Podcasts about Copenhagen interpretation

Dive into the bewildering world of quantum physics with Subatomic Tanvi as we unravel the most mind-bending interpretations of quantum theory. From the classic Copenhagen Interpretation, where particles exist in a fuzzy superposition until observed, to the multiverse-expanding Many Worlds Interpretation, suggesting every quantum possibility spawns a new universe, and finally, the deterministic deBroglie-Bohm pilot-wave theory, we explore the core concepts and the scientific debates surrounding each. Join us for a journey through multiple realities and the very fabric of existence, as we tackle the measurement problem, hidden variables, and the search for empirical evidence in this fascinating exploration of quantum's wildest ideas.

Send us a textLauren's still sick.Sinuses.Getting cancelled. Neil Gaiman. Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics.shelwereadapoem@gmail.com@ShelWeRead

This is a crossover episode in which https://x.com/loubohan interviews me for his podcast Deus Ex Machina.I was obviously in an exuberant mood for this interview - it's one of my favorites!Deus Ex Machina podcast:https://open.spotify.com/episode/7mXUfNJdNnOjGfu6VGactr?si=Y3j1OZG4QsGdPhXd8dKsrw…Timestamps:(00:00) - Growing up in Iowa. Athletics, Chinese culture. KMT and military family background. (11:48) - Hearing about the Cultural Revolution from my dad: his family experienced it firsthand in Zhejiang. Meanwhile, US experts and academics were entirely deluded about reality in PRC (20:55) - "Experts" are often miscalibrated (35:03) - Physicists and finance. Was Charlie Munger right to say it's a waste of talent to channel top brains into finance? (45:15) - Hedgehogs, Foxes, and Eagles. Polymathy. (48:41) - Development of modern China as the greatest story of the last 50 years. My first visit to China: the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone in 1992. US-China competition and the future of Asian Americans. (56:52) - Genomic Prediction. Genomics of cognitive ability. Leftists holding back genetic science. PING = NIH-funded Pediatric Imagining, Neurocognition, and Genetics study. Stephen J. Gould was a fraud. Asian culture (pragmatic realism) and resistance to woken... (01:05:20) - Physics and Free Will. Meat machines programmed by evolution to have an illusion of self? (01:10:04) - Copenhagen Interpretation of QM: Is there true randomness in Physics? Many Worlds, Foundations of QM, and groupthink in modern physics. (01:19:09) - Christianity, raised as a Methodist by my mother, whose family has been Christian since the 19th century. Religious Experience vs Physics viewpoint. Meat machines programmed by evolution to have mystical religious feelings? (01:21:28) - Raising children, family, happiness, the meaning of life in view of my father's life (01:24:34) - The meaning of life, "All is Vanity" (Ecclesiastes), Religion Music used with permission from Blade Runner Blues Livestream improvisation by State Azure.–Steve Hsu is Professor of Theoretical Physics and of Computational Mathematics, Science, and Engineering at Michigan State University. Previously, he was Senior Vice President for Research and Innovation at MSU and Director of the Institute of Theoretical Science at the University of Oregon. Hsu is a startup founder (SuperFocus.ai, SafeWeb, Genomic Prediction, Othram) and advisor to venture capital and other investment firms. He was educated at Caltech and Berkeley, was a Harvard Junior Fellow, and has held faculty positions at Yale, the University of Oregon, and MSU. Please send any questions or suggestions to manifold1podcast@gmail.com or Steve on X @hsu_steve.

In this insightful discussion, filmmaker Paul Howard explores David Bohm's Hidden Variables Theory and how it challenges conventional quantum mechanics interpretations, such as the Copenhagen Interpretation and Many Worlds Hypothesis. Paul Howard breaks down the double-slit experiment, wave function collapse, and David Bohm's belief in a single wave function orchestrating the universe.He emphasises Bohm's unique approach to non-locality, quantum entanglement, and the potential for a deeper understanding of reality through the Hidden Variables Theory. Paul also touches on current scientific efforts at institutions like the University of Toronto and UCL in London, aimed at proving Bohm's quantum potential.Learn more about the ongoing research and how David Bohm's ideas resonate with both scientific and philosophical perspectives on the nature of reality.Learn more about Paul HowardListen to the full Talk hereScience & Wisdom LIVE brings meditation practitioners in conversation with scientists to address the problems of contemporary society and come to new possible solutions.Subscribe to our NewsletterFollow us on FacebookFollow us on InstagramFollow us on YoutubeVisit our Website

