tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5440415324855100362024-03-05T02:27:12.107-08:00too little, too late<small><a href="http://wbmh42.000webhostapp.com/page1.html">home</a> <a href="https://tsm2.blogspot.com">tsm2</a></small>Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.comBlogger201125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-38021775118805049902022-06-06T02:06:00.014-07:002023-10-17T00:21:39.933-07:00simulationsIn an article on his minimum viable homepage <a href="https://keunwoo.com/notes/simulation-argument/">Keunwoo Lee argues against the simulation argument</a>. In short, "future superintelligences" would be too busy with other things and
"once you have the resources to simulate many beings of a given type with high fidelity, doing so becomes uninteresting". <br>
I do not disagree with this argument, but I disagree that "superintelligence" is required to simulate us. <br>
<br>
Every simulation or simulation program would be equivalent to a long string of 0s and 1s; in other words it would be equivalent to a very large natural number.
It can indeed require intelligence to calculate a specific large number, e.g. a large prime number or a particular simulation. <br>
But it does not require "superintelligence" to calculate <b>all</b> numbers, it only requires a counter with vast resources, i.e. a simple Turing machine. <br>
<br>
One could argue that the simulation programs need to be somehow 'executed', but again a simple process with vast resources could do that: <br>
If Sij stands for the i-th program step of the j-th simulation, then we can arrange S11, S12, S13, ... S21, S22, ... in an infinite square and use a
variant of <a href="https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Rational_Numbers_are_Countably_Infinite">the proof that rational numbers are countable</a> to show that i) a simple Turing machine can generate all possible simulations and ii) another simple machine can actually 'execute' all possible simulations. The combination of i) + ii) would basically be a giant clock, no "superintelligence" would be necessary, just a (quasi)infinite amount of resources. <br>
However, we do not know what resources are available in the "really real world" and therefore we cannot estimate how likely it is that we are the result of such a process. <br>
<br>
But we could be the result of a giant clock counting time ... tik, tok ... <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-72697771602763196242022-05-30T01:53:00.000-07:002022-05-30T01:53:12.999-07:00best of ...Below are links to some posts on this blog and <a href="https://tsm2.blogspot.com">my other blog</a>. <br>
<br>
<a href="https://wbmh.blogspot.com/2022/05/reality-2.html">Reality is a flawed concept.</a> <br>
<br>
<a href="https://wbmh.blogspot.com/2016/03/5-x-3.html">Did we get 3x5 wrong?</a> <br>
<br>
<a href="https://wbmh.blogspot.com/2015/06/descartes-and-i.html">I am not my brain.</a> <br>
<br>
<a href="https://tsm2.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-many-worlds-interpretation-does-not.html">The many worlds interpretation does not work.</a> <br>
<br>
<a href="https://tsm2.blogspot.com/2009/01/the-measurement-problem.html">Newton's measurement problem</a> <br>
<br>
<a href="https://tsm2.blogspot.com/2011/04/the-not-so-equivalent-principle.html">The hammer and the feather.</a> <br>
<br>
<a href="https://tsm2.blogspot.com/2010/09/a-new-proof-for-existence-of-god.html">My ontological proof.</a> <br>
<br>
<a href="http://wbmh.blogspot.com/2012/05/thoughts-on-pentecost.html">Deep thoughts.</a> <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-64567617044639648612022-05-19T07:56:00.001-07:002022-05-19T07:58:22.852-07:00linksIn a series of four blog posts I explained my philosophy of "as if": <a href="http://wbmh.blogspot.com/2022/05/flaws-1.html">#1</a>, <a href="http://wbmh.blogspot.com/2022/05/reality-2.html">#2</a>, <a href="http://wbmh.blogspot.com/2022/05/physics-3.html">#3</a>, <a href="http://wbmh.blogspot.com/2022/05/free-will-4.html">#4</a> <br>
<br>
Donald Hoffman asks <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYp5XuGYqqY">if we see reality as it is</a> (spoiler: No) <br>
<br>
Veritasium about <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHIhgxav9LY">electricity</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTn6Ewhb27k">relativity</a>. <br>
<br>
