5,381 reputation
1920
bio website
location
age
visits member for 3 years
seen 5 mins ago

5h
answered Difference between theoretical physics and mathematical physics?
6h
comment What is the difference between a philosopher of science and a theoretical physicist?
This question appears to be off-topic and might be a better fit for philosophy.stackexchange.com or possibly hsm.stackexchange.com
7h
awarded  Informed
8h
revised Feynman-Stueckelberg interpretation
deleted 1 character in body
8h
comment Feynman-Stueckelberg interpretation
@FredericThomas: see edit
8h
revised Feynman-Stueckelberg interpretation
clarified
9h
comment Does the difference between contextuality, nonlocality and retrocausality depend on where we draw the boundaries?
@CuriousOne: What was missing from Luboš exposition? Without decoherence, the Copenhagen interpretation is more religion than physics. Also note some more steps along the way towards a fuller understanding of QM that happened after the 30s: We got the path integral in the 40s, Gleason's theorem in the 50s, Bell's theorem in the 60s, the Lindblad equation in the 70s, decoherence experiments in the 80s, Shor's algorithm in the 90s, ...
9h
comment Does the difference between contextuality, nonlocality and retrocausality depend on where we draw the boundaries?
@CuriousOne: no contradictions, but fairly important clarifications (your claim was that we haven't learned anything since the 30s); your buddy Luboš has written multiple times about this subject, eg this article (take note of the paragraph Limitations of the Copenhagen interpretation)
10h
comment Does the difference between contextuality, nonlocality and retrocausality depend on where we draw the boundaries?
@CuriousOne: major experiments on decoherence where not performed until the 80s
11h
comment Does the difference between contextuality, nonlocality and retrocausality depend on where we draw the boundaries?
@CuriousOne: Ignoring the part a about retrocausality, the question is if quantum contextuality is a consequence of entanglement with an environment that lies beyond the Heisenberg cut. Makes sense to me...
1d
comment Exploring beyond event horizons
@ReXdean: no; the cosmic horizon is an event horizon, so you have to take into account the time of arrival: the signal emitted at A will reach B at a point in time that lies beyond C's horizon
1d
revised Exploring beyond event horizons
mention horizon
1d
revised Exploring beyond event horizons
formulation
1d
comment Exploring beyond event horizons
note that recession velocities reach $c$ at the Hubble sphere, whereas relative velocities according to parallel transport along the light ray will reach $c$ at the cosmic horizon, so in a way, the horizon is where 'relative veocities' reach speed-of-light; it's just that if spacetime isn't flat, you have to be careful about what you mean by 'relative velocity'
1d
revised Exploring beyond event horizons
deleted 167 characters in body
1d
comment Exploring beyond event horizons
@ReXdean: with the help of classical communication
1d
answered Exploring beyond event horizons
1d
comment Exploring beyond event horizons
@ReXdean: Sure, but what's the point? Take a red ball and a blue ball and put them into two boxes without looking. Then, throw one of the boxes into a black hole and open the remaining one and you'll know which ball ended up in the black hole. What will such an experiment prove?
1d
revised Physics & derivatives written in a weird way
added 26 characters in body
1d
answered Physics & derivatives written in a weird way