Humanity is a storied species - everything we do from forming partnerships, to buying stuff, to moving house, to getting a new job… arises from the stories we tell ourselves and each other about ourselves and each other. If we're going to shift to a new way of being, the route will be led by the stories we can build of how it will look and feel, how we'll be more alive, more connected, have a deeper sense of being, belonging, becoming… So - how do we tell stories of transformation in ways that engage everyone, that give everyone the agency, support, encouragement and freedom to be what they need in any moment - in every moment?  This week's guest is theatre maker and champion of access, Jenifer Toksvig.  Jen is creator of the Copenhagen Interpretation, which takes concepts of uncertainty and fluidity evolved to describe the quantum process in physics, and applies them to theatre, to the telling of living stories in a shared space in a way that fosters connection, creativity, and personal growth. Clearly we on Accidental Gods believe that the stories we tell ourselves and each other of ourselves and each other - and our place as more or less conscious nodes in the web of life - are crucial to how we navigate this moment of total turmoil in our cultural, energetic and biophysical worlds.  We not only need new stories, we need new ways of telling those stories, new ways of experiencing different ways of being and this, it seems to me, is what Jen is creating. When I first learned of the Copenhagen Interpretation, and The Broad Cloth that arises from it, when I first took part in Jen's gathering of a Fairy Tale, it felt as if someone was opening doors in my mind; that here is a way safely to explore the emergent edges of interbecoming that are where the magic happens.  So I wanted to bring some of this magic to the podcast, to let Jen tell her story and to see if we could bring it home for you. So here we go, stepping into a place of magic and emergence, people of the podcast, please do welcome Jenifer Toksvig of the Copenhagen Interpretation. Jenifer Toksvighttps://linktr.ee/toksvighttps://www.jenifertoksvig.com/The Copenhagen Interpretationhttps://www.worldanvil.com/w/thecopenhageninterpretationOpen Space Technology - Harrison OwenOriginal: https://openspaceworld.org/wp2/what-is/Original: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_space_technologyOur version: https://www.worldanvil.com/w/thecopenhageninterpretation/a/open-space-articleJoseph Campbell - The Hero's Journey (aka 'arrow narrative')https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero%27s_journeyUrsula K. Le Guin - The Carrier Bag Theory of Fictionhttps://stillmoving.org/resources/the-carrier-bag-theory-of-fictionhttps://www.hive.co.uk/Product/Ursula-Le-Guin/The-Carrier-Bag-Theory-of-Fiction/24443320Navigator of Current See: Diana Finchhttps://www.dianafinch.info/Navigator of Gathering: Ess Grangehttps://slgrange.com/Navigator of Accompanying: Flo O'Mahony / ZooCo - Perfect Show For Rachelhttps://www.wearezooco.co.uk/shows/perfect-show-for-rachelCopenhagen Model: The Fairytale Libraryhttps://www.instagram.com/the_fairytale_library/Copenhagen Model: The Broad Clothhttps://www.worldanvil.com/w/thebroadclothThe Broad Cloth: producing partner, ScandinaviaThe Field Station on Ingøya - Oliver Dawehttps://www.fieldstation.no/https://www.oygrid.no/ - this is Harald Hansen, Oliver's husband, who is working in renewable energy on the islandhttps://www.favli.no/ - this is Harald's company for renewable energy work elsewherehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ing%C3%B8yThe Broad Cloth on the Isle of Wight: partners- Ventnor Exchange, host organisationhttps://ventnorexchange.co.uk/- Lisa Kerley, caretakerhttps://memoriesofthesea.uk/https://farmingmemories.com/- Art Ecologyhttps://www.artecology.space/- Arc Biodiversityhttps://arcbiodiversity.co.uk/- Wolfguard Viking Reenactmenthttps://www.wolfguardiow.co.uk/

