Am 12.01.2017 um 02:49 schrieb Kevin Wampler:

> Hopefully that's more clear in conveying my confusion with the video's
> claims?  If you have another way of interpreting the video's argument
> that makes more sense I'd be interested to hear it.

I won't argue about whether they might have gotten some stuff wrong.
They're not professional physicists, so I guess it's almost inevitable
that they did.

For me the question is not whether every conclusion in this video's
train of thoughts is correct and irrefutible, but whether it leads to an
interesting perspective on information and entropy that warrants to be
pondered further.

Human ingenuity has always been fueled by lucky mistakes.

>> Remember that quantum theory does away with the idea that there even
>> /is/ such a thing as "the" state of the universe.
> 
> Hmm what do you mean?  I was under the impression that quantum mechanics
> describes the state of the universe perfectly well with a giant quantum
> wave function?  Not the notion of "state" that we're used to from
> classical physics, but I was assuming that this would still count as a
> "state".

According to the Kopenhagen interpretation, the wave function does not
describe a particular state. It describes the /probability/ of a certain
state.

There is no spoon. Not until you have a close look at it, at any rate.

You /can/ look at the spoon so closely that you force it to coalesce
into a state -- but then you spoil any chance of predicting /anything/
about the spoon's future. In other words, it will evaporate. Instantly.
(Or not. Because even evaporation won't be guaranteed then.)

If the universe ever /has/ a particular state, "it will instantly
disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and
inexplicable", as an ingenious mind once put it.

Post a reply to this message