Quantum Mechanics, the horse race handicapping of science!

*promote a great explanation of quantum mechanics.

If you are interested in this, I recommend "In Search of Schrödinger's Cat" and "Schrödinger's Kittens and the Search for Reality" by John Gribbin. Great books that go into a bit more depth on this topic.

It is simplified.

Some of the concepts are actually pretty hard to put into words and just are how they are. And for each cosmologist you speak to you will encounter a different opinion of the standard cosmological model or parts of its construction.

There are parts of it i don't like because i can't follow and feel comfortable with each step. The maths makes sense, but there's nothing logical and connected in my understanding. At first i didn't like that, but then i realised that we all accept quantum mechanics where charged particles accelerate without radiating, and "instantaneously" move between distinct energy levels.......

In other words, every physical law we've got is just our primitive way of understanding the signals sent from our senses to our brain. Things seem to make sense to us the more experience we have with it happening. We don't understand why matter moves towards other matter via "gravity" - a word which we accept and go 'ahhh gravity - i understand now' but why the hell should it and/or why should it exist in the first place merely to move towards one another?!

So gravity attracts things (why?!) and time only runs in one direction (why!?) and energy is quantized according to the planck constant (WHY!?) and ... the universe is more or less like it's shown in the video! But why why why!? Well, that's a question for a philosopher.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor#Science_and_the_scientific_method

"In science, Occam's Razor is used as a heuristic (rule of thumb) to guide scientists in the development of theoretical models rather than as an arbiter between published models.[8][9] In physics, parsimony was an important heuristic in the formulation of special relativity by Albert Einstein,[36][37] the development and application of the principle of least action by Pierre Louis Maupertuis and Leonhard Euler,[38] and the development of quantum mechanics by Max Planck, Werner Heisenberg and Louis de Broglie.[9][39] In chemistry, Occam's Razor is often an important heuristic when developing a model of a reaction mechanism.[40][41]"

You are pointing the finger and saying I am ignorant yet you dismiss Occams razor in ignorance of its application to the scientific method. According to the principle of parsimony I do have an argument but it appears you can't be bothered to consider what I am saying. This is an intellectual laziness which seems to typify our culture today. It is an apathetic reasoning process that sees everything through the lens of stereotypes and generalities. If I am wrong about that I will happily admit it, and you still have ample opportunity to establish otherwise.

Yes, probably in that case you would not be intuiting, but inferring. That is perhaps one of the funny things about intuition. Once you do understand those concepts, have you 'lost' your ability to intuit about such things?

That may account for why so many people (dare I say) fear science. As you say though, looked at another way, by learning and deeply internalizing the previously unintuitive concepts, you develop a more complex and Truer form of intuition. A person, however, who cannot or will not put forth the effort to internalize unintuitive concepts is condemned to live in a world governed by strange principles they do not understand. I can see how that may be a disturbing and frightening way to live.

The easy way out, of course, is to say, "it is god's will that the world works this way, and god's will is unknowable." I can see the comfort that can be found in that, and even a glimmer of wisdom there, so I should make the disclaimer that I don't believe this is a bad thing *when applied with intelligence and thoughtfulness.*

Naturally, it doesn't have to be 'god' either. It could simply be an acceptance that some things are beyond what can be truly understood in a single lifetime. Personally, I try to find some sort of a balance--particularly because I'm an engineer and sometimes I just have to accept that something works without really understanding how. For instance, I rely a good deal on quantum mechanical phenomena that I only understand in the crudest sense, and I just have to be satisfied that I can, without any genuine intuitive understanding, mechanically manipulate symbols on a page and create something that nevertheless works. Attempting to intuit on that level (though it may be fun as an exercise), is beyond me personally, and properly in the realm of academia. It's why I have so much respect for this guy and his silly spinning wheel.

As for things like existential questions of the soul and free will and all that? Well, I'm already way too far off topic, and I only got this far because of the couple glasses of wine I had with dinner.

In response to a question posed above about this being number 1, there is something about watching people who are very good at their jobs working that I find appealing. I'm not sure why, really. Another example would be the Spanish bricklayer video a week or so back.

Good point. However, we are just beginning to explore things like quantum mechanics and who knows what the potential there is. It is even being conjectured that light speed may be possible. As for the "laws," aren't laws there to be broken?...;) On a purely romantic note; The universe is there for us to explore and I have every faith that "man" will find a way, even if every solution seems impossible. If not, it would be an awful shame, and an awful waste of space.

You are incorrect. Not believing is a belief. You believe there is no GOD and you can not prove it 100% Its is the same on my side I can not Prove it 100%.

