Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

tama

(9,137 posts)
12. Nice
Mon Mar 19, 2012, 06:22 PM
Mar 2012

a post with content.

I don't have a degree from physics and my interest in these matters originates to a close relative who was a friend and coworker of Bohm. So I know quite well that Bohm didn't intend his theory for the final answer but rather as an ice-breaker between Einstein and Bohr collapse of dialogue, and to participate in scientific progress. And so I know also that Bohm was not entirely satisfied with his quantum theory, but not for reasons you claim, but because he was unable to find the chalice of math to put it all nicely together.

And I must say that I'm astonished at your BS (in both senses) about EPR, as the thought experiment was related to Einstein's dislike of "spooky action at distance" which later "experiments appear to show that the local realism idea is false,[3] thereby supporting the position of Bohr et al., against the challenge from Einstein and his group." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox).

NOT Bohm's non-locality but that of Bohr et alii, and NOT putative. Your lack of basics in your academic field seems to be well matched with your blown up ego.

To really start to understand quantum theory and it's implications I feel that it ismportant to start from "top-down" notions like wave function the size of universe, that are standard notions in contemporary cosmology, regardless of reductionistic or holistic preferences.

In (at least inflationary) cosmologies actualized physical complexity comes from cooling down of the hot-hot-hot singularity/quantum superposition of possible universes.

As for Uncertainty Principle, the question of understanding it as part of a bigger whole logically and mathematically leads naturally to fundamental principle of self-referentiality of which Gödel's incompleteness theorem is a groundbraking example.

If you were more interested in learning and understanding science instead of making it into just another authoritarian religion, I could go on about my pet Theory Of Everything that has scalable hbar, new quantum math of Hilbert spaces inside each point of Hilbert space that allow mathematical modelling self-referentiality with new understanding of also transcendentals (e.g. pi) and much much else and not excluding theory of consciousness... well maybe some day...









Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

However, it would be a big mistake... longship Mar 2012 #1
Straight to the point tama Mar 2012 #3
Is coherence selected or a structural by-product? Jim__ Mar 2012 #4
Wider context tama Mar 2012 #8
I'm not sure why you would begin by looking at a wider context. Jim__ Mar 2012 #15
To begin with tama Mar 2012 #16
A couple of thoughts. Jim__ Mar 2012 #33
A clarification tama Mar 2012 #36
Lack of any supporting data longship Mar 2012 #5
The word "decoherence" tama Mar 2012 #6
This is complete and utter rubbish longship Mar 2012 #9
But, but... someone was wrong about something before... Silent3 Mar 2012 #11
I disagree tama Mar 2012 #13
Your endless devotion to vagueness is certainly amusing, however. Silent3 Mar 2012 #17
Why don't you even try? tama Mar 2012 #19
You seem to be getting different posters confused Silent3 Mar 2012 #20
Flattering ad hominem, thanks for that tama Mar 2012 #28
I have no problem with people trying to understand "quantum" Silent3 Mar 2012 #29
You are making up tama Mar 2012 #31
New Age? longship Mar 2012 #32
Pseudoskepticism tama Mar 2012 #45
Thank you. Thank you. And THANK YOU!!! nt Joseph8th Mar 2012 #40
Nice tama Mar 2012 #12
Sorry! Your post makes no physical sense longship Mar 2012 #18
First tama Mar 2012 #24
Tama, I'm with you longship Mar 2012 #30
Well that's clearly wrong bananas Mar 2012 #34
Wonderful take down longship Mar 2012 #35
Quantum cryptography, quantum teleportation, superconductors are some other examples bananas Mar 2012 #48
Please! It's bad enough to tarnish QM... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #41
Gödel tama Mar 2012 #43
Looking for a ToE ... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #46
Abstract tama Mar 2012 #47
Not sure why I'm bothering, but... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #49
Some good points tama Mar 2012 #50
Heheh... Cantor's Paradise... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #53
LOL - "mathematical theorems ... bear no relation to physics" bananas Mar 2012 #51
Math is not physics... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #52
Physics is NOT illogical or irrational... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #54
I didn't know there were Militant Holists, now... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #38
LOL tama Mar 2012 #39
OMG... Joseph8th Mar 2012 #42
Condencending tone tama Mar 2012 #44
Anybody tama Mar 2012 #7
Hmm. DeWitt. Interesting longship Mar 2012 #10
First tama Mar 2012 #14
Okay, I'm with you on all except the "observer" longship Mar 2012 #21
Well, I think there's more to the "observer" unless you're effectively redefining the term caraher Mar 2012 #22
Touché, Zurek is above my pay grade longship Mar 2012 #23
I do think we're broadly in agreement caraher Mar 2012 #26
Thanks tama Mar 2012 #27
See post 24 for answer to also this n/t tama Mar 2012 #25
Delayed choice experiment tama Mar 2012 #37
So Stuart Kaufmann is still working.. arendt Mar 2012 #2
Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Science»Quantum Biology and the P...»Reply #12