Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.physics.research    |    Current physics research. (Moderated)    |    17,516 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 17,138 of 17,516    |
|    Austin Fearnley to All    |
|    Re: Nobel price physics 2022.    |
|    18 Oct 22 07:30:32    |
      From: ben6993@hotmail.com              On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 4:20:30 PM UTC+1, richali... wrote:       ...       Richard wrote:       " .... I think the hesitation is related to the idea of free will       and the ability to determine your own future. Unfortunately        this is probably on the border of proper science since it        may be untestable and unfalsifiable. I would be very       interested in an idea for testing these ideas experimentally       in a more transparent way than the entanglement experiments. "              I have no ideas about how to introduce free will into a       framework of deterministic calculations that the universe       appears to need. Chaos can be introduced into calculations       using non linear equations but chaos is not free will? One        would need guided-by-free-will use of non-linear equations.        Anyway, I am hanging up my Physics hat and at 73 years       of age feel that I am now too old to work hard enough on physics.              You mention testing. I have obviously thought, but without        success, about how to test whether antiparticles are       travelling backwards in time. For an antiparticle, under my        assumption, the polarisation vector changes from a random        vector to vector d or -d (= detector setting vector) at       measurement, in the antiparticle's own, reversed time       direction. This appears to be a change from vector d or -d       to a random polarisation in the forward time direction.       Adding extra test measurements before or after the main       measurement would always seem to me to interfere too       much and ruin the test.              I am glad you responded to Tom as I could not have        responded so well.              Tom: "The fact that the particles at B and C have a        property that is correlated is curious"              Alice: curiouser and curiouser       Bob: seems darned well spooky to me              My own speculation about Susskind's wormhole        connection is that particles are in dS while antiparticles        are in AdS. This is complicated in my preon model        where each and every particle has both forwards and       backwards-in-time preons within it. Entanglement       (of particle and antiparticle) is probably involved in        construction of spacetime metrics as the metric forms       in the zone where both dS and AdS meet which has       minimal curvature. But that speculation is probably        rubbish. Although most particles are matter, they       overall have an equal number of (my) preons and       antipreons within them. So the loss of antimatter is       caused by spontaneous symmetry breaking in forming        elementary particles from preons.              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca