Recent content by QuantumKitty

"I've only read one anti-string theory book: Woit." I suggest reading The Trouble With Physics by Lee Smolin. I found it quite interesting.

It needed to be said. By the way, have any of you guys ever seen the What the Bleep Do We Know documentary? (and I use the word documentary very loosely) It's full of pseudo-science, mumbo-jumbo crap. It's where he got a lot of fuel for his arguments.

Now there's an idea! :devil:

I believe what he gets from entanglement is that since everyone is connected we can influence others through happy thoughts or meditation or what have you. Also since everything is connected, we can or do influence or create our own reality.

Yes, I can agree that in a vague sense everything is connected at the quantum level, but how does this connectedness carry over to and fit into the classical world? Does it have any practical use or inherent meaning? I'd have to say no to that.

It's not that what he believes is bad, it's just I think he's assuming too much from far too little. The problem I see in giving consciousness or observers a central role is that it seems to give us humans too much emphasis, almost like the science wouldn't work were there no one around to...

Thanks everyone for your replies. Wondering if anyone could address my questions about entanglement? How do particles become entangled in the first place and is it something that occurs frequently in nature?

Good point Dave, thanks. I'm not out to destroy his belief system, I just want him to see the science for what it is, nothing more nothing less.

Thanks for your reply Zapper. I've tried before to explain decoherence to him with no luck. Maybe I'll give that another go.

Thanks for replying Dave. I guess you are right in a sense. But I think it's more like him using the vagueness of QM to support and justify what he believes, therefore it's all fact to him. I'm not trying to deny him anything, just trying to get him to see things from a different point of view...

One of my managers at work is, like me, fascinated with all things quantum, though for very different reasons. His interests seem to stem from the philosophical implications of quantum mechanics. While it may be fun to think about, I just don't buy all the quantum mystical mumbo-jumbo stuff...

But how does the energy "choose" what pattern to vibrate in? If the answer depends on how much energy a particular string has, then why do some strings have low energy while others have higher energy?

What makes the strings in string theory "vibrate"? Does string theory include or say what is responsible for making strings vibrate? Also, why do the strings not all vibrate in the same pattern; what makes a string "choose" one pattern over another?

I'm not saying the universe didn't exist before the big bang, nor that some thing created space-time. It's my understanding that the universe did exist prior to the big bang, as a singularity. Did the universe exist before that? I don't know, but I'm inclined to think that the universe has...

The point, or singularity, didn't exist somewhere in space or the universe, it was the universe. The big bang didn't occur at a specific location in space-time, it happened to space-time. There was no where before the big bang since it created space. There is also no before the big bang...