(no subject)

[abigailbrady]

went to cafe scientifique. there was a really good turnout. there was also a speaker without any prepared notes, talking about a Hard topic (quantum mechanics and general relativity), fielding random questions at the start such as "Well, what about quantum tunnelling?" without really explaining the concepts involved. he needed a narrative, but instead was just rambling off the top of his head. lots of people left. including me.

we then went to firefly to meet avstrangegirl, alexa_jay and others. and then to the orange tree. nicely drunk now.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Well he managed to bore me on one of my favourate subjects. A casual debate format may have worked if every time he was asked a question he didn't go cross eyed and then mumble a opaque incomplete explanation. His explanation of the double slit experiment actually left out the important bit at the end which was the actual quantum weirdness!

Oh well what do you expect from someone who obviously holds the Pilot wave theory in such regard.

[abigailb.livejournal.com]

I'm worried it will have turned off a lot of people, who were obviously new. Oh well.

Pilot wave sounded to me just like an attempt to explain the oddness by calling it something else and hiding it under the carpet. Whilst keeping the same underlying oddness.

[riak.livejournal.com]

Well spotted. He didn't seem to pleased when I voiced approximately the same conclusion!

[abigailb.livejournal.com]

Did he actually get to his wacky new theory in the end?

[riak.livejournal.com]

Sort of. His theory was that by using a certain brand of quantum mathematics on General relativity he got out recognisable quantum expressions. Of course that is a bit obvious since he started with quantum mathematics, so he is now in the process of trying to prove the quantum mathematics purely within General relativity.

Basically his theory is trying to find a mathematical representation of the topology distorted space-time which we see as particles and quantum effects. The main difference between this and string theory is that it includes microscopic scale time travel and that gravity is not a quantum force like the others and instead is completely continuous.

[abigailb.livejournal.com]

For this to be useful, of course, he needs to make predictions about relativistic effects on quantum scale.

I've wondered about the "spooky action at a distance" thing, because it says that as soon as you measure one particle, the other particle is in the same state, instantly. But GR rejects any notion of "now", ie an external chronological reference frame, as being invalid/nonsensical. It ought to be possible to do experiments involving spooky-distance-action and things travelling Quite Fast (in orbit would do), to see if there is an external chronology or whatever.