2013/12/26 LizR <lizj...@gmail.com> > On 26 December 2013 20:17, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > >> There are other viewpoints though. QM makes for some interesting >> questions about time as raised in this speculative paper by a couple of top >> experimentalists: >> >> ==================== >> http://a-c-elitzur.co.il/uploads/articlesdocs/Elitzur-Dolev13.pdf >> >> A few discontents in present-day physics' account of time are pointed out, >> and a few novel quantum-mechanical results are described. Based on these, >> an >> outline for a new interpretation of QM is proposed, based on the >> assumption >> that spacetime itself is subject to incessant evolution. >> >> ... >> One of us (AE) owes this insight to a student's question about >> SchrÄodinger's cat. >> She argued that, if the box is opened after su±ciently many hours, it >> should be >> possible to know whether the cat has been dead or alive during the >> preceding >> hours. If it has been alive, it would soil the box and leave scratches on >> its walls, >> whereas if it has been dead, it would show signs of decomposition. Here >> too, the >> measurement at the moment of opening the box must select not only the >> cat's >> state at the moment of opening the box but its entire history within the >> box. >> >> ===================== >> > > Interesting, at a brief skim they appear to be suggesting that phenomena > like quantum erasure involve rewriting the past, or words to that > effect.....or have I got that wrong? > > QM has prompted all sorts of uinintuitive ideas, of course, but I do feel > that if one is going to indulge in wild speculation, one should start from > a position of understanding what the orthodox view is, as I believe Bruno > and Max Tegmark do. I think these people you're citing are also doing that, > but from what I have seen so far of Mr Owen's speculations, he hasn't > grasped some of the simpler aspects of SR, and hence his ideas don't appear > to me to stack up (or maybe I haven't grasped some of the implications of > SR, if so I'd be glad to have my mistakes pointed out). >
The problem with Mr. Owen (or Roger or Kermit sometimes) is that he asserts things often contrary to known science, use language like " though no one seems to have recognized this prior to my exposition in 1997"... but his exposition from 1997 is unknown to most on earth but somehow has been recognized to give insightful advancement in science. He uses expressions like "XXX *fundamental mistake*" while not seeing his owns... That types of vocabulary is the vocabulary of crackpots, not someone open to discussing ideas... These types of persons once coming to the list tends to overwhelm it with massive posting of their "revolutionary ideas"... I'll pass. Quentin > > This parallels my views on art and music, poetry and writing, as it > happens -- that one needs to know the rules before one can break them to > good effect -- which may of course be another mistake on my part... > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
