But Aspect already had a go at him before, his cosmolocical constant was wrong too.
I like the words: "in fact, modern physics prohibits that kind of finding in principle."
And tha talso goes for the Cat man Schroedinger. However.. Experiment is vlosing in more and more, and man what a disappointment it must be for all them brain dead dogmatic parrots who never even understood anything, and are incapable of analysis.
Thank Sam, for publishing this, but did you read it?
A man at the time of Ford model-T, before penicillin, with only pen and paper available for doing calculations; he got the light-quanta stuff correct, he got the special relativity correct, he got the statistical physics stuff correct. And you're complaining that he didn't foresee the nonclassical phenomena in the quantum optics for which the physics community had to work decades to demonstrate? And even in that direction, he was making the first guesses-in-the dark which guided the development - made the right questions, to be more accurate.
You also complain that he originally set the cosmological constant to zero (which he later called the biggest blunder in his life) - and the whole parameter only makes sense in the framework of GR! Which "Alberto the fool" pretty much developed in solitude. I mean, his other feats were done as part of a race - many other physicists were working on the consequences of Planck's radiation law, or the Michelson-Morley experiment. Others would probably have found the right answers if AE didn't. But GR came pretty much out-of-the blue, it really was not under serious study by much anybody else [*]. And the theory has held to this day.
Do you require as stringent performance standards from non-jews, too?
Of course, I haven't known neither Einstein nor his contemporaries in person, so my information comes from second-hand sources. I assume the same holds for you. My primary source is Pais's book - and he was a jew. Do you think that automatically invalidates everything in the book? Does it help if I certify that I am not a jew, and those parts of the math and physics in the book which I can follow, are sound in my opinion?
I'm also foreseeing that you may consider me being blinded by the jewish propaganda, and hence being unable to judge the contents of Pais's book (i.e. a dogmatic parrot). If that is the case, why don't you take a look yourself and report here in SED what you disagree with?
When Galilei was being investigated by the catholic church, he urged a cardinal to look into his telescope and to see by himself how the jovian moons did not orbit the earth. The cardinal refused - he knew that the telescope was work of demons, and was afraid of getting under the influence of demons, too, if he took a look [**].
parrots
OK, please show us some analysis of yours. Show something beyond what a brain dead dogmatic parrot does.
You seem to mention something about Schrödinger's cat above, although that doesn't look like a grammatically correct sentence. You object its existence? The cat is not a good though experiment - I think Zeh calculated that already the gravitational interaction with the star Sirius at the Earth's distance would make cat-sized object to decohere extremely rapidly. So it is not a very practical example. But maybe you could analyze for the benefit of us SED followers what *really* happens in the GHZ experiment, without using quantum superpositions (same thing as Schrödinger's cats, only smaller and longer-lived when Sirius is around).
Regards, Mikko
[*] Yes, there was Nordström, there was Poincare, but they were waaaay behind. And yes, Grossman helped AE like did some others.
Actually he is one who did see the nonclassical phenomena. Have you heard of the EPR (Einstein, Podolsky, Rosen) paper? In the paper they predicted quantum entanglement to show that QM had problems. This was the paper that led to the demonstration that entanglement existed.
On a sunny day (Sat, 30 Mar 2013 05:50:07 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Mr Stonebeach wrote in :
Hi :-)
Well, eh, I was reading some of your other replies on 'time'. At least that word sort of stuck out. But from memory, yes, in my opinion the Jews are just an other bunch of religious fanatics, armed by the US. Yes, and Einstein was using his refugee status as lever to 'fame'. fact is his professor thought he was nuts (use any other words), and when he finally was given the nobel by the US jewish lobby there were a LOT of scientists who objected to his 'particle of light'. It has done, and is still doing great harm to science, all that can be described better from a wave POV, completely classical. And on THAT subject, this whole probability QM QED stuff may give the right answer, and sometimes NOT, but then it is corrected for relatitvity so else you do not get published or whatever. As to time, you touched something interesting. In my opinion and in my experience, time and knowing the future is the most natural thing,
It was Feynman I think who said that an anti-particle can be seen and mathematically treated as a normal particle moving backward in time. I once worked that out for some particle, and you can, if you accept that statement for a moment, see that at any moment (in time duh) we are hit by anti-particles, that then must come from the future! So we get input from the future, as well as from the present. the 'sea' where information of future and present happens is now. All there is to know is already known, One has to be very careful not to flup down in religious views at that point. Sure in some cultures there are even words etc for this. My personal experience is that we are, our bodies, without the use of even any equipment, already perfect receivers (sensors) and if we are open enough the future is there to see. In that sea (infinite sea?) I want to be very careful with the word infinite anyways, we play with our toys, scientific instruments if you will, and try to describe the relationships between things we observe. How much do we trust that sea? or are we willingly blinded by what we call 'science' and dismiss everything we cannot reproduce at will (joke) all the time. Ultimately we have no free will, and everything we know, everything we do, is the result of past, (forces from the past, say how we evolved as humans, genetics etc, force working on us in the present, and perhaps those forces working on us from the future. Like a piece of magma thrown up from a volcano, we fly, light up, shine, and the fall back to earth to cool of and have plants grow in us, become fertilizer. That sea can tell you all about it,
My words for this (white here it seemed this morning, snow) Easter. very unusual.
