alternatives 32% of respondents did not understand the interpretations enough to have an opinion.
23% thought interpretations were irrelevant. One physicist thought that some could not be verified by experiments and were more philosophy than physics.
Best of luck from Cliff
RMSteele
Posts: 568
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:32 am
Location: New Farnley, Leeds lat 53.8N long 1.6W
Contact:

Re: Quantum Mess PART 2

Post by RMSteele »

Cliff, I wish the big World was like the quantum puniverse. That way, I would always be where my wife expects me to be, doing what she expects me to do, when she expects me to be doing it; and when I lose things I would always find them where I look for them. Anyway, what do surveys prove? It depends what you ask!
Bob
Cliff
Posts: 6598
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:18 pm
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Re: Quantum Mess PART 2

Post by Cliff »

Dear Bob
Yes, I think you are right.
Even so I feel pleasantly surprised that it seems quite a few "real" physicists are not happy with Quantum issues.
I was interested to learn that one well known supporter of the multiverse-universe accepts that idea because if you have enough multi-verses each individual one can have its own specific different laws - rather than having a single universe with a variety of occasions where one or other supposed laws break down.
Personally it doesn't really bother me either way. But I think if you believe in the multiverse it may be hard for anyone to prove you are wrong.
As you say marriage has its own problems that the multi-verse cop-out idea would only make things worse !
Best wishes from Cliff,
brian livesey
Posts: 5436
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 11:05 am
Location: Lancashire
Contact:

Re: Quantum Mess PART 2

Post by brian livesey »

Some might say that the matrimonial equivalent of the multiverse Cliff, is polygamy. :wink:
brian
Cliff
Posts: 6598
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:18 pm
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Re: Quantum Mess PART 2

Post by Cliff »

Dear Brian
Polygamy ?????
I don't think I could handle all the potential arguments. So I'm dead against the Multiverse idea.
Best wishes from Cliff
RMSteele
Posts: 568
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:32 am
Location: New Farnley, Leeds lat 53.8N long 1.6W
Contact:

Re: Quantum Mess PART 2

Post by RMSteele »

Mmmm, think I'll change my mind on this one and go right back to a Newtonian universe. One wife per life seems more than adequate..... Maybe that's going a bit far, after all Isaac never got round to getting married. I have a feeling an administrator is wobbling over closing this thread as we type. :| Bob
Post Reply