tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post4630058669570301488..comments2021-03-07T07:19:05.165-05:00Comments on Sabine Hossenfelder: Backreaction: Nonsense arguments for building a bigger particle collider that I am tired of hearing (The Ultimate Collection)Sabine Hossenfelderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comBlogger92125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-24505475902867132812019-04-05T12:30:48.108-04:002019-04-05T12:30:48.108-04:00Steven,
Yes, a good question. I'll make a go ...Steven,<br /><br />Yes, a good question. I'll make a go at it and say about $2 billion. <br /><br />Reason:<br /><br />A larger collider currently has less scientific promise than LIGO had, which came in at a cost somewhat below $1 billion. It has also less scientific promise than the SKA, whose full proposal would come in at $2 billion. So that would seem a reasonable amount. Sabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-90168320244848851832019-04-05T12:13:09.010-04:002019-04-05T12:13:09.010-04:00Thank you for this exceptionally thoughtful post. ...Thank you for this exceptionally thoughtful post. I do think that a good question to ask people on both sides of the argument is: What is your cutoff? <br /><br />That is: For supporters of the collider, I'd like to ask "How expensive would this thing have to be before you stopped supporting it? 30 billion? 50 billion? 100 billion?"<br /><br />And for opponents: "How Steven E Landsburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00515291316667760469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-2156325082240040452019-04-04T15:59:21.609-04:002019-04-04T15:59:21.609-04:00In fact quantum interpretations are multiplying li...<i>In fact quantum interpretations are multiplying like bunnies, maybe cockroaches to put it in a negative light, and none of them seems to really solve everything.</i><br /><br />Well yes, but the Bohmian advantage over all those proliferating bunnies is twofold. First, it eliminates the self-induced measurement problem of CI. More importantly, it provides a qualitative account of unobservable bud raphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06948881286545517324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-56100095283071312752019-04-04T15:50:01.172-04:002019-04-04T15:50:01.172-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.bud raphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06948881286545517324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-91742484274593224312019-04-04T08:23:04.949-04:002019-04-04T08:23:04.949-04:00@Lawrence Crowell
Thanks for the reply. I found ...@Lawrence Crowell <br /><br />Thanks for the reply. I found papers specific to Bell states and two qubit geometries. In many ways this relates to what I have been doing. There is, for example, a diagram which occurs in several contexts that I use to decide the well ordering of my 16-set of logical constants. It is a tetrahedron inscribed in a cube. Similarly, some of the papers start looking at mlshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15862021650071892590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-88452016421058702352019-04-04T06:17:47.372-04:002019-04-04T06:17:47.372-04:00The particle in the pilot wave interpretation of B...The particle in the pilot wave interpretation of Bohm and taken from deBroglie is not highly regarded in part because of Bohm's intention with local hidden variables. The idea is workable in a nonrelativistic framework and I think a way of working quantum chaos. <br /><br />There is a fascinating way of doing quantum mechanics that Pascual Jordan worked with Wigner. It is a way of doing QM Lawrence Crowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12090839464038445335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-19810633236771604232019-04-04T06:06:43.775-04:002019-04-04T06:06:43.775-04:00This is not the point I wanted to make. This is ob...This is not the point I wanted to make. This is obviously just another extension of a proven theory. Such things did not lead to anything really new. I am well aware of other approaches, such as quantum loop gravity or string theory, which, despite all efforts, have yet to resolve the open questions.<br />The question of what a theory must look like so that QM and GRT can be deduced from it haveWSGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13226241246729687142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-5238836788666353172019-04-04T06:03:01.502-04:002019-04-04T06:03:01.502-04:00The GNS construction is an aspect of noncommutativ...The GNS construction is an aspect of noncommutative geometry. The spectra with Tr(Aρ) is also used in Gleason's theorem. <br /><br />I will try to get to your paper as soon as possible. I have this large backdrop of things to read, including finishing Sabine's book. I started reading a library copy last year and have since bought my own copy and that is on my stack as well.Lawrence Crowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12090839464038445335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-1834114924307976132019-04-03T18:49:17.541-04:002019-04-03T18:49:17.541-04:00@WSG
