Modern physics, Heisenberg, and questions of free will

[cartman]

You Thought Quantum Mechanics Was Weird: Check out Entangled Time

[QuikSand]

unnerving

[QuikSand]

I've already been at the point where entanglement leaves me convinced that there are one or more physical laws/properties that we don't yet grasp. This, to the extent I understand it, just piles on to that conclusion.

[cartman]

Interesting read.

https://www.wired.com/story/the-pecu...aws-of-nature/

[cartman]

Space and Time Could Be a Quantum Error-Correcting Code

[GoldenCrest Games]

Originally Posted by SteveM58

Physicists find we are not living in a computer simulation | Cosmos
Hmm....yeah I definitely don't understand how that debunks the computer simulation hypothesis.

I mean...while I have a painfully superficial understanding of such concepts....couldn't you just postulate a perpetually bigger processor? So if simulating a few electrons "theoretically" requires more atoms than in the the known universe...why does that matter to an exponentially more powerful processor, to quote our dear leader, the likes of which have never been seen?

After reading this article, it reminds me of the time one of the players in my game said "We can't be in a football simulation. Our brain makes decisions 10 times a second. Do you know how fast a processor would need to be to simulate all the physics involved in our world?? Literally HUNDREDS of times a second! ... Impossible."

[cartman]

Physicists Can Finally Peek at Schrödinger's Cat Without Killing It Forever | Live Science

[cartman]

Quantum paradox points to shaky foundations of reality | Science | AAAS

[Brian Swartz]

I'm halfway convinced the simulation hypothesis may be the front-runner. I strongly don't want it to be true, but it seriously seems to be what makes the most sense of the last couple decades or so of experimentation in quantum mechanics, as I understand it.

[QuikSand]

...this thread now shows up in bold for me, despite the fact that I have opened it after the last posting. Seems appropriate, given the subject matter. It remains both read and unread until I click it.

[QuikSand]

Not sure this is the right thread, but...

New result from Fermilab seems to be confirming a previous Brookhaven anomaly: the magnetic moment of the muon is just a wee bit off.https://t.co/PbBdMYD8Of

Live seminar:https://t.co/KN65gbGPRR

— Sean Carroll (@seanmcarroll) April 7, 2021

Money quote from the thread thus far, from Carroll:

As to what the anomaly could mean if it's real -- there are a number of things it could be, sadly. But it would certainly seem to be some kind of physics beyond the known Standard Model. If it's real.

[albionmoonlight]

A buddy this weekend brought up a twist to the simulation hypothesis that I'd not considered before.

The hypothesis goes that an intelligent species in a universe will eventually develop a computer powerful enough to simulate a universe. And then the species in that simulated universe will develop a computer powerful enough to simulate a universe. And then the species in that universe will . . .

And that goes on pretty much infinitely, and the odds of being the "real" universe instead of one of the quintillions of simulated universes is very small.

But (and here's the part I hadn't thought of before), in that model, the folks in the simulated universes have the ability to simulate a universe equal in complexity to their own. And they will know that they can do that. And we don't have that yet. So we might not be on the infinite stack of turtle shells. We might actually be in a real universe. Or we might be at the bottom of a stack of simulations and haven't developed the tech yet to simulate the next universe.

But it is somewhat unsatisfying to try to save a theory based on the idea that we are statistically almost guaranteed to be in the middle with the speculation that the theory is still valid, but we must just be at the bottom or top.

[QuikSand]

"yet" is such an overwhelming word in all such conversations...

[bhlloy]

Yeah, I mean you look at how long we’ve been on this globe and where we have gone in terms of computing and AI advances in the last 10-15 years, along with our rudimentary steps into quantum computing in the last 5... that “yet” becomes almost meaningless IMO.

I can’t see anything other than the simulation theory making sense to my tiny little brain.

[albionmoonlight]

I wonder why the simulation hypothesis feels bad, but "In the beginning, there was darkness, and God said, 'Let there be light.' And there was light." feels normal.

They seem pretty much equivalent from our perspective, but people run from the first one, and something like 5 billion people happily believe the second.

[Ryche]

We're in a Rick and Morty episode.

[cartman]

Two Time Crystals Have Been Successfully Linked Together For The First Time : ScienceAlert

[Ghost Econ]

I can say I understood the entire first word of the article.

[QuikSand]

too much for me, too

[albionmoonlight]

Yeah.

I guess that makes sense for cutting edge science, though.

I wonder if inventions that we consider understandable now (radio, refrigeration, etc.) seemed that incomprehensible when they were on the cutting edge.

And, relatedly, whether our grandkids will have no more trouble understanding time crystals than we have knowing how a blender works.

[Ghost Econ]

I have no idea how many of those items actually work.

[QuikSand]

[flere-imsaho]

Quantum physics is a trip, man.

[cartman]

https://www.popularmechanics.com/sci...consciousness/