4 ms·

Physicists don't have any imagination to break past certain assumptions (e.g wave function collapse is random) I liked Stephen Wolframs ideas around cellular a

Physicists don't have any imagination to break past certain assumptions (e.g wave function collapse is random) I liked Stephen Wolframs ideas around cellular automata and network based structures -- it seems that if we could look at physics as more of an information transfer problem -- paired with network optimization and information storage optimization, on a network: this is where real progress will be made. There have been theories around emergent spacetime from thermodynamic processes that were abandoned and IMO need to be re-investigated. I highly doubt that wave function collapse is just completely random. We just don't see the structure that is creating the "random" distributions we observe.

obastani 8y ago
This is far from a new idea, and is called the "hidden-variable theory" [1]. In fact, it has been mathematically proven that locality and hidden variables are fundamentally incompatible in the context of quantum mechanics. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden-variable_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden-variable_theory
- aaaaaaaaaaab 8y ago
  Maybe it's nonlocal then.
- chr1 8y ago
  Wolframs idea [1] is that space is a network, and closeness of points is determined by the links in the network. A particle is an extra structure that is connected to some of the nodes in the network, so if two particles are connected to nodes far way in the network, but also have several links between each other, they won't have enough links to change the structure of the space, but will be connected enough to affect each other in the Bell test. I'd say this resolves the hidden variable and locality conflict beautifully, by changing the concept of locality to something much simpler than the infinite continuum. And it is also somewhat similar to ER=EPR [2] hypothesis Susskind talks about. But unfortunately it is only a vague idea so far. [1] https://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2015/12/what-is-spacetime-really/ https://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2015/12/what-is-spacetime-re... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY5D7ZgWuXc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY5D7ZgWuXc
kk58 8y ago
Can you explain more and share references?
mhh__ 8y ago
How does your model make quantitative predictions? All evidence suggests that quantum mechanics is probabilistic.
semi-extrinsic 8y ago
> I highly doubt that wave function collapse is just completely random. We just don't see the structure that is creating the "random" distributions we observe. What you're talking about is some form of hidden variables theory[1]. This has been the topic of significant research since the days when Einstein and Bohr had their great debates before WW2. We've had sufficient development in both theory and experiments on this topic to say that either i) there is "just" standard quantum mechanics ii) you must abandon local realism, i.e. it is impossible to do independent separated measurements of a quantum system iii) the world obeys superdeterminism, i.e. there is no free will [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden-variable_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden-variable_theory
- chr1 8y ago
  Have you seen the blog post at question https://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2015/12/what-is-spacetime-really/ https://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2015/12/what-is-spacetime-re...? It proposes the 4th way, that is the space is a graph, that only approximately maps to the 3d continuum, so non locality is introduced only as an artifact of mapping, and everything is local on the graph. > iii) the world obeys superdeterminism, i.e. there is no free will Superdeterminism doesn't simply say that there is no free will. (Normal determinism says that too!). The problem with superdeterminism is that it requires the hidden variables to work in a very complicated way. If Alice asks her friend to play mario and give her sequence of 1s and 0s for winning and losing, and Bobs friend plays golf, superdeterminism requires the outcomes of this games to be exactly correlated with the experiment with photons Alice and Bob will do next year!
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
ummonk 8y ago
The simplest and most popular interpretation - the Everett interpretation - is the most popular with physicists, and wave function collapse is a completely non-random process in that theory (and isn't even really a separate process, but rather just what happens when you apply thermodynamics to wavefunction evolution).
- opaque 8y ago
  > - the Everett interpretation - is the most popular with physicists Source? On the contrary, this survey of physicists https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.00676.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.00676.pdf (Fig 13.) indicates Copenhagen is dominant, followed by no preference, with Everett a long way behind. This is also matches my perception as a former member of the community.
Retra 8y ago
Well, since you have that imagination, I'm sure you'll produce a workable theory any day now...
chr1 8y ago
> Physicists don't have any imagination to break past certain assumptions (e.g wave function collapse is random) This is not quite fair, after all Wolfram himself have worked as a physicist. What physicists do not do, is they do not usually talk much about ideas for which they had not found any mathematical model or any analogy with existing theories. Wolframs idea is very enticing, especially if you like the idea of digital physics and want to get rid of real numbers in the theory. But unfortunately it is very hard to get some working mathematical model from it.

