Members banned from this thread: BRUTALITOPS, Minister of Truth, The Anonymous, cancel2 2022, PostmodernProphet, Legion, Truth Detector, Niche Political Commentor, Superfreak, volsrock, Yurt, Lord Yurt, OG Yurt, Yakuda, ParachuteAdams and jakemax


Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 156

Thread: Einstein vs. Bohr

  1. #16 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,918
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BidenPresident View Post
    How does that violate Newton?
    I never said it violate Newton's laws or model. I said BOTH are correct AT THE SAME TIME.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to AProudLefty For This Post:

    Mott the Hoople (08-04-2021)

  3. #17 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    53,142
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 15,989 Times in 11,516 Posts
    Groans
    873
    Groaned 2,459 Times in 2,200 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    I never said it violate Newton's laws or model. I said BOTH are correct AT THE SAME TIME.
    fine

  4. #18 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,918
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BidenPresident View Post
    fine
    The question is: how can both models be correct at the same time?

    Hence where Godel's incompleteness theorem comes in. It is unsolvable IN THIS universe.

  5. #19 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,918
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    The only thing Einstein was correct in unifying both models/theories was the speed of light.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to AProudLefty For This Post:

    Mott the Hoople (08-04-2021)

  7. #20 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    57,777
    Thanks
    35,457
    Thanked 50,276 Times in 27,089 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,975 Times in 2,692 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Two models are correct. The Newtonian model and QM.

    As I have stated, the Godel's Incompleteness Theorem states that it cannot be solved in this universe.
    Right.
    I need to research Godel more.

    Einstein accepted QM. In a sense, he was one of the founders of QM, going back to his 1905 paper on the photoelectric effect.

    What Einstein hated was Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation of QM. Einstein was a scientific realist who could not abide by the Bohr's instrumentalist approach to the quantum wave function collapse. Einstein at heart believed in a deterministic universe, and he just thought Bohr's probabilistic interpretation of QM must be missing some fundamental variables or insights needed to make the theory compete.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    AProudLefty (07-27-2021)

  9. #21 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,918
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    Right.
    I need to research Godel more.

    Einstein accepted QM. In a sense, he was one of the founders of QM, going back to his 1905 paper on the photoelectric effect.

    What Einstein hated was Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation of QM. Einstein was a scientific realist who could not abide by the Bohr's instrumentalist approach to the quantum wave function collapse. Einstein at heart believed in a deterministic universe, and he just thought Bohr's probabilistic interpretation of QM must be missing some fundamental variables or insights needed to make the theory compete.
    This is Godel and Einstein bullshitting around with each other.



    https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...time-bandits-2

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to AProudLefty For This Post:

    Cypress (07-27-2021)

  11. #22 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,918
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    As another member of the institute, the physicist Freeman Dyson, observed, “Gödel was . . . the only one of our colleagues who walked and talked on equal terms with Einstein.” But if Einstein and Gödel seemed to exist on a higher plane than the rest of humanity, it was also true that they had become, in Einstein’s words, “museum pieces.” Einstein never accepted the quantum theory of Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg. Gödel believed that mathematical abstractions were every bit as real as tables and chairs, a view that philosophers had come to regard as laughably naďve. Both Gödel and Einstein insisted that the world is independent of our minds, yet rationally organized and open to human understanding. United by a shared sense of intellectual isolation, they found solace in their companionship. “They didn’t want to speak to anybody else,” another member of the institute said. “They only wanted to speak to each other.”


    Warning: watching this video will cause a collapse of a black hole due to combined IQs.


  12. #23 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,918
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Here is Einstein walking like a boss. Einstein and Godel were good friends and they feel comfortable with each other. And they hated Bohr.

    But Godel did keep Einstein on the level. It makes sense that it is a unsolvable problem.


  13. #24 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    57,777
    Thanks
    35,457
    Thanked 50,276 Times in 27,089 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,975 Times in 2,692 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    As another member of the institute, the physicist Freeman Dyson, observed, “Gödel was . . . the only one of our colleagues who walked and talked on equal terms with Einstein.” But if Einstein and Gödel seemed to exist on a higher plane than the rest of humanity, it was also true that they had become, in Einstein’s words, “museum pieces.” Einstein never accepted the quantum theory of Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg. Gödel believed that mathematical abstractions were every bit as real as tables and chairs, a view that philosophers had come to regard as laughably naďve. Both Gödel and Einstein insisted that the world is independent of our minds, yet rationally organized and open to human understanding. United by a shared sense of intellectual isolation, they found solace in their companionship. “They didn’t want to speak to anybody else,” another member of the institute said. “They only wanted to speak to each other.”