What is the nature of quantum physics? Neil deGrasse Tyson and comedian Chuck Nice get quantum, exploring Schrodinger's Cat, electrons, Hilbert Space, and the biggest ideas in the universe (in the smallest particles) with theoretical physicist Sean Carroll. NOTE: StarTalk+ Patrons can listen to this entire episode commercial-free here: https://startalkmedia.com/show/the-smallest-ideas-in-the-universe-with-sean-carroll/Thanks to our Patrons Justin Smith, Joanna oneal, Rick Rocket, ShyRaven, Catherine A Ousselin, Cindie Flaig, Akshay Kulkarni, David, Greg Craven, and John Frankki for supporting us this week.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: [Repost] The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics, published by mesaoptimizer on January 26, 2024 on LessWrong. Because the original webpage (and domain) is down, and it takes about a minute (including loading time) for Wayback Machine to give me the page, I've decided to repost this essay here. I consider it an essay that seems core to 2010s rationalist discourse. The Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics says that you can have a particle spinning clockwise and counterclockwise at the same time - until you look at it, at which point it definitely becomes one or the other. The theory claims that observing reality fundamentally changes it. The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics says that when you observe or interact with a problem in any way, you can be blamed for it. At the very least, you are to blame for not doing more. Even if you don't make the problem worse, even if you make it slightly better, the ethical burden of the problem falls on you as soon as you observe it. In particular, if you interact with a problem and benefit from it, you are a complete monster. I don't subscribe to this school of thought, but it seems pretty popular. In 2010, New York randomly chose homeless applicants to participate in its Homebase program, and tracked those who were not allowed into the program as a control group. The program was helping as many people as it could, the only change was explicitly labeling a number of people it wasn't helping as a "control group". The response? "They should immediately stop this experiment," said the Manhattan borough president, Scott M. Stringer. "The city shouldn't be making guinea pigs out of its most vulnerable." On March 11th, 2012, the vast majority of people did nothing to help homeless people. They were busy doing other things, many of them good and important things, but by and large not improving the well-being of homeless humans in any way. In particular, almost no one was doing anything for the homeless of Austin, Texas. BBH Labs was an exception - they outfitted 13 homeless volunteers with WiFi hotspots and asked them to offer WiFi to SXSW attendees in exchange for donations. In return, they would be paid $20 a day plus whatever attendees gave in donations. Each of these 13 volunteers chose this over all the other things they could have done that day, and benefited from it - not a vast improvement, but significantly more than the 0 improvement that they were getting from most people. The response? IT SOUNDS LIKE something out of a darkly satirical science-fiction dystopia. But it's absolutely real - and a completely problematic treatment of a problem that otherwise probably wouldn't be mentioned in any of the panels at South by Southwest Interactive. There wouldn't be any scathing editorials if BBH Labs had just chosen to do nothing - but they did something helpful-but-not-maximally-helpful, and thus are open to judgment. There are times when it's almost impossible to get a taxi - when there's inclement weather, when a large event is getting out, or when it's just a very busy day. Uber attempts to solve this problem by introducing surge pricing - charging more when demand outstrips supply. More money means more drivers willing to make the trip, means more rides available. Now instead of having no taxis at all, people can choose between an expensive taxi or no taxi at all - a marginal improvement. Needless to say, Uber has been repeatedly lambasted for doing something instead of leaving the even-worse status quo the way it was. Gender inequality is a persistent, if hard to quantify, problem. Last year I blogged about how amoral agents could save money and drive the wage gap down to 0 by offering slightly less-sexist wages - while including some caveats about how it was probably unrealistic and we wouldn't see anything like tha...

