tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.comments2014-07-14T03:47:04.307+02:00atdotdeRobert Hellinghttps://plus.google.com/118220336522940810893noreply@blogger.comBlogger476125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-54916492866818013672014-07-14T03:47:04.307+02:002014-07-14T03:47:04.307+02:00Great goods from you I actually like what you'...Great goods from you I actually like what you've acquired here can’t wait to read far more from you. <br /><br />www.triciajoy.comlesannahttp://www.triciajoy.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-33225333331526782782014-06-26T08:29:03.472+02:002014-06-26T08:29:03.472+02:00No matter how far a person can go the horizon is s...No matter how far a person can go the <a href="http://www.mocsbar.com/pkk/horizon" rel="nofollow">horizon</a> is still way beyond you. See the below for more info. <br /><br />#horizon <br />www.mocsbar.comlee woohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07720547920308398294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-59395965760989120742014-04-15T13:33:42.632+02:002014-04-15T13:33:42.632+02:00"The 't Hooft limit leads to important si..."The 't Hooft limit leads to important simplifications in perturbative QFT ..." Does 't Hooft determinism lead to even more important simplifications?<br />"We claim that our observations add a new twist to discussions concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics, which we call the cellular automaton (CA) interpretation.” — G. 't Hooft<br /><a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.3612" rel="nofollow">"Discreteness and Determinism in Superstrings", 2012 by Gerard 't Hooft</a><br /><a href="http://vixra.org/abs/1203.0036" rel="nofollow">Does the Fernández-Rañada-Milgrom Effect Explain the Flyby Anomaly?</a>David Brownhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10537922851243581921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-50463448846459623782014-02-04T14:01:30.934+01:002014-02-04T14:01:30.934+01:00Actually you can think of planar Yang-Mills in exa...Actually you can think of planar Yang-Mills in exactly the way you described above, i.e. at infinite N the path integral is exactly determined by a single saddle point, which is given by a set of 4 infinity by infinity matrices, which are usually dubbed master field, however as far as I can tell nobody has so far managed to make any use of that or determine any properties of these.<br />The original source for this are some old lecture notes by Witten called "The 1 / N Expansion In Atomic And Particle Physics" , which you can find here:<br />http://www-lib.kek.jp/cgi-bin/img_index?8002242<br /><br />Is this what you were looking for?Alexanderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07235510573788847842noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-77536191307381817382014-02-03T13:21:47.869+01:002014-02-03T13:21:47.869+01:00I finally got hold of the Floratos etal paper. Th...I finally got hold of the Floratos etal paper. They build on Jens Hoppe's way of viewing area preserving diffeos of a membrane (they write S^2 but in fact any two dimensional surface will do) as some N->infinity limit of SU(N). They argue that that this allows them to interpret the gauge indices as fourier decomposition of two additional coordinates. I don't see that this would in any way be related to planarity of feynman diagrams.Robert Hellinghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06634377111195468947noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-2335192720349748402014-01-30T17:04:42.803+01:002014-01-30T17:04:42.803+01:00You can compute correlation functions in the path ...You can compute correlation functions in the path integral formalism. There you do have a notion of locality. So you could characterize entanglement by studying how these correlation functions behave. And you do have a notion of non-classical behavior, since you can compute these correlation functions with the ``classical'' measure or by taking the corrections into account-perturbatively (e.g. loop expansion) or non-perturbatively (e.g. lattice regularization).Stam Nicolishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06379940898372024773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-38939705189146581022014-01-30T16:42:20.799+01:002014-01-30T16:42:20.799+01:00Of course they don't factorise but that you al...Of course they don't factorise but that you already have for correlations (which can be classical). I am asking about entanglement which manifests itself in violations of inequalities that are obeyed classically.Robert Hellinghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06634377111195468947noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-68898293981281786192014-01-30T14:45:53.831+01:002014-01-30T14:45:53.831+01:00Two interacting particles 1,2 are in general entan...Two interacting particles 1,2 are in general entangled - you see this in the path integral Z as the fact that it does not factorize as Z1*Z2.<br />But I guess I am missing the point of your question...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-38228195388444995642014-01-29T21:29:15.383+01:002014-01-29T21:29:15.383+01:00Regarding the first topic:
