Don't Spend Too Much Studying Quantum Mechanics | Tony Leggett at The UIUC Talkshow
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 เม.ย. 2023
- UIUC Talkshow Full Episode: • Tony Leggett: Nobel Pr...
GUEST BIO:
Tony Leggett is a Nobel Prize-winning physicist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Subscribe to The UIUC Talkshow Main Channel ( / @uiuctalkshow )
SOCIAL:
Instagram: / uiuctalkshow
Twitter: / uiuctalkshow
TikTok: / uiuctalkshow
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/3ezoc4x...
Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Full episodes playlist: • Episodes
Clips channel: / @uiuctalkshowclips
What is the UIUC Talkshow?
Our goal with this show is to introduce you to the most interesting people with the most interesting ideas from the UIUC campus.
Learn more about Juan David & Aaryaman:
Aaryaman
/ aaryaman-patel-779437205
Juan David
Website: www.juandavidcampolargo.com/
Twitter: / jdcampolargo
LinkedIn: / jdcampolargo
Instagram: / jdcampolargo
I totally agree. QM is an information theory that uses linear algebra to model physical systems. It works on a high level where it accurately predicts the outcome of many experiments or events in a statistical framework It fails to explain what is really going on. This leads to many equivalent and non testable interpretations. We need a completely new conceptual framework that invokes new metaphysics. We have hit a limit and must start over. Lee Smolin is on the right track. Go back to the Greeks.
Of course given we haven’t found such an experiment it’s also possible that there is no such experiment which shows quantum mechanics breaks down and efforts to find such an experiment (if that is the sole purpose of those efforts) may also be in vein.
It is silly to look for QM from LHC. The point is scaling up from few atoms to many atoms, what to observe in an ideal experiment and how to set the ideal experiment.
Any computer simulation of quantum mechanics needs to deal with the Courant-Friedrichs-Levy condition and the prospect of the simulation needing to run in exponential time. We may come up with a bright idea but it is likely to fail on these points. My own bright idea is adding tachyonic Brownian motion to a simulation of an alpha particle hitting two molecules of nitrogen tri-iodide.
0:54 not a good argument 😂 You could say that about anything, in 500 years time nobody's going to be doing anything that we're doing now!
How about not 200 years time but 2 years time? 1) Quantum particles have no inherent properties.
2) They are categorized by their possible interactions with other particles.The number of particles is the number of axis. 3D (hence gravity) -> Sphetical harmonics & Laguerre polynomials -> whole periodic table etc etc. 3) That's it