platz

83 ms·

961.
by platz 7y ago
The benefit is that instead of two rules for quantum behavior 1) the Schrodinger equation 2) the born rule , that contradict each other, you just have 1) the Schrodinger equation, which you already accepted. There is also a higher level
962.
by platz 7y ago
None of the top comments respond to or discuss the actual content in the post (e.g. "my ..."), and instead focus on their own anecdotal experiences, based on the headline or social media in general. this also is mirrors the lack o
963.
by platz 7y ago
To be clear, what is the difficult view of the cosmos? And, what is the view of the cosmos that is not difficult ? Would that be some instance of wavefunction "collapse"?
964.
by platz 7y ago
It's like an "awesome list" or subreddit of visual programming languages except each entry has a detail page that includes a review and feedback
965.
by platz 7y ago
strategic questions: engaging people’s best thinking: https://thesystemsthinker.com/strategic-questions-engaging-p... Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System: http://donellameadows.org/archives&#x2
966.
by platz 7y ago
The original version is from Von Neumann John Von Neumann once said to Felix Smith, "Young man, in mathematics you don't understand things. You just get used to them."
967.
by platz 7y ago
https://github.com/lexi-lambda/hackett Under active development, still WIP
968.
by platz 7y ago
Yes that is accurate, but I feel doesn't detract from the main point, which is about whether to do theoretical physical at in these regimes. We might decide a theory isn't testable even on principle, or discover that a theory we t
969.
by platz 7y ago
ok good night :)
970.
by platz 7y ago
based on the specific wording and vocabulary jshaqaw used, i assumed he was referring to the latter
971.
by platz 7y ago
I don't believe any of the possible interpretations of QM have a clear path to being proven, so are they pseudoscience as well? If Hawking Radiation can never be observed till the heat death of the universe, is that pseudoscience, or j
972.
by platz 7y ago
what is the point shkkmo is making?
973.
by platz 7y ago
I see.
974.
by platz 7y ago
We questioned non-probabilistic newtonian physics when we asked harder questions than it could answer or it gave wrong answers when pushed to a higher regime. Something similar is going on now in QM. And do you really think we have discover
975.
by platz 7y ago
This opinion piece is written by a well-known research professor at CalTech and sits behind Feynman's old desk. He's been extolling this exact message for years. I think he would say he's trying to de-woo QM by asking folks t
976.
by platz 7y ago
Your 'limited hypothesis' can never be proved, because you can't prove things you haven't observed i.e. the proof works only up until counterexample, which by definition of unknowns, counterexamples (or a deeper understa
977.
by platz 7y ago
This is a bigger question than physics can answer. The project of hard science is essentially reductionist and based on predicting events based on hypothesis. Your question is more logical or philosophical. Logic may have something to say
978.
by platz 7y ago
quantum mechanics is well-understood if you don't question the axioms and blindly calculate probabilistic outcomes. That doesn't mean we understand why those calculations work in the first place, what their limits are, what they
979.
by platz 7y ago
> The idea that someone with equal ability to do calculations with both could understand Newtonian mechanics better than they understand quantum mechanics belies an extremely naive view of how easy it is to perceive the true metaphysics
980.
by platz 7y ago
> The Italian town Ivrea was once a model for workers’ rights and progressive design. Now, it’s both a cautionary tale and evidence of a grand experiment in making labor humane. The subheading appears to be a mis-characterization of the
981.
by platz 7y ago
Agency
982.
by platz 7y ago
You can't calculate entropy without defining the macroscopic variables you are interested in. Once you have done that, you can start counting the microstates that satisfy those macroscopic variables.
983.
by platz 7y ago
There is a large overlap in ideas between Haskell and Clojure. You will also find that many of the people who are interested in Clojure are also interested in Haskell and vice-versa. In fact, they share enough that it causes a tension becau
984.
by platz 7y ago
I agree, but you might see how this error or preference creeps in psychologically
985.
by platz 7y ago
At the end of the day, people need to make a decision about something, and I suspect this is what is forcing the importance of this binary distinction. My decision to select, implement, go, or no go cannot itself be a probability distributi
986.
by platz 7y ago
Use the word proof carefully. We've never observed Hawking radiation, we just think it's likely to exist.
987.
by platz 7y ago
Philip Wadler showcases and comments on some of this history in his conference talk "Propositions as Types" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOiZatlZtGU
988.
by platz 7y ago
Not catchy enough
989.
by platz 7y ago
Sabine Hossenfelder seems to think dark matter has quite a lot more problems than is usually presented http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2018/10/dark-matter-or-what...
990.
by platz 7y ago
Imagine something spiky hitting your face. It makes you angry. Then you see another spiky. You have empathy with your past self, and project it onto the thing. The new spiky is angry.

More ›