1/N plays the role of...Regarding the first topic: <br /><br />1/N plays the role of ``Planck's constant'', i.e. it's the quantization parameter. So the limit N->oo is the semi-classical limit.<br /><br />Maybe this <br /><br />E. G. Floratos, J. Iliopoulos and G. Tiktopoulos,<br /> ``A NOTE ON SU(infinity) CLASSICAL YANG-MILLS THEORY,''<br /> Phys. Lett. B217 (1989) 285<br /><br />would be relevant?Stam Nicolishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06379940898372024773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-8196543813296465572013-12-25T10:17:20.793+01:002013-12-25T10:17:20.793+01:00This is really difficult to learn and study. After...This is really difficult to learn and study. After reading so many blog posts I am still not clear with the complete idea behind it. <br /><a href="http://www.arx.com" rel="nofollow">e signatures</a>Jimmy Jarredhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08668675991465015224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-86079624074856066532012-11-06T19:49:34.690+01:002012-11-06T19:49:34.690+01:00Actually i found a chinesse paper...that says &quo...Actually i found a chinesse paper...that says "does the creation operator possess eigenvenctors?...i've read it...and...the a^+ have non zero eigenvectors...i followed the calculations...and...i think they are well done... days ago i found a paper about BEC and the eigenvectors of creation operator were included in the discussion...the idea was..if you have a limit (upper) in your system...you cant creat more states...so (a^+)|z >=0...the same idea to consider the coherent states for the "destruction" operator...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-40387936700503479812012-11-06T15:03:05.044+01:002012-11-06T15:03:05.044+01:00Hi Robert,
I think you are reading too much into ...Hi Robert,<br /><br />I think you are reading too much into this discussion. It gets easier to understand if you just consider what they set out to do: take the four postulates and see if they are consistent. There's a long discussion one can have as to whether one really wants or needs a unitary S-matrix, but that's really not part of the argument. I think in a nutshell the issue is the following: If you take the usual Hawking computation with local effective field theory in the black hole background, you get a mixed state at I^+. If you don't want a mixed state but you still want to hold on to the statistical interpretation of the BH entropy, you have to do something. The question is, can you do what it takes without "drama" at the horizon and without doing anything implausible to local field theory. The firewall argument says basically, no, you can't. If, that is, you believe in the postulates to begin with. Best,<br /><br />B.Beehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-83696703007372307712012-10-03T08:44:37.894+02:002012-10-03T08:44:37.894+02:00I am so glad to see this. Meat definitely needs to...I am so glad to see this. Meat definitely needs to be cooked to a certain point. This is not good for you when it is not cooked to this point.Bloody Ragehttp://www.hannytech.com/onlinegames/bloody-rage.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-5675527601568261972012-07-29T17:32:12.045+02:002012-07-29T17:32:12.045+02:00Nor the relativistic case, nor QFT is in itself a ...Nor the relativistic case, nor QFT is in itself a problem for Bohmian mechanics, for a scalar field this has been done already in the original paper. Gauge fields and fermion fields are a little bit more problematic, but solutions already have been proposed. (My proposal to handle them is part of arXiv:0908.0591, even if Bohm isn't mentioned there, fermions and gauge fields appear there as effective fields only.)<br /><br />What we are, and, that means, also the states of our minds if we observe something, are described in BM by the position Q, and not the wave function. So, what we measure is always some Q, usually of some macroscopic pointer.Schmelzerhttp://ilja-schmelzer.denoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-33767375626210364432012-06-15T09:13:15.064+02:002012-06-15T09:13:15.064+02:00I am a physics student and I am particular interes...I am a physics student and I am particular interested in string theory and postmodern physics, I would like to share some ideas with you through my my blog, as a student I want to understand as much as possible, here is my link:<br /><br />sgoomanee.blogspot.com<br />(the title is :physics and the human mind) , thankssalvish goomaneehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13393206981760783467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-49170085324847582492012-03-15T21:11:12.253+01:002012-03-15T21:11:12.253+01:00I would like to thank you for the efforts you have...I would like to thank you for the <a href="https://bitjack21.com" rel="nofollow">efforts</a> you have put in writing this blog. I’m hoping <br />the same high-grade web site post from you in the future also. Actually your <br />creative writing abilities has encouraged me to get my own web site going now. <br />Really blogging is spreading its wings and growing fast. Your write up is a great example.bitjack21.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15352363282748671665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-45001315881862788832011-12-31T03:22:13.544+01:002011-12-31T03:22:13.544+01:00Your $\latex$ doesn't seem to workYour $\latex$ doesn't seem to workAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-16093072289968555772011-12-01T06:46:25.429+01:002011-12-01T06:46:25.429+01:00Well done, both of you.Well done, both of you.Steven Colyerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10435759210177642257noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-27403489942053547832011-11-30T10:42:41.837+01:002011-11-30T10:42:41.837+01:00Hi Robert,
