Jump to content


Photo

Quantum Mechanics


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
137 replies to this topic

#121 easystreet

easystreet

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 52 posts
  • Age: 65
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Occidental, California

Posted 15 February 2009 - 02:37 PM

I knew I was forgetting somebody - I can't believe I forgot Pauli!

You'll never be able to exclude electrons without him!

#122 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 21 February 2009 - 11:09 PM

Philosophy is the pursuit of wisdom rather than knowlege.  Quantum theory, being a body of knowledge about physical phenomena, is not philosophy.  However, it is possible to philosophize on the implications of quantum theory for epistemology and logic, which are philosophical subjects.  Perhaps such philosophizing could be considered "quantum philosophy," but I would never use that term because it is so easily misunderstood as referring to quantum theory itself which is not philosophy.

View Post


Hmmmmmmmmm…. No, that is an incorrect statement. Actually, it is a twisted half truth.

phi•los•o•phy

NOUN:

pl. phi•los•o•phies

1. Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
2. Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods. 3. A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.
4. The critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs.
5. The disciplines presented in university curriculums of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law, and theology.
6. The discipline comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology.
7. A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity; an underlying theory: an original philosophy of advertising.
8. A system of values by which one lives: has an unusual philosophy of life.

ETYMOLOGY:
Middle English philosophie, from Old French, from Latin philosophia, from Greek philosophi , from philosophos, lover of wisdom, philosopher ; see philosopher


The science we use today comes directly from philosophy and logic… You may want to study your history…

#123 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 23 February 2009 - 12:47 PM

One frequently encounters the term 'counter-intuitive' when the topic of quantum philosophy arises. To apply that term to quantum philosophy is to make a gross understatement so grand in scale that it achieves the status of falsehood. Quantum philosophy isn't counter-intuitive; it's contrary to reason. It's antiscience. It's irreconcilably opposed to profitable intellectual endeavour.

The same can be said of other the other applications we frequently see. The evolution of the eye? "Counter-intuitive!" Counter-intuitive my ...um, foot?

Einsteinian Relativity? "Counter-intuitive!" Right. Like a negative number greater than 300 is "counter-intuitive".

The term 'counter-intuitive' is like evolutionist stink bait. They're drawn to any thing that promises to be a camouflaged impossibility.

#124 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 23 February 2009 - 02:42 PM

One frequently encounters the term 'counter-intuitive' when the topic of quantum philosophy arises. To apply that term to quantum philosophy is to make a gross understatement so grand in scale that it achieves the status of falsehood. Quantum philosophy isn't counter-intuitive; it's contrary to reason. It's antiscience. It's irreconcilably opposed to profitable intellectual endeavour.

The same can be said of other the other applications we frequently see. The evolution of the eye? "Counter-intuitive!" Counter-intuitive my ...um, foot?

Einsteinian Relativity? "Counter-intuitive!" Right. Like a negative number greater than 300 is "counter-intuitive".

The term 'counter-intuitive' is like evolutionist stink bait. They're drawn to any thing that promises to be a camouflaged  impossibility.

View Post


Don't wait to long for a cogent response brother.... I haven’t heard one to any of my queries or rebuttals yet...

#125 A.Sphere

A.Sphere

    AKA st_dissent

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Interests:physics, mathematics, history, bicycling, hiking, traveling, cooking, the Korean language (Han Gul)
  • Age: 29
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Mississippi

Posted 23 February 2009 - 03:49 PM

Don't wait to long for a cogent response brother.... I haven’t heard one to any of my queries or rebuttals yet...

View Post


:lol: More one liners from the fabulous Skudd.

Einstein's relativity is counter intuitive. Wait - CTD do you find time dilation intuitive?

Quantum Mechanics is definitely counter intuitive - so when the double slit experiment tells you that an electron is non-local you exclaim "Ah of course - what else would it be?".

#126 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 23 February 2009 - 04:23 PM

More one liners from the fabulous Skudd.

View Post



You may want to check you math sphere, I can loan you a calculator if you’d like :lol:

As I said CTD, don't wait too long for a cogent response…

#127 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 23 February 2009 - 04:43 PM

One frequently encounters the term 'counter-intuitive' when the topic of quantum philosophy arises. To apply that term to quantum philosophy is to make a gross understatement so grand in scale that it achieves the status of falsehood. Quantum philosophy isn't counter-intuitive; it's contrary to reason. It's antiscience. It's irreconcilably opposed to profitable intellectual endeavour.

