Re: Cyer-Letdown. (Spoilers)

Agamemnon wrote:
"Jaxtraw" <jax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4468fdb4$0$204$db0fefd9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Agamemnon wrote:
"Jaxtraw" <jax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4468bce8$0$688$fa0fcedb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Agamemnon wrote:
"L. Ross Raszewski" <lraszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:oc_9g.5883$Nw6.4057@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 15 May 2006 05:24:21 +0100, Agamemnon
<agamemnon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"The Stainless Steel Cat" <steelcat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message news:C08D2593966860A61B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <0oI9g.5362$cu4.1181@trndny09>,
"Sean Huxter" <sean.huxter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Not likely. The divergent point seems to have happened
sometime during the
last great War. I doubt Zeppelins made a huge comeback after
Jackie and Pete
got married,

They could have done.

From a quick look at Google, it seems that helium is extracted
from natural
gas. So if the North Sea was richer in gas than oil, and Cybus
produced a
cheap method of extracting the helium from that gas in the late
70's, Britain would have the ideal circumstances for increased
airship (not Zeppelin) production; cheap helium, expensive oil
(since there was less of
it) and an already booming airship industry: the ubiquitous
Airship Industries' Skyship 600 made it's maiden flight in 1984
in our timeline,

The time lines diverged some time after 1982 when the Lion
Sleeps Tonight came out and before 2006 so the ratio of known
gas/oil in the North Sea before 1982 would have been the same.


Even if we accept that the time lines had to "diverge" (Which I
don't), we still don't know when they diverved. Had they
diverged in 1960, the two universes might still have been
sufficiently similar in 1982 that 'The Lion Sleeps Tonight' was
still recorded.

No they wouldn't. Even if the performers had been born they would
never have met and never formed a band or even recorded the same
arrangement and mix if they had and Mickey/Ricky would never have
been conceived in any case. If JFK had not been assassinated in
1963 nobody in the world today who was conceived after November
22 1963 would exist and that includes people living deep in the
rain forests in isolation from the rest of mankind.

It's an interesting question this.

Let us for a moment suppose that there are a non-infinite number of
universes- but that there is one for every possible history of the
universe
since the Big Bang. We know that at the quantum level the universe
is random- so every time a quantum interaction occurs, the universe
"splits"

There is nothing at all which is random on the quantum level.
Quantum theory follows a predefined set of mathematical laws and is
entirely deterministic. Even if you wait forever the Pauli
exclusion principle will never be violated and so on.

Of course there is. The probabilities are rigorously defined, but the
outcome of any individual observation inherently cannot be predicted.
That's

I think you'll find that it can.

No. There is no way to predict the outcome of any measurement. That is the
very basis of QM!

pure randomness- the only pure randomness there is (tossing a coin
isn't

No its not. If you fire a beam of light through two slits the
diffraction pattern formed on the other side is NOT at all random.
You know exactly what you are going to get and what the position and
distribution of the photons is going to be.

No. Well, yes. But no. You can predict the distribution after a *large
number* of measurements but you CANNOT predict an individual one. For any
particular photon you cannot predict where it will land. The pattern of many
hits is predictable, but not any individual one.

random- with a sufficient level of measurement and enough processing
power you could calculate in advance whether the coin will be heads
or tails).

You are now contradicting yourself. Tossing a coin is a quantum
process.

Technically yes. But I was using that as an example of a macroscopic
process.


A classic example is a particle/anti-particle pair created at a
point and travelling apart. You measure, say, the spin of one
particle. You have no idea whether it will be up or down. Once you
do, you know the other particle
is the opposite. But you have no way of predicting what answer you
will get
until you make the measurement. The results of quantum measurements
are truly random.

Rubbish. If you conduct the experiment 1000 times and make 1000
measurements then about half of the results will be spin up. That is
clearly not a random process.

But if you conduct the experiment *once* you have no idea whether it will be
Up or Down. For any *particular* observation you cannot predict whether it
will be Up or Down.

Look, if I toss a coin a thousand times, I can predict that I'll probably
get around 500 heads and 500 tails, most of the time. But I cannot predict
the order of heads and tails. It might go H, T, H, T, H... or it might go H
H H T H H T T T or I might get 1000 heads. Probabilities describe the
distribution of *random* results. Which bit of this are you having trouble
with?


In the Many Worlds hypothesis, there are two different universes- one
where
you measured Up, and one where you measured Down.

I'm arguing though that rather than imagine a "split" at the moment
of measurement, rather you have to consider two different
configurations of the
universe which exist timelessly aside each other. You may be in one,
may be
in the other, when you make the measurement you find out which
you're in.

into two. This is a real scientific theory- the Many Worlds
interpretation of QM. It's not too popular because most physicists
baulk at the idea of that many universes, the number would be
collossal. But let's suppose it's true.

Then in that case, there is a universe for every possible
configuration of particles. There is a universe just like ours, for
instance, except one

Every possible configuration is the key fact. Configurations which
are impossible are excluded and one of these would be a universe
where the NAZIs win WW2 and you and your sister are born to the same
parents 30 years or so later using mobile phones and an internet
that uses the same protocols as today and where BMW models look
just like ours.

