3 ms·
Wow, fantastic read. From the concluding section: So Mermin was on the right track, but he didn’t get it quite right: not only is the moon is not really
by Nwallins 17y ago
Wow, fantastic read.
From the concluding section:
So Mermin was on the right track, but he didn’t get it quite right: not only is the
moon is not really there when nobody looks, but it isn't really there even when
you do look! "Physical reality" is not "real", but information-theoretical reality is.
We are not physical entities, but informational ones. We are made of, to quote
Mermin, "correlations without correlata." We are not made of atoms, we are made
of (quantum) bits. At the risk of stretching a metaphor beyond its breaking point,
what we usually call reality is really a very high quality simulation running on a
quantum computer.
This is a very counterintuitive view of the world, but the mathematics of Quantum
Mechanics tell us unambiguously that it is correct, just as the mathematics of
relativity tell us that there is no absolute time and space. Entanglement, far from
being an obscure curiosity of QM, is in fact at its very heart. Entanglement is the
reason that measurement is possible, and thus the reason that the Universe is
comprehensible.
- itistoday 17y agoI'd be wary of it, I haven't read the whole thing but it seems suspicious, least of which is that he comes off as if he fully understands QM. I only know so much about QM, but I do know that no one fully understands it, and that in attempting to sound deep, the author of this paper misattributed a classic Zen koan to Douglas Hofstadter.
- Nwallins 17y agoI certainly can't attest to its correctness, but I found it insightful and thought-provoking. As to the misattribution, the paper reads: The best I can offer as an answer to that question is a Zen koan from Douglas Hofstadter: It seems to me he is describing Hofstadter as the conduit and not the origin.
- lisper 17y agoI got it from GEB. Hofstadter doesn't attribute it, so I just assumed it was original with him. (And frankly I'd be surprised if you found any references to Zen Master Zeno prior to GEB.)
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- gjm11 17y agoIt is not original to Hofstadter; it comes from the Mumonkan: http://www.ibiblio.org/zen/gateless-gate/29.html http://www.ibiblio.org/zen/gateless-gate/29.html . Of course the original doesn't call the sixth patriarch "Zeno"; it leaves him unnamed. (The sixth patriarch actually appears to have been called Huineng: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gateless_Gate#Case_29:_Huineng.27s_flag http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gateless_Gate#Case_29:_Huin... .)
- Eliezer 17y agohttp://lesswrong.com/lw/r6/an_intuitive_explanation_of_quantum_mechanics/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/r6/an_intuitive_explanation_of_quant... "There's a widespread belief that quantum mechanics is supposed to be confusing. This is not a good frame of mind for either a teacher or a student. Complicated math can be difficult but it is never, ever allowed to be confusing."
- lisper 17y agoThat paper has been reviewed at one time or another by at least a dozen card-carrying physicists, including Jeff Kimble and John Preskill at Caltech (who are the ones who actually helped me figure all this stuff out). Reactions range from, "Oh my God, what a revelation!" to "Duh. Everybody already knows that." But I have yet to encounter anyone who knows what they're doing who thinks it's wrong.
- rimantas 17y agoIn the first QM lecture we were told that one cannot understand quantum mechanics, but can get used to it.
- lisper 17y agoThanks! :-)
- pbhjpbhj 17y agoThere is no quantum world. There is only an abstract physical description. It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how nature is. Physics concerns what we can say about nature. Niels Bohr Reality is not "running on a quantum computer" it is just that QM is the best description we have of what we can observe of the external world.
- thangalin 17y agoSimilar, but with pictures: http://www.davidjarvis.ca/entanglement http://www.davidjarvis.ca/entanglement