There is a upcoming version of QM that uses ...@WSG<br /><br />There is a upcoming version of QM that uses complex numbers and four-dimensional Riemann space. It's used to handle open systems.<br /><br />It is called PT-symmetric quantum mechanics.<br /><br />PT-symmetric quantum mechanics is an extension of conventional quantum mechanics into the complex domain. (PT symmetry is not in conflict with conventional quantum theory but is Axilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07190120527431077518noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-87382038335094224212019-04-03T12:57:11.057-04:002019-04-03T12:57:11.057-04:00I often wonder what a theory will look like that e...I often wonder what a theory will look like that explains QM and ART as special cases. As far as I can see, most scientists are trying to bridge the gap from QM. This seems logical, since most physicists probably regard QM as the most fundamental theory. However, the classic cases of really new theories have developed differently. There was no direct path from classical physics to quantum WSGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13226241246729687142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-3626795771948092292019-04-03T11:56:34.266-04:002019-04-03T11:56:34.266-04:00@Lawrence Crowell
Last Spring I submitted a sho...@Lawrence Crowell <br /><br />Last Spring I submitted a short essay to the Gravity Research Foundation (GRF) in Wellesley, Massachusetts, that effectively is another interpretation of QM; albeit, a very amateur one. The concept is largely heuristic with a minimum of mathematical modeling. Currently I'm expanding on the original paper, submitted to the GRF, to include ideas for which the David Schroederhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18048116250413347228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-77248535553489187642019-04-03T05:37:39.165-04:002019-04-03T05:37:39.165-04:00I have certain proclivities for the Bohm interpret...I have certain proclivities for the Bohm interpretation. I suppose this is just as I have the same for other interpretations. In fact I derived a form of path integral with Bohm's quantum mechanics. I found the mention of Bohm was a form of toxin in getting this published. Bohm's QM is also potentially interesting for solving problems in chaos or quantum chaos. Bohm's QM is though notLawrence Crowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12090839464038445335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-17841470859545532002019-04-02T14:26:57.019-04:002019-04-02T14:26:57.019-04:00Not so much Connes as an algebraic QM approach, wi...Not so much Connes as an algebraic QM approach, with the intention to bring it down to a mortal (my) mathematical level (I'm just reading Valter Moretti, "Spectral Theory and Quantum Mechanics", Springer, 2017, for example, where his Chapter 14, "Introduction to the Algebraic Formulation of Quantum Theories, is nicely done).<br />The starting point for both classical (as Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08654675777726560464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-60306362215490231742019-04-02T11:14:34.789-04:002019-04-02T11:14:34.789-04:00Javier, thanks for your comments.
I thought what ...Javier, thanks for your comments.<br /><br />I thought what I was suggesting was obvious from what I wrote, but I apologize to anyone who misinterpreted it as you have.<br /><br />Applied Science starts where science is understood well enough to build on it to produce useful things. At its most interesting it includes developing new techniques and tools, but ithose of us who practice it do not Korean War Photo Documentaryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12109120741562284394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-83489761612459026252019-04-02T09:40:20.837-04:002019-04-02T09:40:20.837-04:00Yes, I'm aware Sabine wasn't suggesting th...Yes, I'm aware Sabine wasn't suggesting that; you were, though. In my experience, Applied Science is just a fancy way of saying engineering research and, as I said, I don't think we should transfer money from the much-in-need-of-funding foundations of physics into the bad-but-still-not-nearly-as-bad field of engineering research. Superconducting magnets are being actively researched Javierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14358004457744637522noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-31521841695874857302019-04-01T20:09:02.899-04:002019-04-01T20:09:02.899-04:00I looked over your paper and down loaded it. I wil...I looked over your paper and down loaded it. I will have to reserve judgment until I read it sometime later, though I hope not too long into the future. It looks a bit like noncommutative geometry of Connes et al..<br /><br />The connection between quantum and classical mechanics is often stated as 1 = {q, p} → [q, p] = iħ for large action S = nħ for n → ∞. I think the most important aspect of Lawrence Crowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12090839464038445335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-62327861661624769872019-04-01T16:14:50.132-04:002019-04-01T16:14:50.132-04:00Simone said,