Numberphile about and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXJ-zpJeY3E">with Terence Tao</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjVDqfUhXOY">Jim Simons</a>.<br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-56055242372184274782022-05-19T07:20:00.007-07:002022-05-19T07:25:47.567-07:00free will #4We use the idea of 'free will' in our daily lives, politics, the justice system, economics, religion etc. and also
the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory assumes an observer with 'free will'. <br>
However, it is not difficult to see that it is a flawed concept (left as an exercise to the reader).<br>
Perhaps Schopenhauer said it best: I can do whatever I want, but I cannot want what I want. <br>
But on second thought (!) it becomes clear that the terms "will", "want" and "I" are not even well defined. <br>
<br>
We do not have a theory that would explain our conscious (or unconscious) experiences, but we assume a direct connection between the activity of our brain(s) and our state of mind(s). However, this assumption also suffers from an obvious flaw: If our brains consist of molecules, electric fields etc. then physics should describe all of its properties. Obviously, physics does not contain anything that would describe our feelings or what has been called 'qualia'. Even if we would have a complete description of a dog's brain, we would not know what it feels like to be a dog ... this is of course known as the 'hard problem of consciousness' <br>
<br>
------ <br>
<br>
Immanuel Kant, concluded that we have to live "as if" we have free will. <br>
We all live "as if" life has meaning ... and I write "as if" somebody is reading this. <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-81194408963794053422022-05-18T08:58:00.005-07:002022-05-19T08:03:36.040-07:00physics #3The best theory physics has to offer is known as 'the standard model';
it consists of quantum field theories on a classical space-time geometry and
describes the physics of our world from elementary particles to galaxies.<br>
It is obviously very useful, but is also known to be seriously flawed:<br>
i) The quantum field theories become inconsistent at very high energies.<br>
ii) The combination of quantum theories with general relativity is only an
approximation, which breaks down in several cases, e.g. when the interaction between
quantum fields and space-time cannot be neglected.<br>
iii) The evolution of quantum fields leads to the superposition of macroscopic
objects (Schroedinger's cat) and therefore the superposition of different space-time geometries.
There is no agreement how to handle this and how to make sense of it, which is known as 'interpretation problem' or
'measurement problem'. <br>
<br>
There is some hope that one day we can find a better theory and there are hints
that a theory based on superstrings could solve the problems of 'the standard model'. <br>
However, we are far from being able to perform experiments that would help us figure this out ... <br>
<br>
The history of physics is a series of increasingly useful, but flawed theories.<br>
It began with the epicycles of Ptolemy, followed by the classical physics of Newton et al., and finally relativity and quantum theory,
culminating in 'the standard model'. <br>
It is quite amazing how much our descriptions of the world changed over time; I think our attempts to
resolve the flaws and inconsistencies of each era is mostly a struggle with our own biases ... <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-4024435964766359062022-05-17T07:37:00.002-07:002022-05-17T07:37:45.692-07:00reality #2I assume most people have a 'concept of reality' similar to mine: I live in a large universe, which contains galaxies, the solar system and our planet Earth. My body contains a human brain, which creates my conscious experiences based on sensory input from my eyes, ears etc. <br>
Of course, the universe evolves and physics describes the movements of the various parts of the universe, from atoms to the galaxies. <br>
<br>
This 'concept of reality' is very useful and therefore we acquire most of it already during childhood, but it is not difficult to see that it is deeply flawed.<br>
<br>
An important part of the concept is the idea of evolution and change, which means that we (have to) divide reality into the past, which no longer exists, the future, which does not exist yet and the present, an infinitesimal sliver of existence. <br>
I think Aristoteles was one of the first to articulate the paradox of time and the fact that only an infinitesimal part of reality actually exists.<br>
