Comment Re:Hmm (Score 1) 530
Years of study no doubt required in order to even attempt to understand what that's all about!
For someone who understands the time-dependent Schrödinger equation? Not so many years more years.
Years of study no doubt required in order to even attempt to understand what that's all about!
For someone who understands the time-dependent Schrödinger equation? Not so many years more years.
If time is an emergent phenomenon, then how does the first event happen? If time does not yet exist, then there is no was to distinguish an event. By the parent's suggestion, time can only be propelled forward when already in motion, by the contribution of each new event.
All I can say is that the Page-Wooters paper suggests that time does not, in fact, work this way and this current paper, if correct, provides evidence that Page and Wooters may have been right about it.
Maybe, but I don't think so. I did some work in this area for my MS.
The paradox comes about because I used the word "observe" in two different contexts. From the abstract: "We implement this mechanism using an entangled state of the polarization of two photons, one of which is used as a clock to gauge the evolution of the second: an "internal" observer that becomes correlated with the clock photon sees the other system evolve, while an "external" observer that only observes global properties of the two photons can prove it is static."
The Schrödinger equation does evolve over time. But the Schrödinger equation is a non-relativistic approximation which does not even attempt to incorporate gravity. This story is about the Wheeler-DeWitt equation which is much more fundamental than the Schrödinger equation.
The theory requires no outside, God-like, observer, nor does it propose one. The point is that time is measured by "events" and "events" occur when the quantum states of two systems become entangled, but only to the systems that became entangled. To an "observer" that has not become entangled, a system is static and no event has occurred.
In the Copenhagen interpretation, one would say that according to the entangled observer the "wavefunction has collapsed" whereas according to the unentangled observer, it hasn't.
I like their space labelled "Recombobulation Area" just beyond the screening. Almost makes up for everything smelling like stale beer.
We have a place in town that advertises on the radio to hurry in and buy your new computer from them because they are still selling Windows 7 but won't be able to do so for long. Given all the airtime they are buying, I have to assume their are a lot of people who don't want Windows 8. I wonder what makes Microsoft think they are going to want it on their Xbox.
Worst? Depends on definition.
Ahead in the numbers? Yes.
http://www.examiner.com/article/atheist-vs-christian-whose-killed-more-and-who-will-survive
More to the point, it's not Java. It's Scala.
Computation is essentially the same process. A computation uses the evolution of a physical system to model an abstract theory.
But this only works when the link between the real and abstract worlds is clear and well understood.
Yet strangely I can work computations using pen and paper using only the evolution of the poorly understood system consisting of my brain, arm, hand and eyes.
Exactly correct. The most important reform our government needs is district-drawing reform so they're ALL swing districts. I just don't know how to accomplish this.
"STOP THE GERRYMANDERING!" isn't a very inspirational campaign slogan.
Why is this modded a zero? It's bang on!
Outside the US, they send drones...
Interesting. Google is completely unusable in this emulator, but IBM's website renders like it was made for it.
"If I do not want others to quote me, I do not speak." -- Phil Wayne