"Actually, it might as well be...Simone said, <br /><br />"Actually, it might as well be; it's just that we don't know that deeper theory yet. "<br /><br />Well unless there are an infinite number of theories, each depending on the one below, the process has to stop somewhere. My gut feeling is that QM is special - it says that fundamentally we have different possibilities (realities if you like) that evolve David Baileyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06172248428321078417noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-44661757798682443242019-04-01T14:57:51.300-04:002019-04-01T14:57:51.300-04:00David Bailey,
That makes QM sound like classical ...David Bailey,<br /><br /><i>That makes QM sound like classical statistical mechanics, which I think isn't fair.</i><br /><br />At the interface between QM and observation statistics is all you get. That QM arrives there via a different set of formalisms necessitated by the peculiar circumstances of the quantum scale, doesn't alter the analogous nature of the outcome.<br /><br /><i>Surely bud raphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06948881286545517324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-59150296080808030382019-04-01T14:20:30.579-04:002019-04-01T14:20:30.579-04:00Lawrence,
Re the measurement problem:
...I think...Lawrence,<br /><br />Re the measurement problem:<br /><br /><i>...I think very strongly this problem is not solvable.</i><br /><br />Well, it is not solvable mathematically speaking because it is not a question of mathematics, but of physics. The question involves the nature of the physical processes underlying the maths of QM. <br /><br />The difficulty, of course, is that those processes are bud raphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06948881286545517324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-90124506077819803282019-04-01T13:57:05.753-04:002019-04-01T13:57:05.753-04:00This conjecture on my part is not something I have...This conjecture on my part is not something I have actually bent metal on or have done any calculations. This is pretty removed from my day job work that is more applied or engineering. The DMPR theorem is similar to the Bernays-Cohen result that the continuum hypothesis is a case of Gödel's theorem. <br /><br />Polytopes also enter into the algebraic geometry complexity of N vs NP. The role Lawrence Crowellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12090839464038445335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-20424670525906340272019-04-01T12:47:24.581-04:002019-04-01T12:47:24.581-04:00Okay, okay. But what if we find more Odderons? ;)Okay, okay. But what if we find more Odderons? ;)Sethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14214033440986093605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-36138080947170191252019-04-01T09:11:50.719-04:002019-04-01T09:11:50.719-04:00@LawrenceCrowell, this is fine, but I suggest ther...@LawrenceCrowell, this is fine, but I suggest there is a question as to what Classical Mechanics is. Specifically, Koopman in 1931 introduced a Hilbert space formalism for CM, which can be thought of as offering a unification of CM with QM, just as the Schrödinger equation and Heisenberg's matrices were unified as Hilbert space formalisms. In these terms, the difference between CM and QM is Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08654675777726560464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-28954617957399305452019-04-01T08:41:56.927-04:002019-04-01T08:41:56.927-04:00@Lawrence Crowell
I do personal research in found...@Lawrence Crowell<br /><br />I do personal research in foundations because of the continuum hypothesis. Should you ever wish to be put on a crank list, become interested in just such a problem. One morning, thirty years ago, I simply woke up with the conviction of its truth.<br /><br />I now know why. The result from core mathematics lies in dimension theory. There is no transfinite dimension mlshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15862021650071892590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-87490425095728259962019-04-01T07:18:14.098-04:002019-04-01T07:18:14.098-04:00Opamanfred,
This is really off-topic. I am one pe...Opamanfred,<br /><br />This is really off-topic. I am one person and not a forum. I do not have time to respond to random questions. Really, this is common knowledge, and in any case, I explained this in my book, and also Lawrence explained it correctly when he writes:<br /><br /><i>"Decoherence does address aspects of measurement. However, it does not tell us how a particular outcome occursSabine Hossenfelderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22973357.post-33323274860471231142019-04-01T05:49:38.312-04:002019-04-01T05:49:38.312-04:00"Decoherence does not solve the measurement p..."Decoherence does not solve the measurement problem"<br />Please elaborate. I would also like to hear how exactly you define the problem. I consider what I sketched as a perfectly acceptable solution. On what aspect do you disagree?opamanfredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07148586222290109507noreply@blogger.com