Is Quantum Mechanics a Science, Philosophy or Religion, or some new age mix of all 3?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-09-2012, 01:55 PM
is the OP a douchebag?
How da fuq is quantum decoherence many worlds? Huh

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2012, 02:04 PM
RE: is the OP a douchebag?
(29-09-2012 01:55 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  How da fuq is quantum decoherence many worlds? Huh

http://users.ox.ac.uk/~everett/abstracts.htm

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist and Levitating yogi, CAAT-LY.
Yeah, for verily I say unto thee, and this we know : Jebus no likey that which doth tickle thee unto thy nether regions.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
29-09-2012, 02:28 PM
Is Quantum Mechanics a Science, Philosophy or Religion, or some new age mix of all 3?
(29-09-2012 01:51 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  
(29-09-2012 01:42 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  And no SUSY, no stringy. Tongue

(Sorry, I hate that crap. Big Grin)

Is there a G string theory?
If not, there should be. Consider

At least have a conference, to study some, it. Suggest Vegas.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist and Levitating yogi, CAAT-LY.
Yeah, for verily I say unto thee, and this we know : Jebus no likey that which doth tickle thee unto thy nether regions.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2012, 02:45 PM
RE: is the OP a douchebag?
(29-09-2012 02:04 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(29-09-2012 01:55 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  How da fuq is quantum decoherence many worlds? Huh

http://users.ox.ac.uk/~everett/abstracts.htm

Quote:not worlds in the sense of complete, isolated universes, but in the sense of approximately isolated, approximately classical chunks of a larger reality.

K then. Dodgy

(Well, it's twelve pages and I hafta use my brain - which is all fulla Gwynnies right now - but I'm thinking there's a conceptual switcheroo going on.)

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-09-2012, 11:38 PM
RE:
(29-09-2012 01:51 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(29-09-2012 01:30 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  Quantum Mechanics itself is a scientific theory.

String Theory is a scientific theory.

M Theory is a scientific theory.

The Copenhagen Interpretation (the hypothesis that conscious observation is what collapses the wavefunction) could be argued to be New Age crap, but does have some supporters

The Many Worlds Hypothesis (the hypothesis that the universe splits each time a quantum wavefunction collapses) is not a rigorous scientific theory and is supported by no one but Freshman physics majors and science fiction writers.

QM is supported by mountains of observed data.
String Theory was in favor, went out, and come back into favor, and no way at present to verify, with present energy available.
M theory is a part of String Theory
Many Worlds, (Quantum Decoherence) has enough interest to have a conference about it at Cambridge, in 2007.

Are protons and electrons particles?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2012, 12:00 AM
RE:
(29-09-2012 11:38 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(29-09-2012 01:51 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  QM is supported by mountains of observed data.
String Theory was in favor, went out, and come back into favor, and no way at present to verify, with present energy available.
M theory is a part of String Theory
Many Worlds, (Quantum Decoherence) has enough interest to have a conference about it at Cambridge, in 2007.

Are protons and electrons particles?

No. None. Absolutely none at all. Weeping

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist and Levitating yogi, CAAT-LY.
Yeah, for verily I say unto thee, and this we know : Jebus no likey that which doth tickle thee unto thy nether regions.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2012, 12:02 AM
RE:
(29-09-2012 11:38 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(29-09-2012 01:51 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  QM is supported by mountains of observed data.
String Theory was in favor, went out, and come back into favor, and no way at present to verify, with present energy available.
M theory is a part of String Theory
Many Worlds, (Quantum Decoherence) has enough interest to have a conference about it at Cambridge, in 2007.

Are protons and electrons particles?

