tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post1080065341685215343..comments2023-09-27T07:44:19.769-04:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Has Reductionism Run its Course?Sabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger121125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-15126436425242887542019-11-03T02:20:17.585-05:002019-11-03T02:20:17.585-05:00As Aristotle observed 2500 years ago, the nature o...As Aristotle observed 2500 years ago, the nature of the elementary substance will never be known.Tibor Molnarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14231806800252963531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-51312586880535061502019-10-16T09:19:59.637-04:002019-10-16T09:19:59.637-04:00Exactly! Many theoretical physicists are still stu...Exactly! Many theoretical physicists are still stuck with the Galilean/Newtonian view of Physics that is modeled by the axiomatic structure of Euclidean Geometry; but a lot had been learned about after that about axiomatic systems.<br /><br /> It is just wishful thinking to assume that a few "fundamental" principles are enough(complete) to fully describe Reality and Godel results Jeremy Jr. Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12101880943293972922noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-60349801606396904122019-10-16T04:51:34.753-04:002019-10-16T04:51:34.753-04:00Typo:
- “review” -> “reviewed book”;
- “appal...Typo: <br />- “review” -> “reviewed book”; <br />- “appalled of” -> “appalled by” (but this is much too strong) -> “astonished by”<br /><br /><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Va5T2KcYiOw" rel="nofollow">And here is also a new minutephysics video</a> about Einstein, Friedmann and biases.Reimondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04669340425105889539noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-38983819843236848212019-10-16T02:30:32.673-04:002019-10-16T02:30:32.673-04:00In this review “... One Century After Hilbert” let...In this review <i>“... One Century After Hilbert”</i> let us take Hilbert´s Einstein-Hilbert action. Witten’s contribution is <a href="https://books.google.de/books?id=lZRdDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA197&lpg=PA197&dq=%22We+average,+in+a+quantum+mechanical+sense,+over+all+possible+spacetime+geometries.%22" rel="nofollow">here</a>. I am always appalled of the naturalness and ease with which the Reimondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04669340425105889539noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-52368044924106249582019-10-15T09:15:21.779-04:002019-10-15T09:15:21.779-04:00Why do you think that Gödels theorems (which ones?...Why do you think that Gödels theorems (which ones?) have anything to do with reductionism? And, no, his incompleteness theorem doesn't mean that there must be a world with pink unicorns because we can't prove that it's not true.<br />Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-41815841649891598692019-10-15T05:57:50.191-04:002019-10-15T05:57:50.191-04:00Readers here might be interested in John Baez'...Readers here might be interested in <a href="https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2019/10/10/foundations-of-math-and-physics-one-century-after-hilbert/" rel="nofollow">John Baez's review of a book on the mathematical foundations of physics</a>.<br />Phillip Helbighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067585245603436809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-8612395495612989162019-10-14T20:29:14.186-04:002019-10-14T20:29:14.186-04:00Dear Sabine,
I would really appreciate, once to r...Dear Sabine,<br /><br />I would really appreciate, once to read an backreaction blogpost about the foundations of reductionism within the context of Kurt Gödels theorems and possibly the relevance of intuitionistic or constructive logic within this context.Soulmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08884551782946824614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-25682675480239558802019-10-14T20:14:17.282-04:002019-10-14T20:14:17.282-04:00Hi Jeremy,
I completely agree with you. The impo...Hi Jeremy, <br /><br />I completely agree with you. The importance of Kurt Gödel's theorems is largely overlooked even in the mathematical community. Heading for a TOE is to a large extent still the continuation of the failed Hilbert program.Soulmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08884551782946824614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-2053813127470665992019-10-14T20:06:22.323-04:002019-10-14T20:06:22.323-04:00Dear 19,
if you want us to believe your claims, y...Dear 19,<br /><br />if you want us to believe your claims, you will have to provide really hard evidence for this prepositions.Soulmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08884551782946824614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-74243655791375443582019-10-14T19:58:59.333-04:002019-10-14T19:58:59.333-04:00Dear Antooneo
"But what did you find hard to...Dear Antooneo<br /><br />"But what did you find hard to understand in my preceding comments: The physical contents or my way to explain them?"<br /><br />The answer is: Both!<br /><br />"Regarding the question of reductionism: I think that there was a real break in the method of physical theories 100 years ago which is not so difficult to understand"<br /><br />May be, that Soulmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08884551782946824614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-85834967756685069392019-10-14T07:04:38.193-04:002019-10-14T07:04:38.193-04:00Reimond,
Ok, thanks. It’s an important point (‘in...Reimond,<br /><br />Ok, thanks. It’s an important point (‘integral part of the dynamics...’). This might be obvious for physicists(?), but it was not for me. <br />I was somehow beginning to wonder whether talking about an isolated quantum system makes sense. Well, yes that makes sense, since the whole problem is about the becoming of the system once placed in a larger context/environment! <br />Falkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12364415222331194182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-44584659400523363042019-10-13T23:31:03.728-04:002019-10-13T23:31:03.728-04:00Wyrd,
I am not a realist, so don't like makin...Wyrd,<br /><br />I am not a realist, so don't like making statements about reality. I don't have a strong problem with ontological reductionism but I don't think it's a scientific question whether it is or isn't correct. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-4831279635513136282019-10-13T13:53:39.138-04:002019-10-13T13:53:39.138-04:00I wondered about this myself. Per the Wiki article...I wondered about this myself. Per the Wiki article "Reductionism":<br /><br />"Ontological reductionism is the belief that reality is composed of a minimum number of kinds of entities or substances."<br /><br />"Methodological reductionism is the position that the best scientific strategy is to attempt to reduce explanations to the smallest possible entities."<br /><Wyrd Smythehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06694506351266400927noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-75119864698046991592019-10-11T03:11:10.234-04:002019-10-11T03:11:10.234-04:00Quentin,