Its like the RUSH song Freewill "If you chose not to decide you still made a choice"

The evidence is overwhelming that there is a GOD. Living objects are so complex it is impossible to conceive that all this on earth is by happenstance.

If you don't believe in GOD than you are an evolutionist by default.

How do you explain the complexity DNA?
There are over 3 Billion base pairs in DNA in humans. Through evolution?
Evolutionists say man has been on earth for about 200,000 years.


The earth is 4.5 Billion years old.
How many evolution cycles to get to 3.17 billion base pairs of DNA in the right order to make a human?



What about Quantum Mechanics?
Its shear existence is dismissive of evolution.


That is just 2 examples, there are many others with out being a bible thumper.

Try this one: Combine the participatory universe idea (ie. the universe is the way it is because thats how it had to be for you to be there to observe it and therefore couldn't be any other way because you wouldn't be there to see it) with the many worlds quantum mechanics jobby. Now, imagine in all of the infinity of different possibilities, in one or more, by whatever random chance, you turn out to be immortal. Since you have to be alive for your consciousness to be around to observe the universe, that immortal possibility is the one you'll end up in.

So no worries. Smoke 'em if you got 'em.

Footnote: Of course, it kind of falls apart if you look at time the other way. Since you were dead before you were born, how'd the universe get there for you to be born into?

How do you make decisions? Neurons firing in your brain.
How do neurons work? Electrical signals.
What are electrical signals? flying electrons
Quantum mechanics effects electrons.

Read up or watch about Schrödinger's cat

I think we're talking about quantum mechanics here and there are aspects there which aren't completely deterministic, or if they are then the information we need to predict what will happen is hidden to us. I suppose its a question of how much impact these quantum phenomena have on our decision making.

I'm not sure which is worse. Is the arc of my life as predicable as the orbit of the planets? Or is there a version of me somewhere that didn't make my mistakes just out of pure chance? Lucky sod.

Heres a video describing the Many Worlds interpretation as well as some of the others. http://youtu.be/ZacggH9wB7Y

Anybody been playing Bioshock Infinite?

I'm not about to go chasing religion's tail again, but the claim being made in this video is pretty freaking strong. It sounds remarkably similar to claims made by classical physicists...they didn't have any measurements that didn't fit within their framework, so obviously it was complete. Now, you have physical evidence of the accuracy of quantum mechanics in the computer you're currently using. Transistors could not work under classical physics.

In the next century or two, I'm pretty sure we'll have developed technology that requires fundamental changes in our knowledge of physics, and those technologies will provide physical evidence of the superiority of that new knowledge. Physics students of that time will laugh at claims like this, just as we do at those who made them centuries ago.

There is actually room for eternal life within certain interpretations of quantum mechanics. I refer to the article on Quantum suicide and immortality on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_suicide_and_immortality
Of course, this is highly speculative at best, and impossible to test in an objective manner. But given the many worlds interpretation, or an infinite universe with infinite variety, it is at least plausible (to some tiny extent) that, say, some advanced aliens could make maybe a robot or something with a randomized personaily and experience, and that that randomized person would match you exactly as you were when you died, "moving" your experience from your life over to that new life as a robot. Very fascinating. And completely irrelevant to everyday life.

Point is, life after death cannot be 100% ruled out (maybe 99%). That was the only part of the video I disagreed with.

Ugh.. "Quantum Physics", theres that buzzword used where it has no place again. you could just as well have said "this is Advanced plumbing come to life", as you clearly have no idea what quantum mechanics is.

Look, its not like scientists just ignore consciousness or the brain, we actually know quite a bit about it in general. We know, for instance that our brains are built with the same carbon, hydrogen, phosphorous,oxygen and other elements that make up the other parts of our bodies, and every other living thing on earth. And we know that these elements adhere to the laws of physics, an there is no reason to expect them to be able to break those laws of physics just because they are put together to form a brain.

This hippie pothead stuff about forgotten magical realms that can be reached through shamanism, if you believe that shit, well, go ahead. But it IS pseudoscience, and nonsense to most people who have an actual interest in actual science. Putting people like that on the same stage as actual scientists and thereby lending them the credibility of a platform that is known for presenting actual science, is not a good idea for that platform if they want to keep their status as promoters of science.

I have no problems with you believing this stuff shagen454, and you are clearly passionate about it. more power to you for it. However, you cannot demand I buy into this or "SHUT MY FUCKING MOUTH", Besides everything else, my only point in my first comment was to correct the idea that TED was "banning" this thing, and I only tried to explain that TED considered it unscientific, and why. Theres no need to get all worked up at me for it. Well, atleast you could have waited til after this comment, where I actually spoke my mind more directly.

How does quantum mechanics suggest that there's a higher power?