By "domain" I mean something more like a world-view. The mechanical philosophers of the 17th century gave modern physics the world-view that matter is to be analysed as something that is inactive, inanimate or dead. They also insisted that physics must explain how things come about using only material and mechanical notions of causation. Other types of causation such as formal and teleological causation were characterised as "occult".
Harry On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:30 PM ROGER ANDERTON <r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> wrote: > >>it might be preferable to accept them as each true within their > respective domains<< > > When "they" talk of those "domains" - there is a lot of handwaving; > general relativity is often said to breakdown at the singularity, and > quantum mechanics supposedly fails to be able to deal with gravity; but no > maths for that is presented as to precisely when equations from such > theories fail. > > On Monday, 8 June 2020, 20:03:09 BST, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 4:30 PM ROGER ANDERTON <r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> > wrote: > > >>Thoughts?<< > > there are problems combining relativity (especially general relativity) > with quantum physics, so when people try to talk from things combining them > then they are not on solid ground. > > > I only mentioned SR because it is often wrongly invoked to dismiss any > experiment needing simultaneity. > On the issue reconciling the two domains of quantum mechanics and SR/GR, > instead of trying to change one or the other or both, it might be > preferable to accept them as each true within their respective domains and > build a bridge between the domains by integrating them technologically > instead trying to merge them into a single mathematical theory. > > Harry > > > > > From my point-of-view relativity has been mistranslated and misunderstood > so false claims are made about it. My latest video-I think it was mainly > written by his wife. > > > > > > On Wednesday, 3 June 2020, 17:25:51 BST, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Quantum Non-locality explained by Sabine Hossenfelder > https://youtu.be/XL9wWeEmQvo > > I disagree with the conclusion that non-locality cannot be used to send an > FLT message. What is overlooked is that an indeterminate state, i.e. > unmeasured state is also a type of information. > > If the transmitter and the receiver have synchronised clocks (which is > possible in SR) then the transmitter can send a message by a sequence of > binary choices: either measure or not measure the particle's spin in the > diagonal direction at a given time. What the receiver detects will be > meaningfully informed by the sequence of the transmitter's choices. > > Thoughts? > > Harry > >
