Heartland

Quantum theory is not so much a law of physics, its a set of approximations and probabilities which work very, very well in certain situations, and appallingly in others.

If you think me a fool to believe so, then I am happy to join Einstein in that club.

Quantum theory has been superseded by M-theory for over a decade, in which there's 11 dimensions, not the 4 you mention. Its not 1970 anymore.

Next...

yeah, right. When Einstein said "God doesn't play dice with the Universe" he was wrong.

If m-theory actually made any predictions that could be tested, it might qualify as science. But it doesn't, so all it is is speculation at this point.

And if you've found some experimental evidence to challenge quantum theory, I think the Nobel committee might like a word.

*Edit: By the way: the 'fool' crack was out of order. I apologise.

I disagree. Just because the universe appears chaotic, does not mean it is, and just because you cannot measure a system, does not mean its not ordered.

Still, even if you believe in quantum theory as a law, doesn't it still rely on long term conservation of mass/energy? Which is cause-and-effect re-written?

nodubmanshouts wrote:Useful, yes. As in: a beer glass is useful, but only if you have beer to put in it.

You have the glass and the bottle of beer, the bottle of beer and the glass. Just like that, just like that.





Sorry, couldn't resist...

nodubmanshouts wrote:Quantum theory is not so much a law of physics, its a set of approximations and probabilities which work very, very well in certain situations, and appallingly in others.

That's pretty much the case for all of our laws and theories of everything, isn't it? Even basic Euclidean stuff breaks once you realise that surfaces aren't actually flat.

Well, Euclidean geometry is purely mathematical so it always works in that context (its flat-world domain). But yeah, when you put it in a physical context, it doesn't work so well.

Holy Shmoly, what have you guys been eating?

I was merely making an analogy using rhetorical questions, and now there's quantum particles flying by!

knowledge <---- things that happened before [either 1 sec ago or 3000 years ago, 'internalized' either through listening, watching, smelling, tasting or feeling; the passing of knowlegde via teaching is also, in theory, an 'experience'].

In that sense, History is important because the knowledge we have today stems from what people did/thought/experienced in the past.

Lots of other things are important too, like going to the loo from time to time before stuff runs over your socks; but that is a whole other debate.

it has been even more of a derail than the usual Heartland effect.

I hasten to point out that it's all done with love of course. Even if I'm snarking at people I don't hold anyone any animosity.

He, no worries.

Yes, history is very important. It just becomes a lot more useful with a context. I don't think you'll find any degree (computing, medicine, law, etc) which doesn't go into some depth about the subject's history... and as well it should.

I still believe in the L-space theory and naught else.

IZ.

Izzy HaveMercy wrote:I still believe in the L-space theory and naught else.

IZ.

As it happens I recently applied that same theory to my living room re-arrangement, and, I must say, that L-space sure is doin' it for me too -- especially the L-shaped sofa is a direct hit.

derailed a bit my friends?

update: have applied for some positions, although I try not get my hopes up much. I am still open for any suggestions