Augustinus wrote: "What then is time? If no one asks me, I know what it is. If I wish to explain it to him who asks, I do not know." <br>
His statement is of course equivalent to saying that 'time' and our 'concept of reality' is very useful, but actually flawed. <br>
<br>
However, we need to go a step further and consider an important insight from the theory of relativity, which provides us with this causal diagram: <br>
<br>
<img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzBHQlq-TeP94_DESzA-fdbh4sF0AdkU61K61iUaVC5Jb822e2VlY1pPQbHyEsCar5KyksAPu3PdLsyq89cFRB8pQdR34lZg_Z0Dh3niZB91ijb0mgqLAvL6rvtkubKmN5endbQRVm4k-MaUY1NzQOARrW9Yb27GDQhanZIUyzrz2opIHCad7YvID1/s1600/time.png"><br>
<br>
The theory tells us that the infinitesimal sliver of the present shrinks to a single point, the 'here and now' (somewhere at the center of the red ring), surrounded by past, future and space-like events. It is quite obvious that 'my brain' and not even a single atom would fit into this point. <br>
<br>
There is a big problem with our 'concept of reality' if none of it actually exists ... <br>
<br>
However, sometimes the assumption is made that all of space-time somehow exists and the diagram just displays the causal relationship of events, which are all real; I think that e.g. Hermann Minkowski believed that. <br>
Unfortunately, this point of view would be in conflict with quantum theory (more about that in a another blog post), but worse, it does not really solve the problem. <br>
In fact it is just a play with words: Of course I can imagine that future events already exist somehow, but this does not change the obvious fact that I have no direct experience of them. The same is true of events from the past and I cannot have direct experience of space-like events. <br>
So the 'here and now' is the only part of reality I can directly experience - but it is a single point only. <br>
And it is the point at which I realize that my 'concept of reality' is just as flawed as the 'concept of a refrigerator' my dog used.<br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-7084154356355092752022-05-16T08:55:00.004-07:002022-05-16T08:58:09.211-07:00flaws #1I believe that all our ideas, explanations and theories about the world are flawed, but some are quite useful.<br>
This blog post shall be the first in a series to provide examples and explain my views.<br>
Perhaps long term readers (if there are any) will notice that this is mostly a repeat of previous writings, but I thought
it might be interesting to explain them under one theme ...<br>
<br>
Many statisticians are familiar with the statement "all models are flawed, some are useful", <br>
and the point of this series is to extend this insight to all our theories, even very basic ideas. <br>
<br>
The philosopher Vaihinger, generalizing the philosophy of Immanuel Kant, was one of the first to embrace the insight that our explanations are
often inconsistent, but that they are nevertheless useful in many cases and we can treat them "as if" they are correct.<br>
I believe that it is necessary to extend this philosophy of "as if" to all our theories, explanations and ideas.<br>
Perhaps some view this as a pessimistic view of the world and our role in it, but I think it can be liberating too ... <br>
<br>
----- <br>
<br>
While I am writing this, I am thinking about my dog. <br>
Does a dog have 'theories' or 'explanations' for his experiences?
What 'ideas' does a dog have about the family he lives with or
the refrigerator with all this great food inside? <br>
Whatever his 'theories' are, I am sure that they are deeply flawed,
even if they are quite useful most of the time. <br>
And perhaps there is even a 'basic idea' similar to 'I bark, therefore I am'.<br>
But my dog would be wrong, because I no longer have a dog ... <br>
<br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-66275468919740446632022-01-18T03:39:00.000-08:002022-01-30T03:12:44.103-08:00<br>
<br>
<img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5z6hnC1gghD58A0RDUt6Iy7lwfF50Nh12AmqTbQIRE_P3yj3pfiimGdOXsCS0fwyS8cIOlMiOVfqd3e_NjgBDfEzSQKqWsIZQL8_VLYkMuM3q6fXH_4CPegmg-Qu-34Ie3siq9i4hd9s/s0/monkey.jpg"><br>
