Quantum Physics Fairy Tale

From David Harriman's course "The Philosophic Corruption of Physics," available at:

http://www.aynrandbookstore2.com/prodinfo.asp?number=CH54M

Category:

Education

Tags:

• quantum
• physics
• relativity
• special
• general
• astronomy
• science
• bohr
• feynman
• particle
• wave
• light
• kant
• einstein
• singularity
• superposition
• schrodinger's
• cat
• elementary
• electron
• proton
• neutron
• german
• germany
• philosophy
• history

[Newton1692]

OMG...Unsubscribed.

[nine9s]

"OMG...Unsubscribed."

Boo-hoo... don't let the door hit ya.

[nine9s]

Oh, and for everyone who says he doesn't know what he's talking about, he has a graduate degree in physics.

[bewertow]

This guy doesn't know what he's talking about. He's just too immature to realize that the universe isn't as logical as he thought it was.

he's using logic to refute experimental data. He doesn't provide any proof for his viewpoint.

reality>logic

[nine9s]

"he's using logic to refute experimental data."

Experimental data doesn't just reveal its meaning to us; we have to interpret it. The philosophy of the late 19th century (which is when modern physics began; it didn't start with Einstein) was that we cannot know reality, only appearances. Physics then treated appearances AS reality.

"He doesn't provide any proof for his viewpoint."

This is just 6 minutes of a 5-hour-long course. He provides scads of historical evidence.

[nine9s]

"He's just too immature to realize that the universe isn't as logical as he thought it was."

Way to jump straight to the ad hominem, buddy. THAT's the mark of immaturity, not the fact that someone disagrees with you.

[outsidemendham]

@KevinStanton84

You seem to forget that objectivism is a philosophy that covers all branches, i.e. also metaphysics and epistemology. Philosophy comes first! That is exactly why these quantum physicists have abandoned causality and identity, because of Kant and his influence. You don't need a doctorate in fairyology to determine that fairies are bunk, you are even more rational when you refute the bs from the beginning.

[KevinStanton84]

@nine9s There are people with doctoral degrees in physics who think cold fusion is possible that doesn't mean they aren't quacks.

However all of the Randroids who think they know more about quantum physics than actual physicists because they've read Atlas Shrugged and yet have no physics background whatsoever, those are REAL BIG quacks.

[MegaFlavia1987]

@outsidemendham There was science long before Peikoff and Harriman arrived on the scene. It's absurd to think that the correct philosophy of science has only first been thought out by Objectivism. And modern physics is based on an inductive approach.

"can causally make sense of the world!"

Yes we can, at least to a degree, but only if we realize that the world is a quantum computer and not really materially there: watch?v=dEaecUuEqfc

PS. Causality is not required for science.

[outsidemendham]

@MegaFlavia1987

Oh, but you have to. The inductive account is the official stance of objectivism concerning the philosophy of science. The inductive method has been thought out and developed by Leonard Peikoff and David Harriman. It makes sense of the world on a RATIONAL level, and explains why the quantum mysticism of modern physicists is bunk at the core and why we really can causally make sense of the world!

[MegaFlavia1987]

@normativeRandroid There is no "crisis in physics." There's just a crisis in Objectivism. I certainly hope all Objectivists don't subscribe to this silliness.

[JohananRaatz]

@outsidemendham "worked as a physicist"

Having a degree and an impressive resume does not prevent one from also holding to pseudoscience. This actually happens not infrequently.

"taught philosophy"

That comes as a surprise. I find it almost as hard to imagine that as I can imagine him as a real physicist.

If he can really explain QM without spooky effects, he should take the Quantum Randi Crackpot Challenge and produce a locally real QM theory. He'd win a Nobel Prize.

[JohananRaatz]

@L1ber8ted I don't believe in 0d particles. Point particles vanish when you take quantum gravity and quantum information theory into account.

The reason it's seen as a point particle is because the space-time defining it is not constructed yet. Whenever we observe it, a point in space-time is defined out of the spin foam thereby giving it a location at an exact point. In reality though there really isn't a particle, just a bit of information. Or perhaps an a-dimensional "particle."

[outsidemendham]

@JohananRaatz

This "clown" has worked as a physicist for the U.S. Department of Defense and taught philosophy at California State University, San Bernardino.

[L1ber8ted]

@JohananRaatz Quacks are people who believe in 0d particles. Quacks are people who call people quacks.