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: [Repost] The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics, published by mesaoptimizer on January 26, 2024 on LessWrong. Because the original webpage (and domain) is down, and it takes about a minute (including loading time) for Wayback Machine to give me the page, I've decided to repost this essay here. I consider it an essay that seems core to 2010s rationalist discourse. The Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics says that you can have a particle spinning clockwise and counterclockwise at the same time - until you look at it, at which point it definitely becomes one or the other. The theory claims that observing reality fundamentally changes it. The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics says that when you observe or interact with a problem in any way, you can be blamed for it. At the very least, you are to blame for not doing more. Even if you don't make the problem worse, even if you make it slightly better, the ethical burden of the problem falls on you as soon as you observe it. In particular, if you interact with a problem and benefit from it, you are a complete monster. I don't subscribe to this school of thought, but it seems pretty popular. In 2010, New York randomly chose homeless applicants to participate in its Homebase program, and tracked those who were not allowed into the program as a control group. The program was helping as many people as it could, the only change was explicitly labeling a number of people it wasn't helping as a "control group". The response? "They should immediately stop this experiment," said the Manhattan borough president, Scott M. Stringer. "The city shouldn't be making guinea pigs out of its most vulnerable." On March 11th, 2012, the vast majority of people did nothing to help homeless people. They were busy doing other things, many of them good and important things, but by and large not improving the well-being of homeless humans in any way. In particular, almost no one was doing anything for the homeless of Austin, Texas. BBH Labs was an exception - they outfitted 13 homeless volunteers with WiFi hotspots and asked them to offer WiFi to SXSW attendees in exchange for donations. In return, they would be paid $20 a day plus whatever attendees gave in donations. Each of these 13 volunteers chose this over all the other things they could have done that day, and benefited from it - not a vast improvement, but significantly more than the 0 improvement that they were getting from most people. The response? IT SOUNDS LIKE something out of a darkly satirical science-fiction dystopia. But it's absolutely real - and a completely problematic treatment of a problem that otherwise probably wouldn't be mentioned in any of the panels at South by Southwest Interactive. There wouldn't be any scathing editorials if BBH Labs had just chosen to do nothing - but they did something helpful-but-not-maximally-helpful, and thus are open to judgment. There are times when it's almost impossible to get a taxi - when there's inclement weather, when a large event is getting out, or when it's just a very busy day. Uber attempts to solve this problem by introducing surge pricing - charging more when demand outstrips supply. More money means more drivers willing to make the trip, means more rides available. Now instead of having no taxis at all, people can choose between an expensive taxi or no taxi at all - a marginal improvement. Needless to say, Uber has been repeatedly lambasted for doing something instead of leaving the even-worse status quo the way it was. Gender inequality is a persistent, if hard to quantify, problem. Last year I blogged about how amoral agents could save money and drive the wage gap down to 0 by offering slightly less-sexist wages - while including some caveats about how it was probably unrealistic and we wouldn't see anything like tha...

Patreon: https://bit.ly/3v8OhY7 Tim Maudlin is Professor of Philosophy at NYU and Founder and Director of the John Bell Institute for the Foundations of Physics. Sheldon Goldstein is Distinguished Professor of Mathematics at Rutgers University, where he researches mathematical physics, the foundations of quantum mechanics, and Bohmian Mechanics. He is also Board Member of the John Bell Institute for the Foundations of Physics, and this is his second appearance on the show. In episode 170, he and Robinson discussed Bohmian Mechanics. On the other hand, this is Tim's fifth appearance on the show. Tim was also a guest on episode 46 (laws of nature, space, and free will), episode 67 with David Albert (the foundations of quantum mechanics), episode 115 with Craig Callender (the philosophy of time), and episode 142 on Bell's inequality and the philosophy of science. In this episode, Robinson, Tim, and Shelly discuss the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, the Many-Worlds theory, spontaneous collapse theories, Bohmian mechanics, and emergent relativity. If you're interested in the foundations of physics—which you absolutely should be—then please check out the JBI, which is devoted to providing a home for research and education in this important area. Any donations are immensely helpful at this early stage in the institute's life. Tim's Website: www.tim-maudlin.site Shelly's Website: https://sites.math.rutgers.edu/~oldstein/ The John Bell Institute: https://www.johnbellinstitute.org OUTLINE 00:00 In This Episode… 00:22 Introduction 03:04 Is Copenhagen the Dominant Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics? 20:12 On the Most Promising Theories of Quantum Mechanics 34:46 Are There 0-Dimensional Quantum Objects? 41:03 On Spontaneous Wave Function Collapse in Quantum Mechanics 47:56 Bohmian Mechanics and Determinism 51:34 What is Bohmian Mechanics? 1:10:33 Is There a Fundamental Theory of Quantum Mechanics 1:18:45What Is Emergent Relativity? 1:31:01 What Are the Problems with Bohmian Mechanics? Robinson's Website: http://robinsonerhardt.com Robinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University. Join him in conversations with philosophers, scientists, weightlifters, artists, and everyone in-between.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robinson-erhardt/support

