3 ms·

unfortunately you have to pay to read the article. Too bad.

by ardit33 18y ago

henning 18y ago
Here's an excerpt: But Valentini thinks that the stalemate could be broken by analysing the cosmic microwave background — the relic radiation left behind after the Big Bang. The cosmic microwave background contains hot and cold temperature spots that were generated by quantum fluctuations in the early Universe and then amplified when the Universe expanded. Using the principles of quantum mechanics, cosmologists have calculated how these spots should be distributed. However, Valentini’s calculations show that the hidden-variables theory might give a different answer. “Any violation of quantum mechanics in the early Universe would have a knock-on effect that we could see today,” says Valentini. Almost all measurements of the cosmic microwave background seem to fit well with the predictions of quantum mechanics, says Valentini. But intriguingly, a distortion that fits one of Valentini’s proposed signatures for a failure of quantum mechanics was recently detected by Amit Yadav and Ben Wandelt at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (see 'Deflating inflation?'). That result has yet to be confirmed by independent analyses, but it is tantalizing, Valentini adds. “It’s far too early to say that this is definite evidence of a breakdown in quantum mechanics — but it is a possibility,” he says. I don't get it. If a theory has great predictive and explanatory power, it's not really "wrong". Better, more accurate models are a good thing, as is nipping bad ones in the bud before they have a chance to take root. But when you have a theory that is pedagogically viable and empirically verified, that's a much better point to progress from than rejecting anything which isn't completely bulletproof and without flaws. Didn't Einstein say "all models are wrong,some models are useful?"

unfortunately you have to pay to read the article. Too bad.

by ardit33 18y ago

unfortunately you have to pay to read the article. Too bad.

Here's an excerpt: But Valentini thinks that the stalemate could be broken by analysing the cosmic microwave background — the relic radiation left behind after the Big Bang. The cosmic microwave background contains hot and cold temperature spots that were generated by quantum fluctuations in the early Universe and then amplified when the Universe expanded. Using the principles of quantum mechanics, cosmologists have calculated how these spots should be distributed. However, Valentini’s calculations show that the hidden-variables theory might give a different answer. “Any violation of quantum mechanics in the early Universe would have a knock-on effect that we could see today,” says Valentini. Almost all measurements of the cosmic microwave background seem to fit well with the predictions of quantum mechanics, says Valentini. But intriguingly, a distortion that fits one of Valentini’s proposed signatures for a failure of quantum mechanics was recently detected by Amit Yadav and Ben Wandelt at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (see 'Deflating inflation?'). That result has yet to be confirmed by independent analyses, but it is tantalizing, Valentini adds. “It’s far too early to say that this is definite evidence of a breakdown in quantum mechanics — but it is a possibility,” he says. I don't get it. If a theory has great predictive and explanatory power, it's not really "wrong". Better, more accurate models are a good thing, as is nipping bad ones in the bud before they have a chance to take root. But when you have a theory that is pedagogically viable and empirically verified, that's a much better point to progress from than rejecting anything which isn't completely bulletproof and without flaws. Didn't Einstein say "all models are wrong,some models are useful?"