3,655 reputation
1629
bio website taufunctionsquared.blogspot.c…
location
age
visits member for 3 years, 10 months
seen 2 hours ago

Physics Stack Exchange users whose comments are worth studying include Lubos Motl and Ron Maimon (now at http://www.quora.com/Ron-Maimon and http://www.physicsoverflow.org/user/Ron+Maimon). Also see http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0207124 for a review of physics since the standard model.


Aug
28
comment Can you count “collapses”? How many collapses in the observable universe?
Read "collapse" as "decoherence event" and this is a meaningful but difficult question - difficult because decoherence is a matter of degree, so one would need to talk about thresholds and other technical details.
Aug
27
comment Can superdeterminism resolve contextuality, entanglement and Shor's algorithm in quantum mechanics?
let us continue this discussion in chat
Aug
27
comment Can superdeterminism resolve contextuality, entanglement and Shor's algorithm in quantum mechanics?
Regarding your constructions: my expectation is that Bell's theorem is irrelevant for free bosonic fields because the physics isn't rich enough to make a measuring device. I'm not sure about the string, but if you can realize a Bell scenario there, I think it would have to be in a space obtained by a nonlocal transformation (holographic, twistorial, ...?) of the target space. It shouldn't be possible to produce Bell violations directly in the target space, for the usual reasons.
Aug
27
comment Can superdeterminism resolve contextuality, entanglement and Shor's algorithm in quantum mechanics?
We can make the choice of settings depend on a deterministically chaotic process. This chaotic intermediate process necessarily randomizes any "signal" that existed in the local microscopic physical state. So the only way to get the right statistics in the experimental outcomes will be to have exponential finetuning of the initial conditions.
Aug
27
comment Can superdeterminism resolve contextuality, entanglement and Shor's algorithm in quantum mechanics?
You have to show how the altered past could possibly produce the right chances without miraculous finetuning, when the right chances depend on the experimental settings, and the experimental settings depend on weight of mouse droppings, or number of lightning strikes modulo 2, or the nth digit of pi, or any other input that could be used to govern a control process...
Aug
27
comment Seeking an account of fundamental particle physics sensitive to the issue of theory-laden observation
You need to suppose that everything is made of atoms, and that there are physical laws, and that 2+2=4... The SM is very thoroughly tested by now. If it's wrong, it's wrong at the margins. If physical reality works in some completely other way, that other way must still mimic the SM very closely, in all circumstances presently accessible to experiment. The hegemony of the SM is not due to paradigm blindness, it's due to repeated quantitative success.
Aug
26
comment Seeking an account of fundamental particle physics sensitive to the issue of theory-laden observation
This really all depends on the level at which you hope to see blindspots and paradigm-busting. What paradigm do you want to challenge - neutralino dark matter? the continuum? the 5-sigma standard of evidence? The literature of physics provides a constant stream of attempts at re-thinking and new thinking, at every level that anyone has imagined. Arxiv is full of this; and for anyone who wants to revert to earlier stages of physics and start over, we have vixra.
Aug
25
comment Seeking an account of fundamental particle physics sensitive to the issue of theory-laden observation
David, theory-laden observation is a commonplace notion of physics, but it seems you want to hear about something very abstract and general, rather than about episodes like how they confused muon and pion. For the latter, a good history like Abraham Pais's "Inward Bound" should provide endless raw material. For the former... there is a famous book called "Constructing Quarks", but I've never read it.
Aug
24
comment Can superdeterminism resolve contextuality, entanglement and Shor's algorithm in quantum mechanics?
Each location only has a local copy of the vacuum data, but to produce the correlations, the apparatus at each location would also need to "know about" the settings of the apparatus at the other location, which aren't determined by the vacuum data, they're determined by the macroscopic control processes.
Aug
24
comment Can superdeterminism resolve contextuality, entanglement and Shor's algorithm in quantum mechanics?
I never said the photons are unaffected by the past. The problem is that the experimental settings can be controlled by arbitrarily complicated macroscopic processes. When this happens at two or more locations which are spacelike separated, there is no way for a shared subquantum vacuum to be the common cause behind Bell correlations...
Aug
24
comment Can superdeterminism resolve contextuality, entanglement and Shor's algorithm in quantum mechanics?
You don't have to think in terms of counterfactuals. You can have many instances of the same experiment (but with varied settings) taking place in the same space-time. The implication of Bell's theorem is that you can't get the right frequencies for the outcomes from a local deterministic physics, unless you artificially tune the microscopic causes at each separate location in order to give the desired frequencies.
Aug
23
comment Can superdeterminism resolve contextuality, entanglement and Shor's algorithm in quantum mechanics?
so you can't get the right statistics just by relying on the subquantum vacuum being the same everywhere.
Aug
23
comment Can superdeterminism resolve contextuality, entanglement and Shor's algorithm in quantum mechanics?
The distant past is a causal antecedent of both the experimental settings and the EPR pair. But for the experimental settings, the local chain of cause and effect "passes through" the mouse, whereas it does not do so for the EPR pair. The scenario is that the selection of experimental setting is determined by what happens inside the mouse, a complicated macroscopic process...
Aug
22
comment What criteria distinguishes causality from retrocausality?
One reason that this is annoying is that you actually have something to say, but since it is scattered across a dozen identities, it's not possible to see how your thoughts connect.
Aug
22
comment What criteria distinguishes causality from retrocausality?
And "Naive stupid boy" who posted 10 minutes later. physics.stackexchange.com/q/34713/1486
Aug
22
comment What criteria distinguishes causality from retrocausality?
Are you the same person as "Combative and confrontational", "Very difficult person", and perhaps dozens of other one-time posting identities?
Aug
22
comment What is the relation of the release time of fossil fuel emissions to climate change?
This is much more than a physics question since the effects are supposed to be economic and environmental. The physics part of the question would concentrate on the time evolution of climatic variables that results from the different emission trajectories.
Aug
21
comment Shor's algorithm and Bohmian Mechanics
Needless to say, it would be interesting to understand exactly where the "quantum speedup" comes from, in a "theory" where there is no exponentially large state space. Instead it must somehow come from the complexity of the nonlocal interaction.
Aug
21
comment Shor's algorithm and Bohmian Mechanics
The unexplored frontier of Bohmian mechanics is the "nomological" form, where you treat the pilot wave as a law of motion. That is, if you specialize to BM with a specific wavefunction, you can just eliminate the wavefunction from your ontology, and you're left with a local and a nonlocal potential for a "classical" system. No-one has seriously investigated this option - not as physics, and certainly not from a computational perspective.
Aug
20
comment Can superdeterminism resolve contextuality, entanglement and Shor's algorithm in quantum mechanics?
The immediate cause of the experimental settings is the number of mouse droppings. So in this case, the chain of cause and effect from the distant past to the choice of experiment passes through the mouse's gut. The chain of cause and effect from the distant past to, e.g., the photons in an EPR pair does not. So it is still ridiculous, because it asserts that rodent digestion is a high-fidelity medium for communicating which subquantum vacuum we're in.