<br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-39159378846064643062022-01-12T06:10:00.000-08:002022-01-12T06:10:23.406-08:00biomassThe EU is very proud of its renewable energy projects and in Germany up to 40% of electricity is produced from renewables. But what they usually don’t mention is that more than half of that is from biomass and the majority of biomass is actually wood chips, i.e. wood pellets made from trees. In fact trees are chopped down in North and South America (i.e. Amazon) to produce those wood chips, which are then burned in former coal plants.<br>
Obviously, burning wood puts as much CO2 into the atmosphere as burning coal, but in addition large numbers of trees are chopped down. The idea that this is renewable energy is completely idiotic, it would take 20 – 50 years to regrow those trees.<br>
<br>
So far the US is not doing this on the same scale, until <a href="https://news.mongabay.com/2021/11/scientists-urge-biden-to-remove-logging-fossil-fuels-biomass-from-budget-bills/">Build Back Better</a>.<br>
Watch <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk11vI-7czE">Planet of the Humans</a> (fwd 52:15) to see who is behind those idiotic biomass projects in the US.<br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-82773252633423857642021-09-30T05:54:00.001-07:002021-09-30T05:54:33.732-07:001984
"I just finished re-reading Orwell's 1984, and if you haven't read it (or it's been a while), I can't recommend it enough.<br>
It has incredibly relevant and predictive elements that describe things we're starting to see in today's culture. Here are some examples ..." <br>
<a href="https://twitter.com/SarahADowney/status/1443031980447256581">Sarah A. Downey</a> <br>
<br>
The really scary part is that political polarization is so bad now that most people won't acknowledge the similarities ... <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-52090085002291126572021-08-15T01:42:00.000-07:002021-08-15T01:42:06.999-07:00then and now<br>
<img width="400" data-original-height="648" data-original-width="699" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2utKBoJS8BQ-mkduIOGoWxq1nYLcESBjttMux0fMvNB4zEf-x2frRzIIYiK8gxtsQHxgrp6JnzHuqTLxEjBmxwSe5qZmxrY0CwHseUc4jME5Gr_6YxnlRxZU4mxRVY9Ml4a75sCm20zI/s400/evac.png"><br>
<br>Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-14076897365837165132021-08-03T03:46:00.004-07:002021-08-03T03:48:20.975-07:00taking bids now ...<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Recently, artist <a href="https://news.artnet.com/art-world/italian-artist-auctioned-off-invisible-sculpture-18300-literally-made-nothing-1976181">Salvatore Garau</a> sold an 'immaterial sculpture' for 15,000 Euros (about 18,300 USD).<br>
After thinking long and hard, I made the difficult decision to auction off the above masterpiece from the artist formerly known as Daily Llama, which I obtained many years ago. I am taking bids now ... <br>
However, I reserve the right to sell the other masterpiece from the same artist as an NFT.<br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-13553819549633464192021-07-23T06:09:00.001-07:002021-07-23T06:12:18.673-07:00Apollo 11In 1969 'the Eagle has landed' on the Moon and a few days later the upper section of the lunar module brought Armstrong and Aldrin back to the command and service module, which finally brought the astronauts back to Earth. <br>
But what happened to the lunar module? Does it still circle the Moon five decades later? <br>
If you find this question interesting you may like <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBHbLV7xEhc">this YouTube video</a>. <br>
I think it is a great example of what dedicated space and science enthusiasts can do ... <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-26289982108114434542021-07-05T04:48:00.004-07:002021-07-05T04:51:40.735-07:00hyperpowerConsider the equation x<sup>x<sup>x<sup><sup>.<sup>.</sup></sup></sup></sup></sup> = 2. <br>
How do you find x in this iterated exponentiation, a.k.a hyperpower? <br>
The solution is quite easy: Consider the 'tower' above the bottom x, ie. x<sup>x<sup><sup>.<sup>.</sup></sup></sup></sup>.<br>
But it is the same as the original 'tower', so we know it is 2.<br>
Therefore x<sup>2</sup> = 2 and it follows that x = sqrt(2). <br>
<br>
But there is a problem if we now consider the equation x<sup>x<sup>x<sup><sup>.<sup>.</sup></sup></sup></sup></sup> = 4. <br>
Using the same argument we find x<sup>4</sup> = 4, with the same solution x = sqrt(2). <br>
Clearly there is a contradiction; it seems that we just proved that 2 = 4 if we equate the 'towers' of sqrt(2). <br>
<br>