Thanks for the comments that are very ...Hi Robert,<br /><br />Thanks for the comments that are very to the point. It is of course entirely correct what you say, I was oversimplifying things considerably. I originally had some more slides on other natural systems (I passionately hate the G=1 choice) but took them out just to keep it short. As I mentioned in my blogpost, I have a tendency to just drop all cs and hbars and noticed that I left some readers confused which is what the video was addressed at. I like your explanation about the interpretation of laws. Best,<br /><br />B.Beehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06151209308084588985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-1641428262801341962011-08-26T03:43:27.183+02:002011-08-26T03:43:27.183+02:00Interesting. But you argument crucially relies on...Interesting. But you argument crucially relies on the assumption that the numbers were picked according to some probability measure with finite expectation value -- why would that be true?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-30753045971052089492011-08-19T11:05:05.738+02:002011-08-19T11:05:05.738+02:00Really-Really This is nice blog till i have been v...Really-Really This is nice blog till i have been visited. Innocent photos are wonderful. I think this is the blog which i was search before. it so informative and i enjoyed very much from it . so thanks you very much to created such a nice blog & written article.Rohitpalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00050219481331027940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-78905794124918463142011-07-14T22:00:18.897+02:002011-07-14T22:00:18.897+02:00what do you think about moving out to wordpress? S...what do you think about moving out to wordpress? Someone has made a program that allows you to write in latex and then just post it.<br /><br />take a look http://lucatrevisan.wordpress.com/latex-to-wordpress/<br /><br />cheers!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-74161628907943323802011-06-20T11:39:39.348+02:002011-06-20T11:39:39.348+02:00That was Jacques point that you cannot roll back b...That was Jacques point that you cannot roll back bitcoin transactions. I am still not convinced that that is a feature since once you received bitcoins you are sure you have them and the other party cannot claim them back (which is a major problem of paypal, it happens far too often that paypal freezes accounts).<br /><br />On the other hand, this incident shows that all the macroeconomic discussions were orders of magnitude off target since a currency that can be brought down by selling worth a few thousand dollars cannot be a threat do anything (except those people's purses that own too much of it).<br /><br />Even if the price at the other exchanges is not affected too much, it shows that currently bitcoin is still far too volatil to be really useful for anything except gambling. Which is too bad since I am convinced (as stated above) that the internet still lacks a good micropayment system.<br /><br />The situation reminds me a bit of some sort of spam popular during the dotcom bubble: You would receive emails stating that some penny-stock is about to make a great announcement that will skyrocket its value (the idea being that the sender of the spam bought shares of that company before sending the spam). A number of people would than buy that share and since the market is so small the price would indeed go up (even without announcement). So the sender could make a profit by selling the shares that he bought before anybody else.<br /><br />The curious thing is that upon receiving the email it is not 100% clear that one should not buy the share although the information in the mail is clearly wrong since one could still hope to be early enough to buy the share at a good price before more people react to the spam and bring up the price even further.Roberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06634377111195468947noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-9202069798908173272011-06-20T09:27:03.487+02:002011-06-20T09:27:03.487+02:00Somebody apparently stole a whole bunch of bitcoin...Somebody apparently stole a whole bunch of bitcoins at mtgox over the weekend. Or something like it. The bitcoin crashed from 30$ to 1 cent, which can be watched live at <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1X6qQt9ONg" rel="nofollow">youtube</a>.<br /><br />mtgox claim that they will rollback all trades. But can they? I thought bitcoins were supposed to be untraceable.Thomas Larssonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15985129937633673870noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8883034.post-34230545607570437782011-06-09T10:37:10.775+02:002011-06-09T10:37:10.775+02:00A good explanation why Bitcoin will not work can b...A good explanation why Bitcoin will not work can be found <a href="http://www.quora.com/Bitcoin/Is-the-cryptocurrency-Bitcoin-a-good-idea" rel="nofollow">here</a>.Thomas Larssonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15985129937633673870noreply@blogger.com