Sure.

fucking Bucky... Big Grin

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2012, 05:01 AM
RE: Is Quantum Mechanics a Science, Philosophy or Religion, or some new age mix of al
A simpler scientific method for dummies:
* Develop a idea
* Determine what its predictions are, especially those that contradict competing ideas
* Determine which ideas are false by testing their predictions and finding out they are false
* Modify or discard bad ideas
Quantum mechanics - especially the standard model - have passed through this cycle many times, and what we have as the result of this process is a model with excellent predictive power. It may still be wrong in many fundamental ways, but it can only be replaced by a model that has greater predictive power. Until then it will stand as it is, with modifications as needed, as predictions are tested and ideas refined.
String, M, etc, have not passed through the whole of the cycle yet - so although they may be scientific ideas their predictive power is unknown. They explain known facts, but as yet to my knowledge have not produced predictions that have been able to be verified or refuted. Explaining known facts is not enough to describe an idea as being scientific knowledge. Scientific knowledge has passed through many cycles of prediction and verification and has been proven as something that has useful predictive power.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2012, 07:40 AM
RE: Is Quantum Mechanics a Science, Philosophy or Religion, or some new age mix of al
(30-09-2012 05:01 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  A simpler scientific method for dummies:
* Develop a idea
* Determine what its predictions are, especially those that contradict competing ideas
* Determine which ideas are false by testing their predictions and finding out they are false
* Modify or discard bad ideas
Quantum mechanics - especially the standard model - have passed through this cycle many times, and what we have as the result of this process is a model with excellent predictive power. It may still be wrong in many fundamental ways, but it can only be replaced by a model that has greater predictive power. Until then it will stand as it is, with modifications as needed, as predictions are tested and ideas refined.
String, M, etc, have not passed through the whole of the cycle yet - so although they may be scientific ideas their predictive power is unknown. They explain known facts, but as yet to my knowledge have not produced predictions that have been able to be verified or refuted. Explaining known facts is not enough to describe an idea as being scientific knowledge. Scientific knowledge has passed through many cycles of prediction and verification and has been proven as something that has useful predictive power.

If the Idea for something exists before the testing to verify it, then basically you are attempting to look for data that promotes the idea, I am not saying this doesn't make it science I am saying that this is very different than past scientific methods. Most science in the past was observe first then study what was observed.

Quantum mechanics is idea-equation which is not proof of anything.

I would love to hear a conversation between a stockbroker of the 90's and a quantum physicist: "you mean you jack off to equations too and can rig the numbers to say whatever you want them to say"

We live in a very religious world and gullible world where one can NEVER see an alternate universe but by an equation can say "hey look it's an alternate universe" are people really that stupid?

Oh yeah and how exactly is an equation proof of the existence of something anymore than the bible is proof of the existence of a god? sounds like the same bullshit.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-09-2012, 07:57 AM
RE: Is Quantum Mechanics a Science, Philosophy or Religion, or some new age mix of al
(30-09-2012 07:40 AM)I and I Wrote:  
(30-09-2012 05:01 AM)Hafnof Wrote:  A simpler scientific method for dummies:
* Develop a idea
* Determine what its predictions are, especially those that contradict competing ideas
* Determine which ideas are false by testing their predictions and finding out they are false
* Modify or discard bad ideas
Quantum mechanics - especially the standard model - have passed through this cycle many times, and what we have as the result of this process is a model with excellent predictive power. It may still be wrong in many fundamental ways, but it can only be replaced by a model that has greater predictive power. Until then it will stand as it is, with modifications as needed, as predictions are tested and ideas refined.
String, M, etc, have not passed through the whole of the cycle yet - so although they may be scientific ideas their predictive power is unknown. They explain known facts, but as yet to my knowledge have not produced predictions that have been able to be verified or refuted. Explaining known facts is not enough to describe an idea as being scientific knowledge. Scientific knowledge has passed through many cycles of prediction and verification and has been proven as something that has useful predictive power.

If the Idea for something exists before the testing to verify it, then basically you are attempting to look for data that promotes the idea, I am not saying this doesn't make it science I am saying that this is very different than past scientific methods. Most science in the past was observe first then study what was observed.

Quantum mechanics is idea-equation which is not proof of anything.

I would love to hear a conversation between a stockbroker of the 90's and a quantum physicist: "you mean you jack off to equations too and can rig the numbers to say whatever you want them to say"

We live in a very religious world and gullible world where one can NEVER see an alternate universe but by an equation can say "hey look it's an alternate universe" are people really that stupid?

Oh yeah and how exactly is an equation proof of the existence of something anymore than the bible is proof of the existence of a god? sounds like the same bullshit.

QM is a model of how reality works. It is based on observed behavior and makes the most accurate predictions of any science.

The Bible doesn't.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: