Re: Proof that macintosh is better than VMS

On Mar 12, 8:11 am, davi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
In article <d605f298-85d8-491f-aeb7-3ba58aa7a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, AEF <spamsink2...@xxxxxxxxx> writes:



On Mar 11, 1:19 pm, billg...@xxxxxxxxxxx (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:
In article <ueEuesurz...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
koeh...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Bob Koehler) writes:

In article <960d254f-6ae7-4334-ab8e-e58e2b1ed...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Doug Phillips <dphil...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

You are confusing quantum mechanics math with reality. If you mean
that the mathematics of quantum mechanics is not concerned with
resolving apparent randomness, then you are correct. You might want to
look into the de Broglie-Bohm theory, more recently called Bohmian
Mechanics.

Quantum mechanics math vs. reality? You think reality differs?

I'll bet a lot of people do. When science requires faith than religion
in order to accept that which can neither be observed nor satisfactorily
proven I think more and more people will see the difference.

I assume you meant "When science requires *more* faith..."

Scientists have faith in the scientific method which requires
evidence. Religious people have what James Randi calls "blind
faith"[1]. That makes all the difference in the world.

[1] Seehttp://www.randi.org/jr/072503.html(Mostly a good article,
but I disagree with his opinion of the Wizard of Oz.)

As far as using local hidden variables to restore determinism that
only "appears" probabilistic, the experimental evidence ruling these
out is more compelling than ever. Many, many experiments have been
done and QM always, always wins.

This is a strawman since there are non-local hidden variable theories.

We're not talking about the
possibility of experimental error clouding the results. The skeptics
who complained that the early experiments could still allow local
hidden variables because of events missed by detectors because said
detectors were not 100% efficient. OK. But the efficiencies have been
greatly improved and the room for determinism has been all but wiped
out. Then there is the GHZ paradox which largely sidesteps the issue.
There is simply no way to explain the results of GHZ experiments using
local hidden variables.

These experiments rule out local realistic theories.
This just leaves two choices

1) non-locality

or

2) non-realism

But what about Feynman's argument?

All these things combined (which includes stuff I don't have time to
document here) leads me to believe that there is almost certainly no
way out.


To my mind the latter doesn't actually make much sense. If the wave function

What makes sense is not as important as experimental results. See, you
know the drill (Beginning of Chapter 6 and parts of Chapter 7).

doesn't actually have a physical existence and a particle doesn't have any
properties until you measure them then how are entangled particles actually
linked. (If the wave function does physically exist then it's collapse will be
a non-local effect so such versions of the Copenhagen interpretation are
non-local).

I think the realism quandary is a red herring. QM tells you what you
will observe and that is what you observe.

As for the "collapse of the wave function" I think of it more as
"altered". The experimenter becomes part of the system.

AEF


David Webb
Security team leader
CCSS
Middlesex University

If you would learn about this, you would probably slowly begin to
realize that there is no way out. It is getting to the point where
insisting there must be determinism somehow being hidden behind the
veil of probability is akin to denying the existence of atoms. Do you
deny the existence of atoms? If so, why; and if not, why not?

I used to be on the deterministic side. I even tried to concoct an
explanation for polarization experiments to show how determinism could
still prevail, but I quickly found my analysis to be flawed.

The only faith science requires is faith in evidence, which is exactly
the opposite of religious faith, which is faith that some people
hundreds and/or thousands of years ago interacted with some god and
wrote about it. That's hardly the same.

AEF

bill

--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
billg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Layman Q: wave funtion and measurement
    ... definition expressed by the collapsed wave function". ... that is the old dicussion about hidden variables. ... the Kopenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics says that the ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: electron pilot waves, why impossible?
    ... the QM philosophy of non-locality and randomness. ... then there will always be hidden variables, but in this light you can ... These events share common histories, and common futures, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Go Improvements to Go
    ... While attempting to figure out whether there are hidden variables ... in quantum mechanics I encountered the words of Krishnamurti. ... Some physicists maintain that underlying ... that there is no deeper reality in quantum mechanics ...
    (rec.games.go)
  • Re: Different application of mathematical models
    ... Hidden variable theory: ... Brownian motion, one may derive non-relativistic quantum mechanics. ... with his inequalities killed hidden variables ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Go Improvements to Go
    ... While attempting to figure out whether there are hidden variables ... in quantum mechanics I encountered the words of Krishnamurti. ... "The Bohm interpretation is not popular among physicists for a number of scientific and sociological reasons that would be fascinating but long to study, but perhaps we can at least say here it is considered very inelegant by some." ... however, that there is no deeper reality in quantum mechanics - that, indeed, experiments have shown hidden variables to be incompatible with observations." ...
    (rec.games.go)
Loading