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: "Humanity vs. AGI" Will Never Look Like "Humanity vs. AGI" to Humanity, published by Thane Ruthenis on December 16, 2023 on LessWrong. When discussing AGI Risk, people often talk about it in terms of a war between humanity and an AGI. Comparisons between the amounts of resources at both sides' disposal are brought up and factored in, big impressive nuclear stockpiles are sometimes waved around, etc. I'm pretty sure it's not how that'd look like, on several levels. 1. Threat Ambiguity I think what people imagine, when they imagine a war, is Terminator-style movie scenarios where the obviously evil AGI becomes obviously evil in a way that's obvious to everyone, and then it's a neatly arranged white-and-black humanity vs. machines all-out fight. Everyone sees the problem, and knows everyone else sees it too, the problem is common knowledge, and we can all decisively act against it.[1] But in real life, such unambiguity is rare. The monsters don't look obviously evil, the signs of fatal issues are rarely blatant. And if you're not that sure, well... Better not act up. Better not look like you're panicking. Act very concerned, sure, but in a calm, high-status manner. Provide a measured response. Definitely don't take any drastic, unilateral actions. After all, what if you do, but the threat turns out not to be real? Depending on what you've done, the punishment inflicted might range from embarrassment to complete social ostracization, and the fear of those is much more acute in our minds, compared to some vague concerns about death. And the AGI, if it's worth the name, would not fail to exploit this. Even when it starts acting to amass power, there would always be a prosocial, plausible-sounding justification for why it's doing that. It'd never stop making pleasant noises about having people's best interests at heart. It'd never stop being genuinely useful to someone. It'd ensure that there's always clear, unambiguous harm in shutting it down. It would ensure that the society as a whole is always doubtful regarding its intentions - and thus, that no-one would feel safe outright attacking it. Much like there's no fire alarm for AGI, there would be no fire alarm for the treacherous turn. There would never be a moment, except maybe right before the end, where "we must stop the malign AGI from killing us all!" would sound obviously right to everyone. This sort of message would always appear a bit histrionic, an extremist stance that no respectable person would shout out. There would always be fear that if we act now, we'll then turn around and realize that we jumped at shadows. Right until the end, humans will fight using slow, ineffectual, "measured" responses. The status-quo bias, asymmetric justice, the Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics, threat ambiguity - all of that would be acting to ensure this. There's a world of difference between 90% confidence and 99% confidence, when it comes to collective action. And the AGI would need to screw up very badly indeed, for the whole society to become 99% certain it's malign. 2. Who Are "We"? Another error is thinking about a unitary response from some ephemeral "us". "We" would fight the AGI, "we" would shut it down, "we" would not give it power over the society / the economy / weapons / factories. But who are "we"? Humanity is not a hivemind; we don't even have a world government. Humans are, in fact, notoriously bad at coordination. So if you're imagining "us" naturally responding to the threat in some manner that, it seems, is guaranteed to prevail against any AGI adversary incapable of literal mind-hacking... Are you really, really sure that "we", i. e. the dysfunctional mess of the human civilization, are going to respond in this manner? Are you sure you're not falling prey to the Typical Mind Fallacy, when you're imagining a...

