Post by Avatar on May 11, 2024 21:34:31 GMT
Another reason scientific progress slows down…
Summary: I had to watch this one several times, just to understand why Sabine was excited. Ever hear of a man, named Gerard t' Hooft? He was a key researcher who determined mathematically that quarks tend to become more strongly attracted to each other the further they moved apart. Or rather, he was able to successfully explain mathematically why that had to happen in Feynmann terms. (Renormalization) in a way that was opposite to the then current held ideas of how gauge fields were supposed to work.
Currently, he has an idea that quantum effects at distances shorter than the distances we can measure (about 10^-22 meters or thereabouts), should scale into macro distances and yield a super determinism.
-
Pay attention to timestamp 10:50 as Hossenfelder describes a test for super-determinism.
================================================================
Hossenfelder, it is clear to me, from her recent output, felt she was dismissed by the physics community about 3–4 years ago because she persisted in her super deterministic arguments. I tend to split that baby down the middle with her by rejecting Bell's all or nothing determination. QM, if it is super deterministic as Hossenfelder believes, does not goosestep you into a result when you open the box.to see if the cat is alive or dead. If that were so, then you would know before you opened the box. You still have a choice. You could have used a mechanical device to give an either / or result, or you could be Wigner's friend and be entangled with the observer and that cat. How you finally hear the cat purr was determined by your decision to use a squeak toy dropped by the trap door you rigged to drop for the cat to play with. No dead cats on my watch!
Sabine, as she has become more cranky, has been driven more and more onto that super determinism limb. As the scales at which “spooky action at a distance” works become smaller and smaller, that is the intervals where entanglement narrow, she thinks that “choice”, which is what physicists mean by scale decoupling, becomes less and less obscured. How we measure becomes more and more obvious to be the determinant of a result. It becomes more and more “local” in other words.
Since no-one actually will run Sabine's proposed super determinism test experiments, because it would force the investigators to redefine “free will” in a manner that they (falsely) think will destroy “free will” in science, you can see why our little marathon runner is frustrated.
It is called “bias”, people.
Avatar
Summary: I had to watch this one several times, just to understand why Sabine was excited. Ever hear of a man, named Gerard t' Hooft? He was a key researcher who determined mathematically that quarks tend to become more strongly attracted to each other the further they moved apart. Or rather, he was able to successfully explain mathematically why that had to happen in Feynmann terms. (Renormalization) in a way that was opposite to the then current held ideas of how gauge fields were supposed to work.
Currently, he has an idea that quantum effects at distances shorter than the distances we can measure (about 10^-22 meters or thereabouts), should scale into macro distances and yield a super determinism.
-
Pay attention to timestamp 10:50 as Hossenfelder describes a test for super-determinism.
================================================================
Hossenfelder, it is clear to me, from her recent output, felt she was dismissed by the physics community about 3–4 years ago because she persisted in her super deterministic arguments. I tend to split that baby down the middle with her by rejecting Bell's all or nothing determination. QM, if it is super deterministic as Hossenfelder believes, does not goosestep you into a result when you open the box.to see if the cat is alive or dead. If that were so, then you would know before you opened the box. You still have a choice. You could have used a mechanical device to give an either / or result, or you could be Wigner's friend and be entangled with the observer and that cat. How you finally hear the cat purr was determined by your decision to use a squeak toy dropped by the trap door you rigged to drop for the cat to play with. No dead cats on my watch!
Sabine, as she has become more cranky, has been driven more and more onto that super determinism limb. As the scales at which “spooky action at a distance” works become smaller and smaller, that is the intervals where entanglement narrow, she thinks that “choice”, which is what physicists mean by scale decoupling, becomes less and less obscured. How we measure becomes more and more obvious to be the determinant of a result. It becomes more and more “local” in other words.
Since no-one actually will run Sabine's proposed super determinism test experiments, because it would force the investigators to redefine “free will” in a manner that they (falsely) think will destroy “free will” in science, you can see why our little marathon runner is frustrated.
It is called “bias”, people.
Avatar