Of course those configurations are possible. What law of physics
would prevent that configuration of particles existing? Remember,
its history is

The same laws of Physics that give you diffraction and ensure that no
photons will appear in the troughs. That means that the number of
possible permutations of events has a limit and you will not get
situations like the one you described the further away you get from
the cause of the original change.

No. Some photons will appear in the troughs, just a lot fewer- and you
cannot predict what the configuaration of the photons will be- where each
individual one will land.

different to ours. If any sequence of events from the Big Bang to now
*could* have resulted in that universe, it will exist in this
scenario.

Except Quantum theory does not allow for any randomness to exist at
all.

Really. I'd recommend you read a basic guide.


You have to get away from the idea of branching- "everything is the
same until this point and then it diverges". There *are* universes
like that (very close in the configuration space to ours) but there
are other universes with similar but different histories that
happened to lead to a universe that looks like ours, but a bit
different. THese would be a little
further away, but still very close. They have taken a different
route to get
to the same place. If the Doc explores this universe, he may find it
a lot more different than it first appears- there may even be
galaxies missing...

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.... Let me simplify the maths for you shall
I so I can illustrate for you the way Quantum theory works.

Imagine you have two perfect dice each marked with a different number
from one to 6 on each face with opposite faces adding up to 7. Now if
you throw on dice what is the probabley of getting each number, ie. a
1, a 2, a 3 and so on. 1/6 right. Next throw two of these perfect
dice and work out all the possible combinations and tell me the
frequency of each of the combinations and how that is related to the
probability for each number you get when you add the numbers on the
top faces together.

After you have calculated this theoretically, throw two real dice
about 1000 times and see what you get and tell me if the results are
at all random or do they agree with your calculations.


I can only conclude that you don't understand what randomness is, or what
probability is. Probability is a way of calculating the likelihood of
*random* events. Can you tell me what the result of any individual die throw
will be? No. It's random, isn't it? That's why people use dice!




None of this explains why we perceive a universe of 3 physical
dimensions,

We can perceive 11.

X, Y, Z... um...

Some formulations of string and M theory seem to work in universes
of 11 and
I think 26 dimensions, but they're far from proven- just very well
studied

11 dimensions was proven over a decade ago.

Don't be silly. It's possible, but not "proven".

speculations. So far as I'm aware nobody has ever physically detected
another physical dimension. I'm not using the "evolution's just a
theory you
know" argument. String theory has a good chance of being completely
wrong- OTOH it may be right.

String theory works. It is no more wrong than Newtonian physics which
also works.

String theory doesn't "work" in the way Newtonian Physics works, because
although some formulations seem to model reality, it doesn't make any
predictions that can be experimentally tested. That doesn't mean it's wrong,
but it doesn't mean it's right and many physicists are skeptical.


nor why we're obligated to travel linearly in a time-like
direction, but then nobody else can explain that either :)

The forward arrow of time is explicable. The question that needs
answering is why do we perceive our own consciousness in that way.

I'm fascinated. So far as I'm aware, the world's greatest minds have
been struggling with the arrow of time. Perhaps they should check in
here more often :)

The maths shows that only forwards chanis of events can occur. All the
backwards chains cancel out.

mm'kay


Our consciousness isn't much help here. Time, and the flow of it, are
external to us and very real. The universe would be evolving
regardless of us, stars woud still be born and die, and so on. We
perceive it because that
is what is happening. The puzzle is why we're driven through time
this way,
not our perception of it.

No. The puzzle is why are you conscious of it and of yourself in this
universe and not a different universe and a different you.

Nobody knows if there are different universes. All this is speculation.

Ian

--
www.jaxtrawstudios.com
science fiction comics with shagging in


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Cyer-Letdown. (Spoilers)
    ... We know that at the quantum level the ... universe is random- so every time a quantum interaction occurs, ... There is no way to predict the outcome of any measurement. ... probabilities for each outcome given. ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)
  • Re: Cyer-Letdown. (Spoilers)
    ... We know that at the quantum level the universe is ... random- with a sufficient level of measurement and enough processing power ... It's not too popular because most physicists ... Every possible configuration is the key fact. ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)
  • Re: Quintessence and Curvature
    ... > factor of two then the universe becomes older ... The Hubble constant is essentially a distance measurement; ... one has to measure distance and redshift, but the latter is quite easy. ... Make the Hubble constant half of what it is and and the age doubles. ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: Diatribe against parallel universe stories
    ... energy" seems to be a law in this universe, ... from this particular function space to a "Hilbert space", ... What these axioms don't say is what "counts" as measurement. ... tool, much like classical probability theory, and that just ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: Cyer-Letdown. (Spoilers)
    ... We know that at the quantum level the universe is ... measurement, rather you have to consider two different configurations of the ... The same laws of Physics that give you diffraction and ensure that no photons will appear in the troughs. ... Next throw two of these perfect dice and work out all the possible combinations and tell me the frequency of each of the combinations and how that is related to the probability for each number you get when you add the numbers on the top faces together. ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)
Loading