On Thursday, June 6, 2019 at 2:13:42 AM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > > > On Wednesday, June 5, 2019 at 6:08:48 PM UTC-5, Bruce wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 11:57 PM Philip Thrift <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Wednesday, June 5, 2019 at 8:25:10 AM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wednesday, June 5, 2019 at 7:56:41 AM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, June 5, 2019 at 6:45:32 AM UTC-5, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tuesday, June 4, 2019 at 10:22:51 PM UTC-5, Bruce wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 1:15 PM Philip Thrift <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As for quantum stochastic retrodependency (which physicists avoid >>>>>>>> like vampires avoid sunlight), it simplifies the "puzzles" of QM, >>>>>>>> meaning >>>>>>>> that, for the most part, the articles you see talking about the >>>>>>>> "spooky >>>>>>>> action at a distance" or "many wolds" of QM you can dump in the >>>>>>>> trashcan >>>>>>>> and save a lot of time! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The trouble is that these retrocausal "explanations" do not actually >>>>>>> explain anything! They sound like they should: "The formation of the >>>>>>> EPR >>>>>>> pair depends on the future setting of the polarises as well as on the >>>>>>> state >>>>>>> preparation." (Or something similar). But no detailed dynamics are ever >>>>>>> given, and the supposed explanation is even more mystical than "spooky >>>>>>> action at a distance...." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bruce >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Bingo --- ting ding ting ding ... . Thanks Bruce. Since QM is time >>>>>> symmetric or invariant in its form with respect to time direction >>>>>> whether >>>>>> you define time forwards or backwards, or do so for some partition of a >>>>>> density matrix or wave, makes no difference. Retrocausality in effect >>>>>> solves nothing. Nonlocality and the contextual nature of QM, eg the >>>>>> Mermin-Peres square that gives Kochen-Specker, have no definition with >>>>>> respect to any time direction. If you have locality in QM then it is >>>>>> still >>>>>> not possible to think meaningfully of counterfactual definiteness (CFD), >>>>>> or >>>>>> if QM is regarded as nonlocal only then can you have CFD, such as with >>>>>> Many >>>>>> Worlds Interpretation. It makes no difference whether the observables >>>>>> measured are considered forwards or backwards evolving. >>>>>> >>>>>> LC >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Retrocausality in effect solves nothing. >>>>> >>>>> It solves wasting any time reading papers about QM many worlds, >>>>> non-locality, all the nonsense you read today. >>>>> >>>>> [If one views QM as a generalized measure on a space of histories, >>>>> then one sees not only how quantal processes differ from classical >>>>> stochastic processes (the main difference, they satisfy different sum >>>>> rules), but also how closely the two resemble each other.] >>>>> via Rafael Sorkin >>>>> >>>>> @philipthrift >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Anyway, as you know well, I "adopted" the retrocausal view 20 years ago >>>> via* Victor J. Stenger,* who pointed of course to Huw Price. >>>> >>>> @philipthrift >>>> >>> >>> >>> Just out: >>> >>> >>> https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24232330-200-weve-seen-signs-of-a-mirror-image-universe-that-is-touching-our-own/ >>> >>> *We've seen signs of a mirror-image universe that is touching our own.* >>> *New experiments are revealing hints of a world and a reality that are >>> complete reflections of ours. * >>> >> >> You should stop being impressed by bullshit such as this in New >> Scientist, Philip -- NS is about as unreliable a science reporting rag as >> you can get! >> >> Bruce >> > > > It's not that i'm impressed by a CPT-symmetric *biverse *(introduced by > others, including Victor J. Stenger, "The Fallacy of Fine Tuning"). It' > that it's better than all the (other) BS. > > @philipthrift >
https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.08928 *CPT-Symmetric Universe* Latham Boyle, Kieran Finn, Neil Turok (Submitted on 23 Mar 2018 (v1), last revised 2 Dec 2018 (this version, v3)) *We propose that the state of the universe does {\it not} spontaneously violate CPT. Instead, the universe after the big bang is the CPT image of the universe before it, both classically and quantum mechanically. The pre- and post-bang epochs comprise a universe/anti-universe pair, emerging from nothing directly into a hot, radiation-dominated era. CPT symmetry selects a unique QFT vacuum state on such a spacetime, providing a new interpretation of the cosmological baryon asymmetry, as well as a remarkably economical explanation for the cosmological dark matter. Requiring only the standard three-generation model of particle physics (with right-handed neutrinos), a ℤ2 symmetry suffices to render one of the right-handed neutrinos stable. We calculate its abundance from first principles: matching the observed dark matter density requires its mass to be 4.8×108 GeV. Several other testable predictions follow: (i) the three light neutrinos are Majorana and allow neutrinoless double β decay; (ii) the lightest neutrino is massless; and (iii) there are no primordial long-wavelength gravitational waves. We mention connections to the strong CP problem and the arrow of time.* @philipthrift > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/b3c0c5ec-27ce-49d4-9b93-b907f99c7b80%40googlegroups.com.
