Thanks Hassaan, you’re an informed and respectful host that allowed your guest to answer your questions without constantly interjecting like some well known ‘personalities’ on this platform. Thanks also to Dr Wallace for his illuminating insights into a range of burning scientific problems and issues old and new. Always a pleasure to listen to this brilliant writer, teacher and communicator. Cheers.
Thank you Hassan for asking my question:) after hearing Prof. David Wallace explain about what a measurement is, I can think more clearly about my question now. My confusion came when I compared Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle with the trisect problem of mathematics. The trisect problem says we cannot trisect a straight line with just a n unmarked ruler and a compass. There is also a "proof" for this. But with a marked ruler ie standardised ruler we can trisect a line. Now here is where I pushed things too far...In Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle it is said that we cannot measure x and px simultaneously and we can "prove" this. In the trisect problem too we can prove that the trisection is impossible with Just unmarked ruler and compass but this is possible with a marked ruler and a compass. So what if there is something that is more general than a measurement and with it we can find both x and px simulatenously just like we could trisect the line if we have a marked ruler where the situation was "proved" impossible with an unmarked ruler and compass? So my comparison was this unmarked ruler and compass= measurement..... Marked ruler and compass= generalized measurement:)
The probability of universe beginning to exist and the initial conditions are very low. How would prof Wallace explain it. Thanks hassan for this brilliant interview
35:30 you don't need to worry on QM foundation funding. Now Quantam Computing has a great funding even from individuals at high pay even at 600 K per year. Some even have a regular professor at University and part of these institutes like Lenny, Aaronson etc.. You can do physics aswell as foundational QM
@1:15:49 Prof. David Wallace talks about a wine bottle kept for opening if we see predictions of Low Energy Quantum Gravity come true:) So after the experiment to test the theory is done we would either see the bottle in an open state or closed state in our world. But Hassaan please correct me on this if I am wrong... If the Bottle turns out to be in open state in our world is it not closed in an another world? so does this mean that Low Energy Gravity Theory is true in our world but is wrong in the other world where the wine bottle is closed? because the bottle will be only opened if the Theory is confirmed to be correct.
Thanks Hassaan, you’re an informed and respectful host that allowed your guest to answer your questions without constantly interjecting like some well known ‘personalities’ on this platform.
Thanks also to Dr Wallace for his illuminating insights into a range of burning scientific problems and issues old and new. Always a pleasure to listen to this brilliant writer, teacher and communicator. Cheers.
Thanks for your kind words
Thank you Hassan for asking my question:) after hearing Prof. David Wallace explain about what a measurement is, I can think more clearly about my question now. My confusion came when I compared Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle with the trisect problem of mathematics. The trisect problem says we cannot trisect a straight line with just a n unmarked ruler and a compass. There is also a "proof" for this. But with a marked ruler ie standardised ruler we can trisect a line. Now here is where I pushed things too far...In Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle it is said that we cannot measure x and px simultaneously and we can "prove" this. In the trisect problem too we can prove that the trisection is impossible with Just unmarked ruler and compass but this is possible with a marked ruler and a compass. So what if there is something that is more general than a measurement and with it we can find both x and px simulatenously just like we could trisect the line if we have a marked ruler where the situation was "proved" impossible with an unmarked ruler and compass? So my comparison was this unmarked ruler and compass= measurement..... Marked ruler and compass= generalized measurement:)
Thank you Hassaan for this wonderful podcast, thank you prof David Wallace for giving us wonderful ideas to think about:)
My pleasure
The probability of universe beginning to exist and the initial conditions are very low. How would prof Wallace explain it. Thanks hassan for this brilliant interview
ur take on chitrang murdia?
My pleasure
35:30 you don't need to worry on QM foundation funding. Now Quantam Computing has a great funding even from individuals at high pay even at 600 K per year. Some even have a regular professor at University and part of these institutes like Lenny, Aaronson etc.. You can do physics aswell as foundational QM
Great podcast
Thanks
@1:15:49 Prof. David Wallace talks about a wine bottle kept for opening if we see predictions of Low Energy Quantum Gravity come true:) So after the experiment to test the theory is done we would either see the bottle in an open state or closed state in our world. But Hassaan please correct me on this if I am wrong... If the Bottle turns out to be in open state in our world is it not closed in an another world? so does this mean that Low Energy Gravity Theory is true in our world but is wrong in the other world where the wine bottle is closed? because the bottle will be only opened if the Theory is confirmed to be correct.