RE: Quantum Physics

From: Higgo James <james.higgo.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 10:00:35 +0100

So why don't we observe vacuum collapses, Jacques?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jacques M Mallah [SMTP:jqm1584.domain.name.hidden]
> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 1999 10:47 PM
> To: everything-list.domain.name.hidden
> Subject: Quantum Physics
>
> On Tue, 6 Jul 1999 GSLevy.domain.name.hidden wrote:
> > Not only will the laws of physics breakdown
> > tomorrow, but they break down right now billion of times every
> picoseconds.
> > When this results in A LARGE SCALE alteration of the world, each self
> cannot
> > be around to observe it. When it happens in a SMALL SCALE, we can still
> be
> > around to observe the fleeting events. We call this Quantum Physics.
>
> I don't mean to be rude but ...
> Quantum physics bears *no* resemblance to the above, and maybe you
> need to learn more about it. There is no evidence that the laws of
> physics 'break down'. It's just that quantum physics is different than
> classical in ways that were thought to be non-deterministic before Everett
> came along, but now we know better.
> First, energy conservation is rigorously true. Particles do not
> pop in and out of existance. Rather, the wavefunction is often not
> orthogonal to the states of nonzero particle number, even for compound
> particles such as rabbits. If so decoherence can occur in a complex
> system leading to segregation of such a term.
> If there is a small quantum 'probability' of people seeing a white
> rabbit appear then dissappear, it is possible (in principle) for someone
> to
> put people through an interference experiment and detect the interference
> of these two kinds of terms of the wavefunction, proving that they are
> both present in just the way predicted by physics, and with the right
> apparatus, even to merge the two terms back into a coherent whole (making
> the guy forget what he saw though).
> The white rabbit that appears when physical laws break down is
> quite different. He does not obey recognizably regular laws. In fact I
> think the question can be phrased as 'why is the observed physics so
> simple?'
>
> - - - - - - -
> Jacques Mallah (jqm1584.domain.name.hidden)
> Graduate Student / Many Worlder / Devil's Advocate
> "I know what no one else knows" - 'Runaway Train', Soul Asylum
> My URL: http://pages.nyu.edu/~jqm1584/
Received on Fri Jul 09 1999 - 02:03:57 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:06 PST