1
New Theories / Re: Could quantum mechanics be wrong?
« on: Today at 02:32:03 »Schroedinger, with a dash of Pauli.How do they tell you that monoatomic and triatomic hydrogen are unstable?
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Schroedinger, with a dash of Pauli.How do they tell you that monoatomic and triatomic hydrogen are unstable?
I don't think that language is a major obstacle in understanding scientific explanations. Especially when online translators are freely available.This lecture explicitly show double slit experiment as an example of interference, and single slit experiment for diffraction.What would you expect from a guy who can't spell diffraction?
"Sufficiently" is what it's all about. See Heisenberg!The universe could be infinite, both in space and time. Simulating it with infinite precision and accuracy would need infinite computational resources, which is not practical.
In this video, I describe the process of Fraunhofer diffraction (also known as far-field diffraction) in terms of the Fourier Transform and Fourier Optics. I go over the assumptions that underlie Fraunhoffer diffraction (both the paraxial approximation and the small-aperture approximation), and give the mathematical form that it takes.
This is part of my graduate series on optoelectronics / photonics, and is based primarily on Coldren's book on Lasers as well as graduate-level coursework I have taken in the EECS department at UC Berkeley.
In this video, I go over one-dimensional single-slit Fraunhofer diffraction. I walk through the mathematics using the Fourier Transform to calculate the intensity at a screen a distance d away, as a function of the screen coordinates.You can have a perfectly valid mathematical model. But to be useful, it should reproduce observed experimental results without excessive ad hoc assumptions.
It's a false dichotomy. It can be sufficiently accurate, precise, and updated in certain practical limits. The remaining inaccuracies can be assigned to random factors with computable probabilitas.The universe is a dynamic system, thus an accurate virtual universe must also be dynamic, i.e. change with time to reflect the real universe.Including itself.
Fact is that any mapping is necessarily incomplete. A database can be accurate or up to date, but not both.
Evolution requires at least 3 ingredients: random change, replication (i.e. non-random change), and natural selection. It directs the path to the existence of particular structures of matter in the future.This generalized anthropic principle has already at work even before life emerged. By simply being a replicator, a physical/chemical structure increases the chance of its existence, as long as its environment can provide the ingredients. Genetics and memetics are additional layers of indirection that can improve the effectiveness of non-random changes to preserve some particular structures.
More conscious entities depend on more non-random changes, and depend on less random changes.
By merely being cheaper, solar panels are beneficial even when the power they produce isn't used.Just let them use alternative energy sourcessources, or simply move elsewhere.Circular argument - we were discussing the use of solar panels as construction materials.
The light was trying to travel towards the place you measure distance from, or away from that place. For an expanding space, this matters.In an expanding space, everything that's stationary in the space-time continuum always moves away from one another over time.
However when it comes to physics, we have to start somewhere, and if we define c as constant we can derive the equations that seem to predict pretty much everything that happens in the universe, to an acceptable degree of precision.If the word "define" is replaced by "insist", would the statement become false?
Light emitted from the creation of the hydrogen in your body was emitted near 'here' at the recombination event 13.8 billion years ago and is currently ~45 GLR away, meaning it has averaged a velocity of over 3c. Meanwhile, the CMB light that we detect here today was emitted 13.8 billion years ago from material that was at a proper distance that was much closer then than where Andromeda is now. which is an average velocity of around 0.0001cWhat causes the asymmetrical difference? It speeds up in one case, while slows down in the other case?
We don't insist, we define c to be a constant. Then we can measure everything else.What is the difference?
This video kicks off the evolution series by going broad and thinking about why things - including non-living things - exist at all. The first in a series on evolution.Evolution requires at least 3 ingredients: random change, replication (i.e. non-random change), and natural selection. It directs the path to the existence of particular structures of matter in the future.
This video follows the evolution of intelligence, from the simple nerve nets to the complex neural networks in humans that enable consciousness, learning, and imagination.
00:00 - Introduction
01:13 - nerve nets
01:29 - steering
02:20 - reinforcement learning
06:23 - mental simulation
08:50 - 3rd person simulation
11:50 - language
Just let them use alternative energy sourcessources, or simply move elsewhere.Let's not forget about Pareto principle. 80% of output is determined by 20% of input. How many people lives in polar regions, compared to elsewhere?But the further you live from the equator, the greater your annual energy consumption. It's a pretty continuous function.
Communist dictators and the heads of theocracies do not need to be popular as long as they pay the army, secret police, or whoever they use to suppress dissent. And since the said enforcers also collect the taxes, there is no theoretical limit to their reign.At least they are popular among the army and secret police.
So far, the only relevant AI output you have quoted in this thread was wrong.Is this statement by Gemini wrong?
No, there isn't a single equation in classical chemistry that predicts exactly how many atoms will bond together to form a molecule like H2.What's the correct equation?