I don't understand the rest of your post, but what I said about "the thermodynamic arrow of time" in the Tunneling thread is not the same thing as Feynman's concept of antiparticles as time-reversed particles. Those come from relativistic QM ( Dirac's equation) whereas the arrow of time can be discussed within non-relativistic context.
Although is true that photons are their own antiparticles, the 'spooky' experiments such as the quantum eraser or the GHZ experiment should be realizable using spin-polarized electrons, too. Positrons need not be introduced even when one wants to ponder the causal order in the microworld (laws of physics are time-reversible) v.s. in the macroworld (the second law sets the preferred direction of time).
Actually that is a mathematical treatment only. The arrow of time points only one way, even in the quantum world. Just last year I saw an article about somebody who performed a quantum experiment that demonstrated an irreversible reaction. That is, if you could make a movie of it then you could tell if the film was being run forward or backward.
That's kind of pitiful, only getting 5 ns resolution in that experiment.
But nothing traveled faster than light. The photons just started with opposite polarization.
too.
AE called the CC his biggest blunder. But he was ultimately right... he only thought he blundered, because the measurements of the expansion of the universe were crude at the time.
So far, I don't think Einstein was wrong about anything [1], and he did discover a lot.
[1] Well, he did think that a couple of things, like matter-energy conversion and stimulated emission, wouldn't be practical at the engineering level. But he was a physicist, after all.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators
There is a kind of sick tradition here. I've just been reading one of Feynman's books. He recounts how when he first went to Cornell he was approached by a humanities professor who tried to recruit him into a kind of anti-Semitic club, for people who were concerned that there were too many Jews doing this and that. He got short shrift from Feynman, of course. Interestingly, Feynman told him "I was raised in a Jewish family". He didn't say "I'm Jewish", because he wasn't religious.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser drivers and controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation
I have no insight into the emotions of photons. They do what they do, we can observe and take notes, but we probably can never understand them. QM is like that; forcing classical "understanding" onto the quantum universe is probably hopeless.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators
That isn't good enough to explain it. You have to allow that the first measurement made locks down the second one to be the opposite sense and that you are free to do the second test immediately without allowing time for light (information) to reach the second one being tested.
It is closer to a situation where the universe contains all permitted possibilities until you actually do the measurement and then instantly collapses down to only those states permitted by *that* measurement.
One reason why multiverse theories are gaining ground is that they provide a handy formalism for looking at these things. It is a bit like the geometrical interpretation of optics vs the full diffrcation wave theory. In the latter case the light explores all available paths but only the ones close to the path of least time fail to cancel out.
Similarly classical Newtonian gravity has to be instant action at a distance or planets would spiral into the sun. The theory of GR works with spacetime altered by mass works without using that arbitary fudge.
wrong too.
universe
Were non-existent or possibly just being worked on. The whole point of his adding the cosmological constant was to make Steady State universes stable. Einstein had discovered that only expanding or contracting universes were possible as solutions of the original field equations.
It is ironic that it now looks like one is needed to make expansion match the actual observations of very distant supernovae curves.
discover
he
When he was working at his peak they were not possible. Lasers didn't get realised until about 2 years after his death although Lamb et al had demonstrated a hydrogen microwave maser in about 1953 for which he got the Nobel prize. Up to that point there was still an argument raging about whether stimulated radiation and associated coherence would conflict with the Heisenburg uncertainty principle.
As an engineer, I have to work down some of the way to first principles, keep myself somewhere in the midrange of the abstraction stack, and use/do what works. That's consistant with the moderm physics concept of observing and describing without really understanding. Light waves/photons don't make sense, but they are consistant. Just a beam splitter is mind boggling.
wrong too.
universe
discover
he
One problem that the old guys had was too narrow a faith in statistical mechanics. It was thought that, in a large system, inverted energy level population was impossible. Pumping makes it possible. Several types of laser could have been constructed in 1900!
--
John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators
So far theories which require instantaneous action at a distance have all been found to mean that there is a deeper more complete underlying theory which doesn't. The speed of information transfer being FTL otherwise causes too many contradictions in the timeline.
I don't see this one being any different. Announcing that there is nothing more than the science we have almost invariably results in someone doing a novel experiment that breaks the prevailing orthodoxy.
The last time it happened significantly was the photoelectric effect which incidentally earned Einstein his Nobel Prize for explaining.
formatting link
The wavefunctions including their phases make perfect sense as do the correlations when multiple paths are offered. You have to trust the mathematics where quantum mechanics is concerned - even more so with QCD. The really difficult bit is translating the calculated results back into something that common sense can accept.
The limitation here is with our "common sense". Appeals to common sense don't work in extreme conditions for example: the very small, very large, very massive or very fast.
Our experience of normal vision is almost exactly like geometrical optics which means that it is only when we use telescopes and microscopes that the limitations of wavelength become apparent.
If you stop your eye down to a tiny pinhole and wait for the eye sensitivity to dark adapt then you will see the world dimly complete with obvious diffraction effects but at 2mm iris size you won't.
discover
conversion
he
Once the Fabry-Perot etalon had been invented it was really only a matter of time before someone stumbled upon it. But you really need to choose the right materials to get a laser to work.
Exodus 3:14: And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.
Sometimes Friday is just the fifth Monday of the week. :(
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.