The same can be said of other the other applications we frequently see. The evolution of the eye? "Counter-intuitive!" Counter-intuitive my ...um, foot?

Einsteinian Relativity? "Counter-intuitive!" Right. Like a negative number greater than 300 is "counter-intuitive".

The term 'counter-intuitive' is like evolutionist stink bait. They're drawn to any thing that promises to be a camouflaged  impossibility.

View Post


Quantum mechanics is difficult to grasp and some of it's conclusions do run contrary to common sense. But you can't deny that it works. It's shown to work by first year physics students in labs all over the world. The maths works and the theory makes predictions you can test.

But if you've got a better theory (a simpler theory or a theory that makes more predictions) then please tell us. Don't keep it to yourself. If you know of a simpler explanation as to why these things should be so that show them. I would really really like to know.

#128 A.Sphere

A.Sphere

    AKA st_dissent

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Interests:physics, mathematics, history, bicycling, hiking, traveling, cooking, the Korean language (Han Gul)
  • Age: 29
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Mississippi

Posted 23 February 2009 - 05:47 PM

You may want to check you math sphere, I can loan you a calculator if you’d like :lol:

As I said CTD, don't wait too long for a cogent response…

View Post



A calculator? I use Matlab :lol:

#129 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 23 February 2009 - 06:34 PM

A calculator?  I use Matlab  :lol:

View Post


I'm sure a Sylvan Learning Center near you could come in handy as well..

http://tutoring.sylv...ng_programs.cfm

But I doubt they have a Quantum Mechanics Tutor, so you'd best start with basic math :lol:

#130 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 23 February 2009 - 06:36 PM

Quantum mechanics is difficult to grasp and some of it's conclusions do run contrary to common sense.  But you can't deny that it works.

View Post

I already have.

It's shown to work by first year physics students in labs all over the world.  The maths works and the theory makes predictions you can test.

They've shown that they can repeat experiments and get the same results - like clockwork. They've tested the premise that you can repeat the experiments and obtain the same results - like clockwork. They have not properly tested their philosophy, or they would've rejected it.

But if you've got a better theory (a simpler theory or a theory that makes more predictions) then please tell us.  Don't keep it to yourself.  If you know of a simpler explanation as to why these things should be so that show them.  I would really really like to know.

View Post

When I have access to appropriate equipment, I intend to test my hypotheses. Is that unreasonable?

#131 A.Sphere

A.Sphere

    AKA st_dissent

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Interests:physics, mathematics, history, bicycling, hiking, traveling, cooking, the Korean language (Han Gul)
  • Age: 29
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Mississippi

Posted 23 February 2009 - 10:47 PM

I'm sure a Sylvan Learning Center near you could come in handy as well..

http://tutoring.sylv...ng_programs.cfm

But I doubt they have a Quantum Mechanics Tutor, so you'd best start with basic math  :lol:

View Post



Actually I tutored at Sylvan as an undergraduate and I tutored at a math tutoring facility at a university. I tutored algebra, trigonometry, calculus, and differential equations. I also tutored engineering physics.

Oh and I past my graduate level qualifying exams in quantum mechanics with flying colors (my best score) so I don't think I need a tutor for that subject. I could use one with Jackson level E&M - does Sylvan have that? :lol:

#132 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 24 February 2009 - 12:54 AM

{snippage}
(Just as it was happily assumed the inability to construct a device capable of measuring quantities of light less than 1 "photon" meant that such quantities could not exist.)
A system that prohibits learning has what relation to science?
{snippage}

View Post


Somebody stop me!

The beloved uncertainty assumption implies a promise NOT to pursue learning about particles too far.

Although it may not require it dogmatically, quantum philosophy enthusiastically encourages a belief in the ancient superstition of infinite regression of smaller and smaller particles. Now then! It may turn out that one of these smaller particles could be used instead of photons to observe Heisenberg's imaginary electron. It might turn out that such an imaginary particle wouldn't alter the course or speed of the electron appreciably.

But one would be duty bound NOT to discover such a particle, lest another come along and discover the application and blow the whole field of antiscience to bits.

I really do need to get this junk out of my head for a while...

View Post

Anyone think I was joking? Exaggerating?

