Things to Reject in 21st Century Physics
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Deepwater Horizon BP Oil Spill - A Geophysical Theory That Needs Consideration
Next: EINSTEINIANA: THE FUNDAMENTAL NIGHTMARE
From: Robert L. Oldershaw on 4 Jul 2010 00:27 (1) Acausality - everything in nature obeys causality, except bad mathematical physics. (2) Reversibility - an unacceptable Platonic over-idealization. (3) Strict reductionism - nature is multi-scaled and fundamentality occurs throughout the hierarchy, which has no upper or lower bounds. (4) Absolute scale - within any given cosmological Scale there is quasi-"absolute" scale, but the entire cosmological hierarchy of Scales only has relative scale. (5) Non-deterministic modeling - real physical systems are fully deterministic; it is our obsession with our mundane observational limitations that confuses the issue, as well as the false assumption that predictability limits mean indeterminism. A manifesto for the 21st century. RLO www.mherst.edu/~rloldershaw
From: Surfer on 4 Jul 2010 03:25 On Sat, 3 Jul 2010 21:27:26 -0700 (PDT), "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rloldershaw(a)amherst.edu> wrote: > >(1) Acausality - everything in nature obeys causality, except bad >mathematical physics. > >(2) Reversibility - an unacceptable Platonic over-idealization. > >(3) Strict reductionism - nature is multi-scaled and fundamentality >occurs throughout the hierarchy, which has no upper or lower bounds. > >(4) Absolute scale - within any given cosmological Scale there is >quasi-"absolute" scale, but the entire cosmological hierarchy of >Scales only has relative scale. > >(5) Non-deterministic modeling - real physical systems are fully >deterministic; it is our obsession with our mundane observational >limitations that confuses the issue, as well as the false assumption >that predictability limits mean indeterminism. > In quantum theory, how well does the Continuous Spontaneous Localization model comply with the above and will it become a viable theory? http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0611211 http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0611212 My impressions are that it is: 1) Causal, though incorporates "random" value generation. 2) Non-reversable, owing to effect of "random" values. 3) Not strictly reductionist. 4) Doesn't make assumptions about absolute or relative scales. 5) Would be deterministic if the "random" value generation was pseudo-random instead of random.
From: Jacko on 4 Jul 2010 08:55 On 4 July, 05:27, "Robert L. Oldershaw" <rlolders...(a)amherst.edu> wrote: > (1) Acausality - everything in nature obeys causality, except bad > mathematical physics. I would say time causes cause/effect. > (2) Reversibility - an unacceptable Platonic over-idealization. This is due to video recording. Play one back? Don't see the electrons attracting each other, and repelling the protons, which in turn are imploding by attraction with themselves? All time like dimensions are two way, but the arrow is caused by an unzipping of matter in a negative time flow direction!! > (3) Strict reductionism - nature is multi-scaled and fundamentality > occurs throughout the hierarchy, which has no upper or lower bounds. This is probably true, with lower bounds mashed up by uncertainty, and higher bounds invisible by distance. > (4) Absolute scale - within any given cosmological Scale there is > quasi-"absolute" scale, but the entire cosmological hierarchy of > Scales only has relative scale. If the whole universe is an atom, it would be an atom not within this universe. > (5) Non-deterministic modeling - real physical systems are fully > deterministic; it is our obsession with our mundane observational > limitations that confuses the issue, as well as the false assumption > that predictability limits mean indeterminism. We have this facination with light existing. If photons are just a concept for decribing the transfer of uncertainty, then determinism and computability are seperated. A quantum system is not a super- position of states, it is in one state, and at the no time passes for light leaving to arriving, the edges of the particle waves touch, and uncertainty is transfered. When enough uncertainty moves, a bit of information can allow an observation to have a particular(t) outcome. > A manifesto for the 21st century. > > RLOwww.mherst.edu/~rloldershaw Cheers Jacko
From: Jacko on 4 Jul 2010 09:00 > > (4) Absolute scale - within any given cosmological Scale there is > > quasi-"absolute" scale, but the entire cosmological hierarchy of > > Scales only has relative scale. > > If the whole universe is an atom, it would be an atom not within this > universe. Well that depends on if universe is the totalverse, or just one of a multiverse. Uni? implies just the one, and if universe is a long word for god, well then yes it is in this universe, but not on the usual radius scale. Cheers Jacko
From: Sam Wormley on 4 Jul 2010 09:01
On 7/3/10 11:27 PM, Robert L. Oldershaw wrote: > > Non-deterministic modeling - real physical systems are fully > deterministic; it is our obsession with our mundane observational > limitations that confuses the issue, as well as the false assumption > that predictability limits mean indeterminism. > You should take an into course in quantum mechanics, Oldershaw. Physics FAQ: A Physics Booklist: Recommendations from the Net Quantum Mechanics http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Administrivia/booklist.html#quantum-mechanics |