I found this math exercise and the solution to the puzzle <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmP3sFIZ0XE">here</a>. <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-32365700394463902372021-06-25T11:37:00.000-07:002021-06-25T11:37:17.213-07:00failureWe tend to think about the history of science as a series of breakthroughs and successes, from Galileo to Einstein ... <br>
But mistakes and failure were always part of it, from Galileo's explanation of the tides to Einstein's unified field theories.<br>
In physics there were Blondlot's N-rays, planet Vulcan, Fermi's trans-uranium (he even got a Nobel for it [*]) and many more -
but every science has its fair share.<br>
<br>
A few years ago I read <a href="https://www.amazon.com/When-Science-Goes-Wrong-Discovery/dp/0452289327">When Science Goes Wong</a>, an entertaining little book about big
blunders of science. <br>
If there should ever be a new edition, the <a href="http://capitalistimperialistpig.blogspot.com/2021/06/origin-of-covid-lab-leak-theory.html">laboratory in Wuhan</a> should have its own chapter. And if <a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/fauci-wuhan-826k/">this story</a> will be made into a movie, Brad Pitt should play Dr. Fauci... <br>
<br>
<small>[*] Much later another Nobel prize winner became famous for his predictions, which turned out to be mostly wrong. But he was not really a scientist.</small><br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-73873301897162440682021-06-13T06:06:00.009-07:002021-06-13T06:35:52.006-07:00convivial links<a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.05029">Herve Zwirn</a> proposes 'convivial solipsism' as a plausible interpretation of quantum theory. <br>
<small>I think he should have used LaTeX instead of an 80s version of WordPerfect to format his paper...</small><br>
<br>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kC6j6dregRs">Michael Penn</a> looks at a geometric proof of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermat%27s_little_theorem">Fermat's little theorem</a>.<br>
<small>He has lots of interesting stuff on YouTube...</small><br>
<br>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbI31x3FpS0">Remy</a> explains the current economy and financial markets. <br>
<small>Very trading ... such amaze ...</small><br>
<br>
<a href="http://blog.gorozen.com/blog/exploring-lithium-ion-electric-vehicles-carbon-footprint">Goehring & Rozencwajg</a> estimate the carbon footprint of electric vehicles.<br>
<small>Obviously, their results contradict the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-020-0488-7">Exeter, Nijmegen & Cambridge paper</a>...</small><br>
<br>
<a href="https://greenwald.substack.com/p/yet-another-media-tale-trump-tear">Glenn Greenwald</a> writes about yet another corporate media tale.<br>
<small>I have my own theory why US media evolved from news reporting to political propaganda...</small> <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-4346778273521229842021-05-23T02:38:00.003-07:002021-05-23T02:55:43.076-07:00holesWe can collect light from a large but far away fusion reactor to generate electricity. <br>
A better way could be to use the heat from the nuclear reactor we inhabit. <br>
But in order to do this we would need to drill holes up to 10km deep through granite in many places
and this is a surprisingly difficult problem. <br>
Surprisingly, because we are able to dig tunnels through mountains and we can drill deep enough holes to produce oil and gas.<br>
However, existing rotary drilling technology is not sufficient to unlock geothermal energy in most places. <br>
<br>
A research project at the University of Leoben, Austria, investigates <a href="https://pure.unileoben.ac.at/portal/en/publications/rock-mechanical-investigations-related-to-the-development-of-an-alternative-drilling-technology(28ee3f09-7ff6-4b41-b9ca-62c217a80f10).html?customType=theses">an alternative drilling technology using water jets</a>, which looks promising. <br>
But perhaps it will take <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu-tzV0Mi_I">a billionaire and plasma jets</a> (YouTube, fwd to 43:30) to solve this problem: <a href="https://www.ipulse-group.com/about">link</a>.<br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-8614153798307801262021-05-15T03:52:00.010-07:002021-05-16T03:50:06.697-07:00learning and understanding<a href="http://capitalistimperialistpig.blogspot.com/2021/05/herd-immunity.html">CIP</a> asked "from what books did you learn QM, QFT, and GR?" <br>
I guess it depends on your definition of "learning" ... <br>
<br>
