But you have not given any answer .... let alone not a clear one...
Are you denying that randomness has been proven true?
Or
Are you denying that Quantum Physics has been proven true?
Or
What???
Last edited:
Free will and determinism
- Thread starter Robin
- Start date
But you have not given any answer .... let alone not a clear one...
Are you denying that randomness has been proven true?
Or
Are you denying that Quantum Physics has been proven true?
Or
What???
No. Start reading up on Bell's Theorem and all the later follow-up work, there are no hidden variables.
All of 248 is consistent with Everett.
And that casino did pay out. You clearly don't understand Everett, or QM in general.
Hahaha.... nope!!!
Last edited:
Absolutely.
A fairly trendy material that owes its good electrical properties to the uncertainty principle is graphene. The electrons are highly constrained in one dimension so the uncertainty in momentum translates to a high electron mobility in the other two.
You too.... need to do what Darat said ... and what I also told the other guy...
Last edited:
And very clearly and evidently you do not either...
Last edited:
Right, my view is that Copenhagen is a mess, but I have the humility to understand that while plenty of physicists share that view, plenty don't. If you want to say "The Copenhagen Interpretation is consistent with everything we know about QM", I won't really argue.
On the other hand, you seem to think that somehow Everett can be ruled out. The funny thing is that you think it can be ruled out by falsifiability arguments, when it assumes nothing other than the the Schrodinger equation is correct. Every other interpretation has to add (unfalsifiable) things to that, like the collapse of the wave function. Everett says "but wait, what would the world look like if the wave function didn't collapse", and sees "oh, it would look exactly like the world we see, so maybe we shouldn't put collapse in by hand".
If you're not happy with that viewpoint, fine, I'm not trying to argue that its the correct view, only that it's one of the alternatives on offer and you can't rule it out.
There are no local hidden variables. Even Bohemian Mechanics is consistent with Bell's Theorem. And Everett is as well.
Unfalsifiable woowoo claptrap can be made to be compatible with everything and anything... because it is nothing but a sleight of imagination.
Last edited:
Yes... because it is unfalsifiable woo woo claptrap... meaningless nonsense.... which you do not understand at all.
Last edited:
Any theory in which the Schrodinger equation didn't hold would be inconsistent with Everett, which is simply the statement that the Schrodinger equation describes the universe.
And, as you yourself pointed out earlier, that has been extremely well tested.
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
Of course. It is just assumed in the absence of other information.
What do you mean by "true"? If you mean that no other theory (now or in the future) could give the same answers that QM theory gives then the answer is "yes".
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
Yes... as I said.... unfalsifiable woo woo ... legerdemain of the imagination ... can be made to fit anything....
If one says that there are multiple versions of the universe and the casino has to pay out a losing bet because the other versions won... then ... well... this is nonsense.
Last edited:
It provides the mathematical and later experiments the empirical evidence of the underpinnings behind what you consider are "assumptions".