3 ms·

This is a climate scientist saying (without justification) that a century of physicists missed the obvious trivial explanation. A little humility is in order.

by lupire 4y ago

This is a climate scientist saying (without justification) that a century of physicists missed the obvious trivial explanation. A little humility is in order. The whole crux of QM, as shown by actual experiments in lab, is that it really is different from just really complicated classical mechanics.

naasking 4y ago
> This is a climate scientist saying (without justification) that a century of physicists missed the obvious trivial explanation. A little humility is in order. He's a mathematical physicist [1] that happens to work on non-linear dynamical systems that apply to climate models. You know, like the non-linear dynamics seen in a quantum measurement. Maybe don't be so dismissive. He won the Dirac gold medal for theoretical physics in 2014, for instance. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Palmer_(physicist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Palmer_(physicist)
sampo 4y ago
> This is a climate scientist saying (without justification) that a century of physicists missed the obvious trivial explanation. As far as I understand, and even though the article doesn't call it by name, he is making a case for superdeterminism. Which hasn't been missed, but has it's own Wikipedia article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism In fact, Bell (of Bell's theorem fame) himself discussed (super)determinism as a way to escape Bell's theorem.
nl 4y ago
> This is a climate scientist saying (without justification) that a century of physicists missed the obvious trivial explanation. Actually he's published extensively in quantum physics: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=TN+Palmer+quantum&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=TN+P... > A little humility is in order. Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose both cited him on quantum theory: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/JHEP05(2017)161 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/JHEP05(2017)161 https://i-share-ctu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/openurl?institution=01CARLI_CTU&vid=01CARLI_CTU:CARLI_CTU&volume=369&date=2011&aulast=Penrose&issue=1956&issn=1364-503X&spage=4864&id=doi:10.1098%2Frsta.2011.0179&auinit=R&title=Philosophical%20transactions.%20Mathematical,%20physical,%20and%20engineering%20sciences.&atitle=Uncertainty%20in%20quantum%20mechanics:%20faith%20or%20fantasy%3F&sid=google https://i-share-ctu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/openur...

by lupire 4y ago

naasking 4y ago

> This is a climate scientist saying (without justification) that a century of physicists missed the obvious trivial explanation. A little humility is in order. He's a mathematical physicist [1] that happens to work on non-linear dynamical systems that apply to climate models. You know, like the non-linear dynamics seen in a quantum measurement. Maybe don't be so dismissive. He won the Dirac gold medal for theoretical physics in 2014, for instance. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Palmer_(physicist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Palmer_(physicist)

sampo 4y ago

> This is a climate scientist saying (without justification) that a century of physicists missed the obvious trivial explanation. As far as I understand, and even though the article doesn't call it by name, he is making a case for superdeterminism. Which hasn't been missed, but has it's own Wikipedia article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism In fact, Bell (of Bell's theorem fame) himself discussed (super)determinism as a way to escape Bell's theorem.

nl 4y ago

> This is a climate scientist saying (without justification) that a century of physicists missed the obvious trivial explanation. Actually he's published extensively in quantum physics: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=TN+Palmer+quantum&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=TN+P... > A little humility is in order. Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose both cited him on quantum theory: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/JHEP05(2017)161 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/JHEP05(2017)161 https://i-share-ctu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/openurl?institution=01CARLI_CTU&vid=01CARLI_CTU:CARLI_CTU&volume=369&date=2011&aulast=Penrose&issue=1956&issn=1364-503X&spage=4864&id=doi:10.1098%2Frsta.2011.0179&auinit=R&title=Philosophical%20transactions.%20Mathematical,%20physical,%20and%20engineering%20sciences.&atitle=Uncertainty%20in%20quantum%20mechanics:%20faith%20or%20fantasy%3F&sid=google https://i-share-ctu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/openur...