obastani 8y ago

This is far from a new idea, and is called the "hidden-variable theory" [1]. In fact, it has been mathematically proven that locality and hidden variables are fundamentally incompatible in the context of quantum mechanics. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden-variable_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden-variable_theory

aaaaaaaaaaab 8y ago
Maybe it's nonlocal then.
chr1 8y ago
Wolframs idea [1] is that space is a network, and closeness of points is determined by the links in the network. A particle is an extra structure that is connected to some of the nodes in the network, so if two particles are connected to nodes far way in the network, but also have several links between each other, they won't have enough links to change the structure of the space, but will be connected enough to affect each other in the Bell test. I'd say this resolves the hidden variable and locality conflict beautifully, by changing the concept of locality to something much simpler than the infinite continuum. And it is also somewhat similar to ER=EPR [2] hypothesis Susskind talks about. But unfortunately it is only a vague idea so far. [1] https://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2015/12/what-is-spacetime-really/ https://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2015/12/what-is-spacetime-re... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY5D7ZgWuXc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY5D7ZgWuXc

kk58 8y ago

Can you explain more and share references?

mhh__ 8y ago

How does your model make quantitative predictions? All evidence suggests that quantum mechanics is probabilistic.

semi-extrinsic 8y ago

> I highly doubt that wave function collapse is just completely random. We just don't see the structure that is creating the "random" distributions we observe. What you're talking about is some form of hidden variables theory[1]. This has been the topic of significant research since the days when Einstein and Bohr had their great debates before WW2. We've had sufficient development in both theory and experiments on this topic to say that either i) there is "just" standard quantum mechanics ii) you must abandon local realism, i.e. it is impossible to do independent separated measurements of a quantum system iii) the world obeys superdeterminism, i.e. there is no free will [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden-variable_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden-variable_theory

chr1 8y ago
Have you seen the blog post at question https://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2015/12/what-is-spacetime-really/ https://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2015/12/what-is-spacetime-re...? It proposes the 4th way, that is the space is a graph, that only approximately maps to the 3d continuum, so non locality is introduced only as an artifact of mapping, and everything is local on the graph. > iii) the world obeys superdeterminism, i.e. there is no free will Superdeterminism doesn't simply say that there is no free will. (Normal determinism says that too!). The problem with superdeterminism is that it requires the hidden variables to work in a very complicated way. If Alice asks her friend to play mario and give her sequence of 1s and 0s for winning and losing, and Bobs friend plays golf, superdeterminism requires the outcomes of this games to be exactly correlated with the experiment with photons Alice and Bob will do next year!
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

ummonk 8y ago

The simplest and most popular interpretation - the Everett interpretation - is the most popular with physicists, and wave function collapse is a completely non-random process in that theory (and isn't even really a separate process, but rather just what happens when you apply thermodynamics to wavefunction evolution).

opaque 8y ago
> - the Everett interpretation - is the most popular with physicists Source? On the contrary, this survey of physicists https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.00676.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.00676.pdf (Fig 13.) indicates Copenhagen is dominant, followed by no preference, with Everett a long way behind. This is also matches my perception as a former member of the community.

Retra 8y ago

Well, since you have that imagination, I'm sure you'll produce a workable theory any day now...

chr1 8y ago

> Physicists don't have any imagination to break past certain assumptions (e.g wave function collapse is random) This is not quite fair, after all Wolfram himself have worked as a physicist. What physicists do not do, is they do not usually talk much about ideas for which they had not found any mathematical model or any analogy with existing theories. Wolframs idea is very enticing, especially if you like the idea of digital physics and want to get rid of real numbers in the theory. But unfortunately it is very hard to get some working mathematical model from it.