Recent content by lukephysics

Just look like a 2d vector to me. My next job is to learn why the notation isn’t simply z=(a,b). Since a+bi looks silly to me. Maybe it’s algebra, like y=mx+b!?

thanks for you replies. you gave me some good motivation to learn more. just a quick one out of interest, if complex numbers, quarternions, up to octonions, are used for <=8 dimensional space, what if you come across a more complex space like in ML where you have a billion dimensional space...

because it sounds silly and extraneous (to me, im sure its not but i dont get it yet), and i dont want to learn something if i can avoid it. if something has 10 dimensional configuration or parameter space that sits atop its position space (like a field), what is the real or imaginary part of...

i feel like i have deja vu here (but i couldnt find an existing thread by me so sorry if im repeating to someone). so its just a convenience? why cant you talk about theory in terms of matrixes like we do in 3d maths or machine learning, and piss off the complex theory? it sounds so silly to...

I was thinking of investigating field theory because i like reading about quantum interpretations. What role does complex numbers have in physics? I have a hard time seeing why properties of a point in that field are not just multi dimensional properties on some parameter space? Why start...

its not what it adds, it what it doesnt add - problems. Copenhagen has the measurement problem. Why live with that when you can have a problem free interpretation? Your model should be as simple as possible and no simpler. Further it explains the uncertainty. Copenhagen and MWI introduce a...

Boemian is less philosophical and more ontic than Copenhagen so you should be in to that right? The whole thing is physical! Coming from the top of a different field and in to physics with fresh eyes, Copenhagen seems lost in metaphysics for no reason when here is a better alternative.

I was unsatisfied with the measurement problem so I was looking at pilot wave (PW) Sabine says one downside of pilot wave is there is no QFT version for pilot wave yet. And a significant problem in replacing the QFT is that PW is non-local, and that copenhagen very much depends on being local...

Thank you for admitting this. This is what this thread is about. But an NPC in a game will never be able to know the random damage it’s sword is doing is just a deterministic formula. And that npc will never see outside it’s program because it’s brain is sitting in protected memory walled...

Copenhagen takes the probabilities as prima facia. I am looking for causes for those probabilities because no cause is given in Copenhagen. no, sorry. i edited my example. the non-local field might interact upon decoherence, not on creation. sorry to do that to you. maybe its random, maybe its...

yes this would be correct if they were identical runs. perhaps the elementary particles interact with a non-local field that evolves chaotically, which makes each run non-iid. this field might be truely random or it might be chaotic and appear random to us. maybe we can never know how it...

Could you please explain that a little more? As far as I know there is no such thing as quantum probability. It is simply the born rule which gives you a pdf which is classical. So if your chaotic process evolves to give you a pdf that matches the wave function pdf they are the same thing...

No, bell only eliminates local deterministic mechanisms. Not non-local deterministic mechanisms. Either god is rolling a dice in a cup, or god is glancing at his multi leg pendulum toy. Either way god is non local here. Either are interchangeable from what I can tell.

RNG is random number generator. Ie true random, pseudo random, quasi random etc.

Can you swap out the RNG that is the wave function collapse with a suitable deterministic chaotic process that matches the wave function (squared)? I can picture a multi leg pendulum swinging around drawing out the wave function. The point where you measure is the point the pendulum was at. Is...