Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #593745

Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical.

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 8/15/2016 5:01 PM, benj wrote:
> On 8/15/2016 9:47 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 8/14/2016 7:42 PM, Michael J. Strickland wrote:
>>> I tend to disagree about the "constituents of our world" (or universe)
>>> bowing to statistics (a human mathematical invention).
>>
>> Every theory, including Newtonian, deterministic mechanics, is a human
>> invention. I don't think it's a question of nature "bowing to" a human
>> idea. I think it's a question about whether the human idea is a good
>> description of how nature works. And, from what I know of the scientific
>> method, the ONLY way we can determine whether the description is good or
>> not is whether experiment supports the idea. I don't think there is
>> anything nasty or repellent about statistics where we should say, "But
>> this simply cannot be a good description of nature."
>>
> The problem, Boinker, isn't that people use statistics to obtain some
> measure of knowledge where before there was total ignorance. The problem
> comes when one starts saying that such probabilities are ALL that it is
> possible for humans to know. How can any human make such a statement?
> What possible basis could one have to justify it. Superpowers are the
> only possible way one could know such a thing.

So this is where Bell's theorem is interesting. What Bell showed is that 
you can tell whether there are hidden variables at work, even without 
knowing what the hidden variables are. There will be a measurable 
difference between certain outcomes if quantum mechanics is right and 
there are no hidden variables at work, and if quantum mechanics is wrong 
and there are hidden variables at work regardless of type. This is very 
non-intuitive, where one is inclined to say "How could one say anything 
at all about outcomes due to hidden variables, unless you know what 
those variables are?" But Bell's theorem stands nonetheless, and this is 
precisely why it is is one of the most important advances in science of 
the 20th century.

>
> Those scientists who take this view should just use the short form: I'm
> a moron.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-12 10:04 -0500
  Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-12 13:32 -0700
  Re: "Virtual Reality" is a _model_ of reality; even when it's poorly done. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-12 18:56 -0500
  Re: Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2016-08-14 20:42 -0400
    Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 08:47 -0500
      Re: Quantum "Statistics" ( not "Mechanics" ) is a horrible description of nature. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-08-15 12:10 -0700
        Re: Quantum "Statistics" ( not "Mechanics" ) is a horrible description of nature. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 12:29 -0700
          Re: Quantum "Statistics" ( not "Mechanics" ) is a horrible description of nature. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-08-15 13:44 -0700
          Re: Quantum "Statistics" ( not "Mechanics" ) is a horrible description of nature. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-08-15 16:51 -0700
        Re: Your S.S. check. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-08-15 13:42 -0700
          Re: Your S.S. check. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-08-15 17:14 -0700
            Re: Your S.S. check. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-08-16 13:14 -0700
              Re: Your S.S. check. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-08-16 13:44 -0700
      Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-15 18:01 -0400
        Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 15:32 -0700
        Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-16 08:45 -0500
          Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-16 10:31 -0700
            Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-16 16:25 -0700
              Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-17 13:35 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-17 13:37 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-17 17:52 -0400
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2016-08-18 13:23 -0400
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 10:25 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-18 22:17 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-19 11:04 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 14:59 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-20 15:18 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-22 23:30 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-22 23:54 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-23 10:36 -0700
        Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-17 09:37 -0700
        Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 17:34 -0500
          Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-18 20:49 -0400
            Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-18 20:25 -0500
              Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-18 23:22 -0400
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-19 10:10 -0500
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-08-19 08:35 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 13:57 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-08-19 16:37 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. "Henrietta Testicockles" <invalid@example.com> - 2016-08-19 19:24 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-08-20 04:11 -0700
          Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 23:27 -0700
        Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 23:13 -0700
      Re: Reduce your meds. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-17 11:02 -0500
      Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-17 09:32 -0700
      Re: Reduce your meds. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-08-20 11:44 -0700
        Re: MrAA believes in magic; to wit: a HeadsTailsSuperposition. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-08-21 13:46 -0700
  Re: "Virtual Reality" is a _model_ of reality; even when it's poorly done. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-17 09:27 -0700
    Re: "Virtual Reality" is a _model_ of reality; even when it's poorly done. LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 09:38 -0700
      Re: "Virtual Reality" is a _model_ of reality; even when it's poorly done. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-17 10:27 -0700
        Re: "Virtual Reality" is a _model_ of reality; even when it's poorly done. LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 10:41 -0700
          Re: "Virtual Reality" is a _model_ of reality; even when it's poorly done. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-19 14:35 -0700
            Re: "Virtual Reality" is a _model_ of reality; even when it's poorly done. LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-19 15:11 -0700
              Re: "Virtual Reality" is a _model_ of reality; even when it's poorly done. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-08-22 23:26 -0700
                Re: "Virtual Reality" is a _model_ of reality; even when it's poorly done. LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-23 10:46 -0700
      Re: "Virtual Reality" is a _model_ of reality; even when it's poorly done. LIGO Fraud Investigator <mapou001@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 10:44 -0700
      mism noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-08-17 16:15 -0700
        Re: mism noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 12:46 -0700
  Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. poraty350@gmail.com - 2016-08-18 23:04 -0700

csiph-web