swansont

You can’t use speculations to support a topic in a mainstream thread, or advertise your pet theory

So now all you have to do is demonstrate nonlocality in some unambiguous fashion. But you claim it’s all one or all the other in order to claim everything is determined. And earlier you said “Undetermined or unknown state is due to observer ignorance only. It is not due to broken causality, which in principle, is impossible” but now we’re back to broken causality. How, exactly, does being in an undetermined state break causality?

Fermions obeying Fermi-Dirac statistics shows that they are identical.

Moderator NoteHijacking a discussion to rant against mainstream science or promote a pet theory is not permitted. Such speculation can only be discussed in its own thread in speculations.

Not conforming to your Reason” or logic is a “you” problem. Not evidence of a flaw in the theory Superposition is not an object. Many things in physics are not real objects, and there’s no real pretense that they are, though we can get careless about it and treat them as such because it doesn’t really matter (holes, shadows are some obvious examples, but fields, too. Phonons. The list is long. But superposition is a new and somewhat bizarre one to claim) People familiar with my posts know I am quite vocal in pointing this out. <something that’s not an object in physics is not an object!> is a characterization that, in my experience, is made by people not particularly familiar with physics.

Theorem 1 “Assume particle 1 is indeterministic (causality broken, e.g., unpredictable state).” Apologies. I mistakenly assumed you were familiar with your own work. But if the premise is incorrect the conclusion is invalid. Another clue to this is that we can measure states, so indeterminism is not universal. There are counterexamples to step 2 as well. A particle in an undetermined state could interact with a particle in a determined state but not have sufficient energy to change the state. Or it could interact in such a way that one must return to a determined state (e.g. an excitation into a maximal angular momentum state only has one decay channel, so you know what state it’s in) You can’t “convince” an AI.

What do you mean by “full determinism”? Particles are never in an indeterminate state?

I pointed it out. No, that’s not true. Let’s say you have a particle that’s spin 1, and you measure the state. Then it decays into two spin 1/2 particles. Their spins are undetermined. If they had determined but unknown states you can measure effects from that. Then why did you say that it was? And your “proof” relies on it I asked which one. Will you answer that question? Your post is curiously well-formatted . You did all that for a forum post? And made it look like a bunch of other posts that used AI? That seems…unlikely. (And AI is not trustworthy to check your logic) Superposition depends on your basis. It’s a fairly trivial exercise to change from one basis to another. Kinda pointless to deny this. Nobody says it’s an “object” “Reason” doesn’t really enter into it. QM interpretations are not QM, they are each a framework to help with a more intuitive understanding of QM. You don’t like e.g. wave-function collapse? Fine. You have other options. It doesn’t change QM one iota.

To be clear, since the OP has said we are not discussing their conjecture, it’s not. I’ve moved this to philosophy, since it’s on the nature of the universe.

You’re reifying these laws. That’s an assumption. What’s the evidence that the laws of the universe exist as some kind of tangible entity?

Would a company settle a lawsuit that would bankrupt them? If they lose they’re likely ruined, so I’m guessing a settlement would allow them to continue operating, if they think they can raise the money to keep going. Otherwise why settle? Is there some downside to losing as opposed to settling, if both destroy the company?

<deleted; didn’t see that this was in the sandbox>

It’s not really a proof. Being in an undetermined state does not mean that causality is broken. Please disclose which AI you used for this.

One thread per topic, please

Moderator NoteAdvertising your pet theory is considered thread hijacking

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/08/authors-celebrate-historic-settlement-coming-soon-in-anthropic-class-action/ “If every author in the class filed a claim, industry advocates warned, it would "financially ruin" the entire AI industry. It's unclear if the class certification prompted the settlement or what terms authors agreed to, but according to court filings, the settlement terms are binding. A lawyer representing authors, Justin A. Nelson, told Ars that more details would be revealed soon, and he confirmed that the suing authors are claiming a win for possibly millions of class members.“ I saw something recently that claimed a significant part of construction $$ has been on AI infrastructure, so there’s a big bubble that could pop here

This is from memory, so buyer beware, but IIRC while laser class depends on power, it also depends on packaging. A class 1 laser product means that it’s eye-safe, but that can be because it’s completely enclosed. The laser itself could be a higher classification. e.g. when you open the box it’s class 3 or 4. We used point this out when we had safety inquiries. We had 3b and 4 lasers, but they were in boxes with only a fiber output, and that fiber went to another enclosure, so no eye protection was needed. (and no interlocks turning them off when you opened the lab door) The blu-ray burner writer might use one color to write data and lower power and possibly different color for playback.

And a complicit majority on SCOTUS, who might just create some power out of thin air, as they’ve done before. Section 4 CongressClause 1 Elections Clause The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators. https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-1/section-4/ Laws are already on the books making election day uniform (second Tuesday in November). Most states have some form of early voting, but those rules are up to the states The 20th amendment says when congress is to be sworn in, and the elections have to be certified, so I don’t see much leeway in moving the date later, but who knows what SCOTUS would say, but how clueless can they be if there’s a pissed-off electorate? I think screwing with elections won’t play well with even Republican voters, outside of super-hardcore MAGAts.

It’s more like what you discuss at 2AM in a chemically-altered state. “Not a full theory” is an understatement. It’s the thinnest of veneers, and what is needed is depth. I don’t know what the disconnect is, the requirements of speculations have been explained to you several times and you’re not understanding or just ignoring them. You can go back to your previous threads on this subject and you’ll see them.

Not a lot of space at 10^-43 sec after the BB, and who said space was empty?

I’m pretty sure there’s no legal avenue for this to happen. Not that Trump won’t try something illegal. But it’s not happened before, even during the Civil War. Martial law doesn’t suspend the Constitution and congress sets the date of federal elections. Almost a majority of people who voted. Trump isn’t on the ballot and dissatisfied people who didn’t vote in ‘24 might be motivated to show up

It’s…not good. What are the laws made of, and what is space made of that you can embed the laws in them? Do you actually understand how a hologram works? So spacetime is a substance? What’s it made of? What can it predict? How can it be tested?

There’s a lot to unpack. The densest forests have less than 75k trees per square km https://worldpopulationreview.com/metrics/how-many-trees-are-in-the-world “Countries with the densest tree cover in trees per square kilometer: Finland (72,644) Slovenia (71,131) Sweden (69,161) Taiwan (62,975) Brunei (62,333)…”

Yes. There are lasers that use frequency-doubling crystals, such as a 1064 nm (IR) pump laser that gives 532 nm (green) light. (Usually the 1064 is filtered out, but cheap ones had poor filters and were dangerous because there’s no blink reflex, and doubling is not efficient so there was a lot of that light.)

The issue is how one would test this. We can only confirm what we can experimentally observe.