2 ms·
Yet you can generally catch a thrown ball. The point of the analogy was that the halting problem - like the uncertainty principle - is a result that says that
by jameshart 3y ago
Yet you can generally catch a thrown ball.
The point of the analogy was that the halting problem - like the uncertainty principle - is a result that says that you can’t know certain things about systems - and with small systems in particular figuring that out can be as complex as the system itself. But they don’t prevent us from doing useful things with larger systems. It struck me as a similar result to this paper - though only by analogy, not like, in some deep way.
- tsimionescu 3y agoMy point was more that Heisenberg uncertainty doesn't simply go away because of the size of the system, it is explicitly not an element of classical physics. If you apply the equations of QM to a system of any size, you'll see compounding uncertainty, not an attenuation. The fact that classical objects have deterministic trajectories is not a consequence of statistics + Heisenberg uncertainty, it is explicitly in contradiction to Heisenberg uncertainty, requiring an extra element to be added to the theory (the Born rule).