I have pointed out these things because the more you see how strangely Nature behaves, the harder it is to make a model that explains how even the simplest phenomena actually work. So theoretical physics has given up on that. [p.82, boldface added]

That's Richard Feynman

Now I know that other old men have been very foolish in saying things like this, and, therefore, I would be very foolish to say this is nonsense. I am going to be very foolish, because I do feel strongly that this is nonsense! I can't help it, even though I know the danger in such a point of view. So perhaps I could entertain future historians by saying I think all this superstring stuff is crazy and is in the wrong direction....
Richard Feynman, quoted in Not Even Wrong, The Failure of String Theory and the Search for Unity in Physical Law, by Peter Woit [Basic Books, 2006, p. 174-175]


Source:
http://www.friesian.com/space-2.htm

One can only handle so much of this at a time. At least if that one is me, anyhow.

#133 de_skudd

de_skudd

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,518 posts
  • Location:North Augusta, SC
  • Interests:reading, learning, talking and stuff
  • Age: 41
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • North Augusta, SC

Posted 24 February 2009 - 03:37 AM

Actually I tutored at Sylvan as an undergraduate and I tutored at a math tutoring facility at a university.  I tutored algebra, trigonometry, calculus, and differential equations.  I also tutored engineering physics.

Oh and I past my graduate level qualifying exams in quantum mechanics with flying colors (my best score) so I don't think I need a tutor for that subject.  I could use one with Jackson level E&M - does Sylvan have that? :lol:

View Post


Then you need to go back for a refresher course, or get a refund because they didn't teach you the difference between a one-liner and a two liner :lol:

Remember, all the education in the world will not correct a lack of common sense and/or a flawed worldview.

And please do not assume you're the only person here who has completed multi-post graduate coursework :lol:

#134 A.Sphere

A.Sphere

    AKA st_dissent

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Interests:physics, mathematics, history, bicycling, hiking, traveling, cooking, the Korean language (Han Gul)
  • Age: 29
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Mississippi

Posted 24 February 2009 - 05:31 AM

Then you need to go back for a refresher course, or get a refund because they didn't teach you the difference between a one-liner and a two liner  :lol:

Remember, all the education in the world will not correct a lack of common sense and/or a flawed worldview.

And please do not assume you're the only person here who has completed multi-post graduate coursework  :lol:

View Post



Putting "..." doesn't make it a two liner. The sentences:

Don't wait to long for a cogent response brother


.... I haven’t heard one to any of my queries or rebuttals yet...


are related to each other and aren't even strong enough to be separated by a semicolon. They are not two separate ideas but rather one insult that reads

"Don't wait to long for a cogent response brother, I haven’t heard one to any of my queries or rebuttals yet."

Its a one liner - don't try to get off on technicalities OJ. :lol:

#135 CTD

CTD

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,059 posts
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Missouri

Posted 24 February 2009 - 11:03 AM

"Don't wait to long for a cogent response brother, I haven’t heard one to any of my queries or rebuttals yet."

Its a one liner - don't try to get off on technicalities OJ.  :P

View Post

A comma is inappropriate there. A period or semicolon will work. Such abuse of commas is common, but it is still incorrect.

I was expecting you to offer the observation that both statements fit within one line of text, and take that route of equivocation. Guess we'll have to wait.

#136 A.Sphere

A.Sphere

    AKA st_dissent

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 683 posts
  • Interests:physics, mathematics, history, bicycling, hiking, traveling, cooking, the Korean language (Han Gul)
  • Age: 29
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Mississippi

Posted 24 February 2009 - 01:32 PM

A comma is inappropriate there. A period or semicolon will work. Such abuse of commas is common, but it is still incorrect.

I was expecting you to offer the observation that both statements fit within one line of text, and take that route of equivocation. Guess we'll have to wait.

View Post



I disagree. The part of the sentence after the comma is strongly dependent on the first so a comma may be used (so could a semi-colon but it isn't necessary).

This argument is stupid anyway. Skudd's comment amounts to a one-liner even if it were two sentences because it is a knee jerk response that has nothing specific to say about the content of the argument put forth. If you want to call it a two-liner then go ahead - it is still just as petty.

#137 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 24 February 2009 - 02:04 PM

I think this thread may have run it's course.

If we're done with this topic, maybe we should consider closing this thread.

#138 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 24 February 2009 - 02:19 PM

Yep, I agree. It has run it's course, and will now be closed.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users