I read several pop.sci. books as a kid, including Misner, Thorne & Wheeler 8-) <br>
So I had some idea what physics was about before I went to university. <br>
<br>
But I would say I learned relativity from the books of two Austrian physicists, Sexl & Urbantke. <br>
I learned quantum theory from the Berkeley lectures and Landau & Lifshitz. <br>
And I learned QFT from xeroxed lecture notes and Ryder. <br>
<br>
Of course there are many good books available now and some really good online lectures, e.g. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyX8kQ-JzHI&list=PLQrxduI9Pds1fm91Dmn8x1lo-O_kpZGk8">Lenny Susskind</a>.<br>
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/General-Relativity-Robert-M-Wald/dp/0226870332">Wald</a>, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Field-Theory-Nutshell-nutshell/dp/0691140340">Zee</a> and <a href="https://www.amazon.com/First-Course-String-Theory-2nd/dp/0521880327">Zwiebach</a> are good books imho. <br>
<br>
But I should also mention that I learned a lot about quantum theory in a seminar with Anton Zeilinger, which included eye opening interference experiments with slow neutrons at a research reactor in Vienna. <br>
I think I really learned relativity during my master thesis, writing a program to numerically integrate the equations to simulate the gravitational collapse of a scalar field into a black hole. <br>
And I really learned something about QFT by writing programs to simulate lattice field theories; including <a href="http://wbmh42.000webhostapp.com/files/files.html">attempts to simulate quantum gravity</a>.
We did not really succeed, but I learned quite a lot along the way ... in some sense moving from <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Field-Theory-Dover-Physics/dp/0486445682">Itzykson & Zuber</a> to <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Statistical-Field-Theory-Renormalization-Mathematical/dp/0521408059">Itzykson</a> & <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Statistical-Cambridge-Monographs-Mathematical-Physics/dp/0521408067">Drouffe</a>. <br>
<br>
Last but not least, I should mention that our best theories contain several unsolved mysteries: naked singularities, closed timelike loops, the 'interpretation problem' of quantum theory (*), Landau poles, the 'direction of time' etc. <br>
They are ultimately incomplete and even inconsistent and therefore one might say that nobody really understands them ... <br>
<br>
<br>
(*)<small> Physicists cannot agree if quantum theory describes one or many worlds, while I prefer <a href="https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=5359#comment-1881926">a zero worlds interpretation</a>. </small><br>
<br>Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-79358852822856054132021-04-18T04:41:00.006-07:002021-04-27T02:29:07.880-07:00alien mathPerhaps we should think more about <a href="http://www.math.hawaii.edu/~jb/four.pdf">alien math</a> (pdf), since <i>they</i> seem to be everywhere now (see my <a href="https://wbmh.blogspot.com/2021/01/mostly-harmless.html">previous post</a>). <br>
<br>
Or perhaps we should just try to solve some weird math problems, like this one: <br>
"One day it started snowing in the morning at a heavy and steady rate. <br>
A snowplow started out at noon, going 2 miles in the first hour and 1 mile in the second hour." <br>
What time did it start snowing?" <br>
<br>
You should assume that the snowplow's speed is inversely proportional to the height of snow.<br>
<br>
You can find the solution <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKtooOjgINY">here</a> and I post this problem and link mostly for Lee,
who likes math puzzles.<br>
I think MindYourDecisions is a great source ... <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-71851351148915478382021-01-10T04:29:00.005-08:002021-01-10T05:06:31.662-08:00mostly harmlessUnfortunately, free speech on US social media officially ended yesterday; <br>
the good people will no longer have to endure the opinions of those other 74 million. <br>
<nr>
Consequently, my own small contributions on US controlled websites shall remain mostly harmless ... <br>
<br>
------ <br>
<br>
Avi Loeb is publishing <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial:_The_First_Sign_of_Intelligent_Life_Beyond_Earth">a book about Oumuamua</a>, arguing that it is the object of an alien civilization.<br>