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: "Humanity vs. AGI" Will Never Look Like "Humanity vs. AGI" to Humanity, published by Thane Ruthenis on December 16, 2023 on LessWrong. When discussing AGI Risk, people often talk about it in terms of a war between humanity and an AGI. Comparisons between the amounts of resources at both sides' disposal are brought up and factored in, big impressive nuclear stockpiles are sometimes waved around, etc. I'm pretty sure it's not how that'd look like, on several levels. 1. Threat Ambiguity I think what people imagine, when they imagine a war, is Terminator-style movie scenarios where the obviously evil AGI becomes obviously evil in a way that's obvious to everyone, and then it's a neatly arranged white-and-black humanity vs. machines all-out fight. Everyone sees the problem, and knows everyone else sees it too, the problem is common knowledge, and we can all decisively act against it.[1] But in real life, such unambiguity is rare. The monsters don't look obviously evil, the signs of fatal issues are rarely blatant. And if you're not that sure, well... Better not act up. Better not look like you're panicking. Act very concerned, sure, but in a calm, high-status manner. Provide a measured response. Definitely don't take any drastic, unilateral actions. After all, what if you do, but the threat turns out not to be real? Depending on what you've done, the punishment inflicted might range from embarrassment to complete social ostracization, and the fear of those is much more acute in our minds, compared to some vague concerns about death. And the AGI, if it's worth the name, would not fail to exploit this. Even when it starts acting to amass power, there would always be a prosocial, plausible-sounding justification for why it's doing that. It'd never stop making pleasant noises about having people's best interests at heart. It'd never stop being genuinely useful to someone. It'd ensure that there's always clear, unambiguous harm in shutting it down. It would ensure that the society as a whole is always doubtful regarding its intentions - and thus, that no-one would feel safe outright attacking it. Much like there's no fire alarm for AGI, there would be no fire alarm for the treacherous turn. There would never be a moment, except maybe right before the end, where "we must stop the malign AGI from killing us all!" would sound obviously right to everyone. This sort of message would always appear a bit histrionic, an extremist stance that no respectable person would shout out. There would always be fear that if we act now, we'll then turn around and realize that we jumped at shadows. Right until the end, humans will fight using slow, ineffectual, "measured" responses. The status-quo bias, asymmetric justice, the Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics, threat ambiguity - all of that would be acting to ensure this. There's a world of difference between 90% confidence and 99% confidence, when it comes to collective action. And the AGI would need to screw up very badly indeed, for the whole society to become 99% certain it's malign. 2. Who Are "We"? Another error is thinking about a unitary response from some ephemeral "us". "We" would fight the AGI, "we" would shut it down, "we" would not give it power over the society / the economy / weapons / factories. But who are "we"? Humanity is not a hivemind; we don't even have a world government. Humans are, in fact, notoriously bad at coordination. So if you're imagining "us" naturally responding to the threat in some manner that, it seems, is guaranteed to prevail against any AGI adversary incapable of literal mind-hacking... Are you really, really sure that "we", i. e. the dysfunctional mess of the human civilization, are going to respond in this manner? Are you sure you're not falling prey to the Typical Mind Fallacy, when you're imagining a...

Lee Smolin is a founding and senior faculty member at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics. He is best known for contributions to quantum gravity as a co-inventor of loop quantum gravity and deformed special relativity. Beyond his work in other areas of physics, Lee has written a number of best-selling books, the most recent of which is Einstein's Unfinished Revolution: The Search for What Lies Beyond the Quantum (Penguin, 2019). In this episode, Robinson and Lee discuss one of the main tenets that has characterized his work over the past decades: Realism. They first talk about realism in quantum mechanics before moving on to Lee's version of radical presentism, in which only what is occurring in the immediate present can be said to exist, before finishing the main body of their conversation with mathematics and its relation to both physics and cosmology. The episode ends with brief digressions on biology and living with Parkinson's disease. Lee is also an Honorary Fellow of the John Bell Institute for the Foundations of Physics. If you're interested in the foundations of physics—which you absolutely should be—then please check out the JBI, which is devoted to providing a home for research and education in this important area. Any donations are immensely helpful at this early stage in the institute's life. Einstein's Unfinished Revolution: https://a.co/d/7GHcebp The Singular Universe and the Unreality of Time: https://a.co/d/hZqLT59 Lee's Website: https://leesmolin.com The John Bell Institute: https://www.johnbellinstitute.org/home 00:00 In This Episode… 00:47 Introduction 05:03 From Dropping Out of High School to Physics 10:42 Many-Worlds, Bohmian Mechanics, and Realism in Quantum Theory 29:18 Realism and the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics 33:00 Uniting Quantum Mechanics and Cosmology 45:43 Working with Roberto Mangabeira Unger 55:10 The Singular Existence of the Universe 01:05:29 Lee's Interest in Biology Robinson's Website: http://robinsonerhardt.com Robinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University. Join him in conversations with philosophers, scientists, weightlifters, artists, and everyone in-between.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robinson-erhardt/support