    Warning: watching this video will cause a collapse of a black hole due to combined IQs.

    I think the scientific paradigm is shifting a little away from Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation of QM, back towards the scientific realism Einstein wanted. The question is if the Quantum wave function collapse really dependent on the subjective knowledge of the observer? Or is there something deterministic and objectively real there, per the MWI interpretation.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    AProudLefty (07-27-2021)

  15. #25 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,918
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    I think the scientific paradigm is shifting a little away from Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation of QM, back towards the scientific realism Einstein wanted. The question is if the Quantum wave function collapse really dependent on the subjective knowledge of the observer? Or is there something deterministic and objectively real there, per the MWI interpretation.
    Hence the objective/subjective problem going all the way back to Aristotle and some other Greek philosophers.

    Fun fact: one of those Greek philosophers brought up the idea of atoms.

    Why those ideas didn't pick up sooner is another topic.

  16. #26 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    53,142
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 15,989 Times in 11,516 Posts
    Groans
    873
    Groaned 2,459 Times in 2,200 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Hence the objective/subjective problem going all the way back to Aristotle and some other Greek philosophers.

    Fun fact: one of those Greek philosophers brought up the idea of atoms.

    Why those ideas didn't pick up sooner is another topic.
    Democrates.

  17. #27 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,918
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BidenPresident View Post
    Democrates.
    Oh yes yes that's him. Thank you. Just strange that those people had ideas and they never picked them up.


  18. #28 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    53,142
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 15,989 Times in 11,516 Posts
    Groans
    873
    Groaned 2,459 Times in 2,200 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Oh yes yes that's him. Thank you. Just strange that those people had ideas and they never picked them up.


    Not sure what you mean. Lucretius had an atomic theory.

  19. #29 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    86,918
    Thanks
    35,051
    Thanked 21,761 Times in 17,091 Posts
    Groans
    985
    Groaned 2,342 Times in 2,261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BidenPresident View Post
    Not sure what you mean. Lucretius had an atomic theory.
    Ancient Atomism
    First published Tue Aug 23, 2005; substantive revision Thu Dec 15, 2016
    A number of important theorists in ancient Greek natural philosophy held that the universe is composed of physical ‘atoms’, literally ‘uncuttables’. Some of these figures are treated in more depth in other articles in this encyclopedia: the reader is encouraged to consult individual entries on Leucippus, Democritus, Epicurus and Lucretius. These philosophers developed a systematic and comprehensive natural philosophy accounting for the origins of everything from the interaction of indivisible bodies, as these atoms—which have only a few intrinsic properties like size and shape—strike against one another, rebound and interlock in an infinite void.


    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atomism-ancient/

  20. #30 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    53,142
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 15,989 Times in 11,516 Posts
    Groans
    873
    Groaned 2,459 Times in 2,200 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Ancient Atomism
    First published Tue Aug 23, 2005; substantive revision Thu Dec 15, 2016
    A number of important theorists in ancient Greek natural philosophy held that the universe is composed of physical ‘atoms’, literally ‘uncuttables’. Some of these figures are treated in more depth in other articles in this encyclopedia: the reader is encouraged to consult individual entries on Leucippus, Democritus, Epicurus and Lucretius. These philosophers developed a systematic and comprehensive natural philosophy accounting for the origins of everything from the interaction of indivisible bodies, as these atoms—which have only a few intrinsic properties like size and shape—strike against one another, rebound and interlock in an infinite void.


    https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atomism-ancient/

    Yes. I knew that. What is your point?

Similar Threads

  1. Niels Bohr vs. Erwin Schroedinger
    By Cypress in forum Religion, Philosophy, and Ethics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-18-2021, 09:48 AM
  2. Einstein
    By katzgar in forum Religion, Philosophy, and Ethics
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 12-01-2020, 04:53 PM
  3. Einstein
    By katzgar in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-01-2020, 06:29 AM
  4. Einstein
    By Guno צְבִי in forum Religion, Philosophy, and Ethics
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 05-31-2018, 11:02 AM
  5. Einstein still right
    By Phantasmal in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-25-2012, 12:41 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •