If other, please elaborate:)
Consistent Histories feels like the best choice to me.
I preffer my smallest balls interpretation/teory.
Eleborate? What can I say. My interpretation explaining from A to Z another interpretations are constants or mysteries or don't explaining the base of everything.
Eleborate? What can I say. My interpretation explaining from A to Z another interpretations are constants or mysteries or don't explaining the base of everything.
come again?
smallest balls interpretation?
smallest balls interpretation?
Multiple Worlds has a definite appeal, but 'smallest balls' really sounds more like Apollonian Circle packing.
DavidD is a screensaver gone wild!
Would that be SA in his case, instead of IA? 
DavidD is a screensaver gone wild!
Would that be SA in his case, instead of IA?
what about MWI has an appeal?
Boheman interpretation:
All quantum experiments is accident. All experiments with one photon in martch zender experiment is accident. All particles positions are determined, deterministic. Probability of such accidednt equal to number of particles in universe times time in seconds or nanoseconds or atoseconds... So I predicting that accorind to boheman interpretation probability of all experiment matching like we no see is very small not sure maybe 1/10^100000 but it can be even smaller to much, on the over hand it much only then human measuring so probability can be maybe 1/10^100 or somthing.
All quantum experiments is accident. All experiments with one photon in martch zender experiment is accident. All particles positions are determined, deterministic. Probability of such accidednt equal to number of particles in universe times time in seconds or nanoseconds or atoseconds... So I predicting that accorind to boheman interpretation probability of all experiment matching like we no see is very small not sure maybe 1/10^100000 but it can be even smaller to much, on the over hand it much only then human measuring so probability can be maybe 1/10^100 or somthing.
what are you talkin about?
QUOTE (laydman+May 17 2008, 07:44 PM)
what are you talkin about?
I dunno - just some idiotfuck.
- bit like you!
I dunno - just some idiotfuck.
- bit like you!
QUOTE (laydman+May 17 2008, 07:44 PM)
what are you talkin about?
I am talking about interpretation of quantum mechanic. Martch zender interferomter is accident accordint to this theory. Double slit experiment with electrons is false or accident of measurment... Uncertainty principle is accident. Quantum mechanic is deterministic according to this interpretation/theory. Suppose that you measuring somthing. In infinity time, the probability of repeating the same event many times is correct... Quantum mechanic don't have property of superposition, but is purely probabilistic according to this theory. Superposition phenomenas is accident. In infinity time accident still will be accident if coin will comes 10^100 times with same side... Entanglement also don't exist, it is accident that you observing it like this!
Of course I don't believe in this interpretation more than agent. But that a heck if multiuniverse theory is logical, why not?
I am talking about interpretation of quantum mechanic. Martch zender interferomter is accident accordint to this theory. Double slit experiment with electrons is false or accident of measurment... Uncertainty principle is accident. Quantum mechanic is deterministic according to this interpretation/theory. Suppose that you measuring somthing. In infinity time, the probability of repeating the same event many times is correct... Quantum mechanic don't have property of superposition, but is purely probabilistic according to this theory. Superposition phenomenas is accident. In infinity time accident still will be accident if coin will comes 10^100 times with same side... Entanglement also don't exist, it is accident that you observing it like this!
Of course I don't believe in this interpretation more than agent. But that a heck if multiuniverse theory is logical, why not?
QUOTE
Quantum mechanic is deterministic
indeed
God does not play dice
LOL
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 18 2008, 07:13 AM)
indeed
God does not play dice
LOL
Still probability of accident is very small, but IS, maybe 1/10^100000000000
God play dice, and he is very lucky
QUOTE
God play dice, and he is very lucky
LOL
yes, VERY Lucky..
No really, I think if all the parameters were known,,, it is all deterministic.
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 18 2008, 10:16 AM)
No really, I think if all the parameters were known,,, it is all deterministic.
I am think such also, but I am telling possible answer. I am only not sure about double slit experiment, but probability of such reality remain, if you understand about what I am talking.
Yes, Thank you DD
Maybe probability will always remain.... maybe in reality, we will never know everything.. LOL
Maybe probability will always remain.... maybe in reality, we will never know everything.. LOL
QUOTE (Zarkov+May 18 2008, 09:59 PM)
Yes, Thank you DD
Maybe probability will always remain.... maybe in reality, we will never know everything.. LOL
I think you don't understand nothing
Maybe probability will always remain.... maybe in reality, we will never know everything.. LOL
I think you don't understand nothing
Fundamental particles aren't fundamental.
Just look at all the ridiculous properties that "fundamental particles" have.
Spin(not to be confused with rotation)
charge
mass
velocity
rotation
position(often overlooked)
Moreover, most of these properties are not even fundamental in and of themselves.
For example, "Charge" is known to exist in particles and molecules ranging anywhere from +7 to -7, and for particles there are also fractional charges obeying the various harmonic sequences.
Something "fundamental" would be like a single bit on a computer language. All other "information" would be composed of combinations of one or more fundamental structure(s) each having exactly one property.
Additionally, "empty space" would need to be quantized and shown to be a combination of fundamental entities. I do not say particles, because the fundamental structure may not be a particle at all. Particles may simply be "surface features" of the fundamental structure
I mean, I'm not smart enough to figure it all out, but even an idiot can see that "fundamental particles" are not at all fundamental.
Just look at all the ridiculous properties that "fundamental particles" have.
Spin(not to be confused with rotation)
charge
mass
velocity
rotation
position(often overlooked)
Moreover, most of these properties are not even fundamental in and of themselves.
For example, "Charge" is known to exist in particles and molecules ranging anywhere from +7 to -7, and for particles there are also fractional charges obeying the various harmonic sequences.
Something "fundamental" would be like a single bit on a computer language. All other "information" would be composed of combinations of one or more fundamental structure(s) each having exactly one property.
Additionally, "empty space" would need to be quantized and shown to be a combination of fundamental entities. I do not say particles, because the fundamental structure may not be a particle at all. Particles may simply be "surface features" of the fundamental structure
I mean, I'm not smart enough to figure it all out, but even an idiot can see that "fundamental particles" are not at all fundamental.
Ye, ye... And this bit is sphere in my theory... Of course seems, how sphere can be bit? But what more fundamental than sphere can be in 3 dimensions?
QUOTE (DavidD+May 19 2008, 10:50 AM)
I think you don't understand nothing
Out of ALL the people here on Physorg. YOU happened to say that statment?
Dear o' dear me.
Sandra
Out of ALL the people here on Physorg. YOU happened to say that statment?
Dear o' dear me.
Sandra
QUOTE (Sandra doliak+May 26 2008, 07:12 AM)
Out of ALL the people here on Physorg. YOU happened to say that statment?
Dear o' dear me.
Sandra
You don't understand nothing too
Dear o' dear me.
Sandra
You don't understand nothing too
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.