You always end up with some kind of 'master' frame of reference that must contain all other frames of reference otherwise you can't express the acceleration
of a reference frame. And within a non-master reference frame, the acceleration of it acts as a fictitious force.
And if you include all of...
The reason we can choose a frame of reference arbitrarily is that a physical system is not dependent on an absolute position, orientation or time.
According to Noether's Theorem, the invariance of a system under a change of position is equivalent to the momentum conservation law.
In the same...
In fact, I suspect that's all you need : Noether's theorem on invariance -- Conservation.
Thermodynamics -- Destruction.
How nice that probably the most important physics law was formulated by a woman!
It seems almost radfem : Women conserve and men destroy :)
+Demystifier : The uncertainty principle describes a relation between the conjugate quantities position/momentum, orientation/angular momentum and time/energy. If probability
is conserved between them, the principle of invariance holds. This is nice :)
The Brohmian theory violates invariance...
Bell : 'No physical theory of local hidden variables can ever reproduce all of the predictions of quantum mechanics.'
In other words, pure chance cannot be defined. 'local hidden variables' is an attempt to define pure chance, which is impossible, as the theorem states.
'How can your arguments...
I'm basically saying that when it comes to QM, we should shut up and calculate. I'd advise against any philosophical interpretation because that's
always going to be invalid, for the reasons I've been arguing.
It's a matter of whether or not you care about the philosophical void. It's probably...
Ok, then, show me a formula for true random behaviour that I can call in a computer program. Like so :
int getRandom()
{
...
}
I don't mean pseudo random numbers, for obvious reasons, nor do I mean random numbers obtained by some physical process, like Linux does, since that also
ends up...
When you try to formalize probability, you're always making the same implicit assumption that chance cannot be defined. If it could, then why are you
handling it in that way? Rigorous treatment contents itself with studying the behaviour of randomness, but makes no attempt to define it. If it...
'Welcome to PhysicsForums, Adversary!'
Thanks.
'You don't need to make an assumption when there is empirical evidence.'
You're always making an implicit assumption. And then it's best to be pragmatic, which ultimately leads to the scientific method, indeed.
'That being our world exists and...
There's also no way out of using a PDF! From Feynman, Lectures on Physics vol. III :
'The uncertainty principle 'protects' quantum mechanics. Heisenberg recognized that if it were possible to measure the momentum and the position simultaneously with a
greater accuracy, the quantum mechanics...
I recently had a discussion with someone about Quantum Mechanics. His story was confusing to me but I could detect that he made an error in his thinking
which I proceeded to explain :
You are trying to reason from the idea that the 'collapse of the wave-function', which precedes the...