Recently, SETI picked up <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/astronomers-discover-mysterious-radio-signal-proxima-centauri-180976602/">a mysterious signal from Proxima Centauri</a> and several <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_works_similar_to_the_2020_Utah_monolith">strange monoliths</a> appeared in different places. <br>
Naturally, I wonder what to make of all those <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_UFO_videos">reports about UFOs</a> and alien artifacts popping up now. <br>
<br>
Perhaps they just don't want to miss the series finale of <i>Earth, planet of the crazy apes</i> ... <br>
<br>
Elon Musk thinks that <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1347126794172948483">the most entertaining outcome is the most likely</a> - as seen from their perspective, not ours, unfortunately.<br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com14tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-71893600718525417252020-11-08T03:56:00.004-08:002020-11-08T03:59:59.746-08:00four seasons<br>
<img src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnX3Pos4FyaDlTmp3Uh6rl-JV8vNJtBkD5Z6uGNuiilZm2952mGBi4bUsE-7HQkTriCH8U0tQxcao8VrhiYcr7CXfZXIvvFvJY8A9djp7kIkxq-D6r8r5EVsuBuKrzleVjKyrp1ar5vuU/s0/maga.jpg"><br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-13136804774075517382020-11-02T01:01:00.006-08:002020-11-02T01:07:10.547-08:00independenceScott writes about <a href="https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=4974">the Continuum Hypothesis</a> , a topic I find fascinating, although I never really understood it (I belong to his target audience of complete idiots).<br>
But he has a talent to explain difficult proofs in a way that makes me believe I understand them and, as I get older, this is all I really need. <br>
Of course, I had to ask <a href="https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=4974#comment-1863648">a silly question</a>, but he <a href="https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=4974#comment-1863717">did not really bite</a> ... <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-31602564173194188102020-10-16T02:43:00.001-07:002020-10-16T02:56:14.599-07:00predictions ..." I will predict, though, that before December 31, 2020, fleets of driverless taxis will be on the road in more than ten cities." <br>
<a href="http://capitalistimperialistpig.blogspot.com/2018/12/auto-autos.html">CIP</a><br>
<br>
I was reminded of this prediction when Elon Musk announced recently for the n-th time that <a href="https://thenextweb.com/shift/2020/08/06/why-elon-musk-is-wrong-about-level-5-self-driving-cars-syndication/">very soon his cars will be fully autonomous</a>. <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-87430739505107883382020-08-03T11:20:00.000-07:002020-08-12T03:48:33.945-07:00gone fishing<img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKOHoQ9Fg0MqPXpycdZ9Wp_YGHs_0Enghst8_nWXgAaD1Kmo1qws5pubEOouJHKkS9fzNZUIqj1sqYaUrO-MKEfxy674ZE4W9OrUO3Iu1g7acVBh2JW0wzVyrt1GvZco18ySUvQuLoJgc/s1600/gone_fishing.jpg" data-original-width="504" data-original-height="801"><br>
<br>
<small>Paul Klee: <a href="https://www.moma.org/collection/works/33587">Der Angler</a></small><br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-544041532485510036.post-69807583995357347242020-07-06T02:45:00.005-07:002020-07-06T02:54:37.911-07:00the fog and the princesRecently, I watched two documentaries that I found quite interesting.<br>
<br>
<a href="https://documentaryheaven.com/the-fog-of-war/">The Fog of War</a> tells the story of Robert McNamara, in particular his experience of the 'cold war' and the Vietnam war; I think every politician should be required to watch it.<br>
It provides several examples of smart men (and Robert McNamara was certainly very intelligent) doing really stupid things ... <br>
<br>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-IZZxyb1GI">Princes of the Yen</a> documents the actions of the Bank of Japan after WW2, until and after the bubble burst in 1990.<br> I always feel that I don't know enough about Asia and Japan in particular,
however, I disagree with the extrapolations at the end of the documentary; I do not understand central banks as omnipotent manipulators of the world economy.<br>
Perhaps another documentary should be made about the Federal Reserve, from Alan Greenspan to Jay Powell. <br>
I already have a title: "Clowns of the Dollar". <br>
<br>
Wolfganghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07086991199438418163noreply@blogger.com3