I watched it once with attention, and grasped the whole thing, but that is just me. I don't have time to waste. 😛
Like Galu, I wondered if this was some usual stupid Conspiracy nonsense, but turned out to be a good lecture on Quantum Mechanics and Entanglement.
Hard Copy here:
https://flownet.com/ron/QM.pdf
It was unfortunate that a member of the audience waylaid the subject with (already disproved) ideas about (Copenhagen) multi-Universe interpretations, and was then interrupted when asking for a much more interesting clarification of what a zero Universe might be.
Happily I grasped it entirely again. We think we live in the One Universe, but actually that is a classical simulation running on a quantum computer which is the Zero Universe. Wasn't "The Matrix" film along these lines, though I have yet to see it?
Ron Garret also made an extremely interesting observation about a photon leaving the back of the Sun. Outside our light cone, UNLESS there is a mirror out there which makes it come back to us. I also found interesting his notion that we think we are looking at an Electron, whereas the Electron is looking at us! Very stimulating lecture full of ideas.
Bonsai will find interesting the notion that Quantum Information Theory allows for negative and complex entropy. Being more Classical Information Theory up to now, I must admit I hadn't thought about it myself! I was only hitherto considering real solutions between 0 and 1.
Thank you Disco-Pete.
Best Regards from Steve in the Zero Universe. Near Portmouth, UK, in a Classical One Universe Interpretation.
Like Galu, I wondered if this was some usual stupid Conspiracy nonsense, but turned out to be a good lecture on Quantum Mechanics and Entanglement.
Hard Copy here:
https://flownet.com/ron/QM.pdf
It was unfortunate that a member of the audience waylaid the subject with (already disproved) ideas about (Copenhagen) multi-Universe interpretations, and was then interrupted when asking for a much more interesting clarification of what a zero Universe might be.
Happily I grasped it entirely again. We think we live in the One Universe, but actually that is a classical simulation running on a quantum computer which is the Zero Universe. Wasn't "The Matrix" film along these lines, though I have yet to see it?
Ron Garret also made an extremely interesting observation about a photon leaving the back of the Sun. Outside our light cone, UNLESS there is a mirror out there which makes it come back to us. I also found interesting his notion that we think we are looking at an Electron, whereas the Electron is looking at us! Very stimulating lecture full of ideas.
Bonsai will find interesting the notion that Quantum Information Theory allows for negative and complex entropy. Being more Classical Information Theory up to now, I must admit I hadn't thought about it myself! I was only hitherto considering real solutions between 0 and 1.
Thank you Disco-Pete.
Best Regards from Steve in the Zero Universe. Near Portmouth, UK, in a Classical One Universe Interpretation.
Last edited:
Darn, I really will have to watch it now! 😉
And Pete should understand your reference to "The Matrix" as he often refers to the film!
WARNING! Contains spoilers....
I was impressed with Ron Garret's $30 demonstration of Quantum Mechanics! Why, a child of ten could do this experiment with two polaroid sheets and a, er, 90 degree light rotating sheet in a sandwich. Or another polaroid sheet at 45 degrees. Who says Quantum Mechanics is hard! 😀
I did have to brush up my Greek alphabet for some of the equations:
This is why the dumb question about multiverses was so annoying. The guy clearly had not been paying attention:
And here is the bit about negative entropy, and I can't help noticing these objects could be 3 quark baryons or maybe 2 quark mesons:
All very good, IMO. 🙂
I was impressed with Ron Garret's $30 demonstration of Quantum Mechanics! Why, a child of ten could do this experiment with two polaroid sheets and a, er, 90 degree light rotating sheet in a sandwich. Or another polaroid sheet at 45 degrees. Who says Quantum Mechanics is hard! 😀
I did have to brush up my Greek alphabet for some of the equations:
This is why the dumb question about multiverses was so annoying. The guy clearly had not been paying attention:
And here is the bit about negative entropy, and I can't help noticing these objects could be 3 quark baryons or maybe 2 quark mesons:
All very good, IMO. 🙂
Last edited:
I've watched the lecture and it has set me up for a good night's sleep! 😴
Entanglement and measurement are the same thing - that was my takeaway.
All of the equations looked like Greek to me! 😉
P.S. Steve, the forum upgrade allows you to easily reduce the size of your copied images, which would help reduce the wear to my scrolling finger! 👆
It seems to me the main thrust of his lecture was that since measurement is entanglement, matter itself is non existent but rather consists of information 'bits'. As such our seemingly tangible reality is merely thought.
however I could be wrong since I do remember being wrong at least one other time. 🤔
however I could be wrong since I do remember being wrong at least one other time. 🤔
Well Pete, at least you've attempted to give a synopsis of the lecture rather than merely copying pictures from it!
Steve's earlier summary was more the way to go, but seemed to emphasise side issues such as interventions from the audience rather than the main thrust of the lecture.
P.S. All of the interesting stuff that Steve (zero universe, light cone, electrons etc.) and you (information 'bits') mentioned must have occurred at the end of the lecture, by which time I had nodded off!
Steve's earlier summary was more the way to go, but seemed to emphasise side issues such as interventions from the audience rather than the main thrust of the lecture.
P.S. All of the interesting stuff that Steve (zero universe, light cone, electrons etc.) and you (information 'bits') mentioned must have occurred at the end of the lecture, by which time I had nodded off!
Last edited:
Okay, but is it really 'there'?
or I should say..'really' there?
🙂
or 'should' I say really 'there' or 'really' there?
😎
or I should say..'really' there?
🙂
or 'should' I say really 'there' or 'really' there?
😎
Last edited:
By wrapping "think" within two ', what semantic message do you intend to pass? Perhaps you ment to say: "think"? As usual you ciphering is hard, for a human, to decode into an understandable message. Why are you trying so desperatly to be cryptic? #10,630 is an inferno of interpunction violations - it must be a coded message to some unknown species - your english teacher is twirling in her grave :-D
//
//
My maths teacher once declared that she "would be better off teaching pigs".
The comment was prompted by me laughing out loud in class during one of her lengthy monologues.
There was no pleasing that woman. At least for once I had stayed awake in her class! 😀
The comment was prompted by me laughing out loud in class during one of her lengthy monologues.
There was no pleasing that woman. At least for once I had stayed awake in her class! 😀
- Status
- Not open for further replies.