Jump to content

joigus

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    2093
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    18

joigus last won the day on April 26

joigus had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

449 Beacon of Hope

7 Followers

About joigus

  • Rank
    Primate
  • Birthday 05/04/1965

Profile Information

  • Location
    (0,0,0)
  • Interests
    Biology, Chemistry, Physics
  • College Major/Degree
    Physics
  • Favorite Area of Science
    Theoretical Physics
  • Biography
    I was born, then I started learning. I'm still learning.
  • Occupation
    teacher

Recent Profile Visitors

9788 profile views
  1. I think I've seen one of those somewhere.
  2. Just to add to the mountain of very sound objections. I'm curious: How do you explain muon decay as a property of chains of protons? What about mesons? What would Tesla have to say about that?
  3. Doesn't look like a very functional clock, does it? But still, when in Rome do as the Romans do.
  4. To think how many dogs have had to put up with this shit... Last joke for today...
  5. Nice account, by a top man in the field.
  6. Good point. I think before the universe was vacuum-dominated, the calculation with just energy density of matter and radiation works quite well, and you can actually do the calculation by Newton's gravitation, the result giving coincidence between Schwarzschild's radius and radius of observable universe. I suppose you could do the trick of including an additional term to the total content of the energy by adding vacuum energy, then you would have to recalculate Schwarzschild's radius and everything would check again.
  7. I think this belongs in the Brain Teasers section.
  8. Erm... EM waves have no De Broglie wavelength. Their EM wavelength would not make much more than a few meters? There goes your teleportation. Tunneling is not teleportation. It's about things getting past classically forbidden energy barriers. And it has attenuation: the probability amplitude at the other side is much weaker than in the classically allowed region.
  9. Black holes do not exist. This must be a peanut:
  10. Where there's a will, there's a way. And even where there isn't exactly a will, there may still be a way.
  11. Quantum tunneling is not free from attenuation. Look at this Wikipedia animation, for example: Also, quantum tunneling happens just next to the barrier, not far away. It's a completely different effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling
  12. I was referring to the usual, i.e., speaking over the phone. Correlations at a distance are not magical, or anything new. But these correlations have to travel from Alice to Bob. Quantum correlations in entangled states are of a different nature. First of all, and most important, the word that Alice sets in her system is random. It's not like she can decide to send the word "ALERT" to Bob. That would be a code in binary 0100101101... etc. that she chooses. But she can't do that. All she can do is pick a spin projection --that much she can choose-- and see what word her system produces, wh
  13. Correlations at a distance is not synonymous with "entanglement". We experience correlations at a distance every day. In quantum entanglement it is essential that there is an observable "number of particles" so that you can tag particle 1 and particle 2. The quantum state is an arrangement of 2-particle states that cannot be factored: \[ \left|12\right\rangle -\left|21\right\rangle \] You cannot do that with classical fields. Also, certain polarisation choices allow you to contradict classical logic. If A, B, and C are certain statements "the car is red", or "the pencil is upwards",
  14. I would tend to develop the argument along these lines. When someone puts forward a theory, there is an honest attempt to explain what we see or measure (let's call that "real"). But then it never stops at that; there are all sorts of concepts that are logically necessary to make the theory consistent. Taking up on your analogy with the map and the territory; we could ask: Are Meridians and Parallels real? I don't think anybody would say they are. They're just part of the theoretical scaffolding. There are no lines there, really. In the case of (perturbative) quantum field theory, if
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.