Posted on 09/12/2019 9:05:16 AM PDT by C19fan
One of the most radical and important ideas in the history of physics came from an unknown graduate student who wrote only one paper, got into arguments with physicists across the Atlantic as well as his own advisor, and left academia after graduating without even applying for a job as a professor. Hugh Everett’s story is one of many fascinating tales that add up to the astonishing history of quantum mechanics, the most fundamental physical theory we know of.
Everett’s work happened at Princeton in the 1950s, under the mentorship of John Archibald Wheeler, who in turn had been mentored by Niels Bohr, the godfather of quantum mechanics. More than 20 years earlier, Bohr and his compatriots had established what came to be called the ‘Copenhagen Interpretation’ of quantum theory. It was never a satisfying set of ideas, but Bohr’s personal charisma and the desire on the part of scientists to get on with the fun of understanding atoms and particles quickly established Copenhagen as the only way for right-thinking physicists to understand quantum theory.
(Excerpt) Read more at aeon.co ...
Exactly and in the end I think there is something ridiculous about an entirely new universe being created every single time anything happens.
Then again what the heck do I know?
isn’t Everett’s description a description of M-theory?
No clue but Everett’s idea predates the M-theory description of String Theory by decades.
According to Everett there is a Universe in which you not only know but are certain.
Maybe his work is where the ideas came from?
I think all of this indicates that we have a lot to learn about quantum physics.
Those is are some portions of theoretical physics that ought to be recognized as more in the area of philosophy than science.
As they so extremely seldom have any practical application to life or living, it is totally fine that most folks either know nothing of them or ignore them.
if “God” is the “observer” of the “universe”.....doesn’t that sort of contain the universe, as it were, in sort of a closed system?
I get the idea of goose/gander (what applies to micro must apply to macro). But if there is an Ideal Observer big enough to observe the whole thing....because He created it...then it would seem that His “observations” are the only ones that matter.....
Berkeley said this a long time ago. (I’ve always found Berkeley not only correct, but sort of unremarkable......)
Yawn. Theology masquerading as science.
“...but Bohr’s personal charisma and the desire on the part of scientists to get on with the fun of understanding atoms and particles quickly established Copenhagen as the only way for right-thinking physicists to understand quantum theory.”
I know nothing about quantum mechanics but I do know once scientist all agree on one thing being right and any other opinion is wrong...they stopped being scientist and have become priest.
There is a universe where I am the Queen of England, and you are a chocolate eclair.
Science!
Eventually, even physicists who like the ManyyWorlds theory came to admit that it is a dead-end because it is untestable and does not generate any new insights.
True!
However Quantum Mechanics has worked remarkably well in its predictions, has been verified experimentally up to 12 - 14 decimal places. I am sure there is a brick wall coming, there always is. Then a new theory will be worked out and QM will subsumed into it.
Exactly.
I have a big problem with science accepting "dark energy" and "string theory" and "many worlds" and "37 dimensions" and all sorts of other untestable things just because they provide a convenient theoretical basis to explain things which are otherwise unexplainable.
If I say "God created the universe" a lot of scientists would scoff at such an unscientific notion. It's not science!!!! It's theology!!!
Well, a lot of fairly mainstream science is really theology. They just oppose Christianity -- as theology goes, it's not their cup of tea,
In the Unfortunate Feline experiment, a cat is threatened with loss of its 9th life. Dumb experiment, and I don’t accept the conclusion that the “cat is neither alive nor dead until you open the box.” Sorry. They failed with that one.
Other than that, I couldn’t care less if particles at the subatomic level don’t act in a deterministic way.
A universe WITHOUT a cat?
I wonder sometimes if Rick Sanchez from the hit cartoon 'Rick and Morty' is based on Hugh Everett . Hugh was so clueless that when his son committed suicide he said he had no idea his son was so sad.
Our universe is just one of many and it exists in a single red corpuscle of a sleeping giant...
AND the number of giants is GIGANTIC !
LOL.....
“Yawn. Theology masquerading as science.
Exactly.
I have a big problem with science accepting “dark energy” and “string theory” and “many worlds” and “37 dimensions” and all sorts of other untestable things just because they provide a convenient theoretical basis to explain things which are otherwise unexplainable.
If I say “God created the universe” a lot of scientists would scoff at such an unscientific notion. It’s not science!!!! It’s theology!!!
Well, a lot of fairly mainstream science is really theology. They just oppose Christianity — as theology goes, it’s not their cup of tea, “
I agree, the other side of this is any opposition to current dogma/theory threatens their tenure and or PHD status... so is it science or a religion?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.