I originally wrote "ontological red...Quentin,<br /><br />I originally wrote "ontological reductionism", but then I looked it up on Wikipedia and changed all instances of "ontological" to "methodological". At least according to Wikipedia "methodological" is the correct word. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-63613737022092074842019-10-10T11:15:20.776-04:002019-10-10T11:15:20.776-04:00Quick terminological note (thanks for the article)...Quick terminological note (thanks for the article): what you describe at the beginning of the article is more appropriately called ontological reductionism. It's a view about what the world is like. Methodological reductionism is normative, it is the idea that we should assume ontological reductionism for the purpose of enquiry (whether or not it's ultimately true), that we should attemptQuentin Ruyanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18395553776256376317noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-69073119747382013422019-10-10T03:31:14.330-04:002019-10-10T03:31:14.330-04:00Falker,
I regard measurement (reduction of the wa...Falker,<br /><br />I regard measurement (reduction of the wavefunction/state) as an integral part of the dynamics of our world, that happens all the “time” and everywhere. Thus after a measurement is before a measurement – nature does this again and again. <br />The unitary evolution in between measurements just calculates the probabilities that then are realized in a measurement. <br />A Reimondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04669340425105889539noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-88978755641052741122019-10-09T12:47:29.634-04:002019-10-09T12:47:29.634-04:00"...of getting entangled first and finally be..."...of getting entangled first and finally being reduced again"<br />Reduced again? What do you mean by ‘again’ ?<br />Falkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12364415222331194182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-88695210147118053802019-10-09T02:03:40.094-04:002019-10-09T02:03:40.094-04:00Quasiparticle. That doesn't mean it's not ...Quasiparticle. That doesn't mean it's not real, though, it means it's not fundamental. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-14521496019892996872019-10-08T15:15:22.211-04:002019-10-08T15:15:22.211-04:00A former LEP expermentalist wrote:
“It seems to me...A former LEP expermentalist wrote:<br />“It seems to me, that MWI does not try to measure anything physical at all. If my consideration would be correct, I would not include MWI into that what I call physics research!”<br /><br />MWI is not physics research. MWI only role is to show us that all quantum interpretations do not belong in physics research. There is not a single shred of experimental Udi Fuchshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02529460830838964526noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-17772929458506139632019-10-08T14:49:51.575-04:002019-10-08T14:49:51.575-04:00Former LEP experimentalist:
thank you for feedbac...Former LEP experimentalist:<br /><br />thank you for feedback. But what did you find hard to understand in my preceding comments: The physical contents or my way to explain them?<br /><br />Regarding the question of reductionism: I think that there was a real break in the method of physical theories 100 years ago which is not so difficult to understand (i.e. basing on principles rather on lower antooneohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12559038212417783694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-58739017187242739912019-10-08T14:29:29.774-04:002019-10-08T14:29:29.774-04:00https://phys.org/news/2019-10-axion-particle-solid...https://phys.org/news/2019-10-axion-particle-solid-state-crystal.html<br /><br />Axion particle spotted in solid-state crystal<br /><br />"An axion insulator is a correlated topological phase, predicted to arise from the formation of a charge-density wave in a Weyl semimetal. The accompanying sliding mode in the charge-density-wave phase, the phason, is an axion. It is expected to cause Axilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07190120527431077518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-41260363590067561792019-10-08T13:49:48.481-04:002019-10-08T13:49:48.481-04:00Reimond,
Something entirely different. Will write...Reimond,<br /><br />Something entirely different. Will write about this in more detail in a separate blogpost. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-83097305816753204292019-10-08T12:36:56.226-04:002019-10-08T12:36:56.226-04:00Reimond wrote:
"In MWI a measurement is not ...Reimond wrote:<br /><br />"In MWI a measurement is not a special event and there is no collapse. The initial state 1+2 does end up in a detector superposition"<br /><br />It seems to me, that MWI does not try to measure anything physical at all. If my consideration would be correct, I would not include MWI into that what I call physics research!Soulmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08884551782946824614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-42533095773264330352019-10-08T07:37:10.997-04:002019-10-08T07:37:10.997-04:00Reductionism does come to an end but like an upsid...Reductionism does come to an end but like an upside down parabola. The point at which one has to concentrate so much energy to see smaller things that one creates a black hole which increases its surface area not volume by absorbing matter/energy. So one adds more energy and the surface area increases and thus more energy equates to larger things not smaller things at that point. Lenny Susskind A. Hardinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07764154826815624332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-437426525048070322019-10-08T05:59:03.038-04:002019-10-08T05:59:03.038-04:00Sabine,
With “... dark energy may be an artifact ...Sabine,<br /><br />With <i>“... dark energy may be an artifact of our difficulty averaging non-linear equations.”</i> do you refer to the <a href="http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2016/02/much-ado-around-nothing-cosmological.html" rel="nofollow">Cosmological non-Constant Problem</a>, especially eq. 22 in <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1504.00012" rel="nofollow">here</a> or something entirely Reimondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04669340425105889539noreply@blogger.com