Is it time to abandon the search for reality?Looking for a link we mentioned? It's here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesNietzsche famously declared 'God is dead' in the late nineteenth century. Outspoken critic of philosophical realism Hilary Lawson observes that today we have replaced God with ‘reality'. He urges us to abandon this elusive and unattainable concept, offering an alternative view which embraces observation and reason while abandoning reality for good.There are thousands of big ideas to discover at IAI.tv – videos, articles, and courses waiting for you to explore. Find out more: https://iai.tv/podcast-offers?utm_source=podcast&utm_medium=shownotes&utm_campaign=the-world-after-reality-hilary-lawsonSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

I really really really enjoyed speaking with Rizwan Virk the amazing writer of The Simulation Hypothesis and The Simulated Multiverse Do multiple versions of ourselves exist in parallel universes living out their lives in different timelines?In this follow up to his bestseller, The Simulation Hypothesis, MIT Computer Scientist and Silicon Valley Game Pioneer Rizwan Virk explores these topics from a new lens: that of simulation theory. If we are living in a simulated universe, composed of information that is rendered around us, then many of the complexities and baffling characteristics of our reality start to make more sense. In particular the two most popular interpretations of quantum mechanics, the Copenhagen Interpretation and the Many Worlds interpretation, which are thought to be mutually exclusive, can be unified in an information based framework. Quantum computing lets us simulate complex phenomena in parallel, allowing the simulation to explore many realities at once to find the most "optimum" path forward. Could this explain not only the enigmatic Mandela Effect but provide us with a new understanding of time and space? Bringing his unique trademark style of combining video games, computer science, quantum physics and computing with lots of philosophy and science fiction, Virk gives us a new way to think about not just our universe, but all possible timelines in the multiverse! Rizwan (“Riz”) Virk is a successful  entrepreneur, investor, futurist, bestselling author, video game industry pioneer, and indie film producer.     Riz received a B.S. in Computer Science  from MIT,  and a M.S. in Management from Stanford's GSB.  He is currently working on a PhD at ASU's College of Global Futures, researching metaverse and virtual worlds. Riz has produced many indie films (imdb link), including Thrive,  Sirius,  Knights of Badassdom, starring Peter Dinklage and Summer Glau, The CW's The Outpost, as well as adaptations of the works of Philip K. Dick and Ursula K. Le Guin.​Riz's books include Startup Myths & Models, The Simulation Hypothesis, Zen Entrepreneurship, and Treasure Hunt: Follow Your Inner Clues to Find True Success, and The Simulated Multiverse. You can find Rizwan's latest book The Simulate Multiverse here https://www.amazon.com/Simulated-Multiverse-Scientist-Simulation-Hypothesis-ebook/dp/B08XFR749T/ Check out his website here https://www.zenentrepreneur.com/ You can get Lee's new book here Conversations with the Z's, Book One: The Energetics of the New Human Soul https://www.amazon.com/Conversations-Zs-Book-One-Energetics-ebook/dp/B0B9FLR8ZN  Buy Tickets to Reality CON 2 Activating the Large Sums Of Money Mindset https://realityrevolutioncon.com/tickets  Buy My Art - Unique Sigil Magic and Energy Activation Through Flow Art and Voyages Through Space and Imagination. https://www.newearth.art/  The New Earth Activation trainings - Immerse yourself in 12 hours of content focused on the new earth with channeling, meditations, advanced training and access to the new earth https://realityrevolutioncon.com/newearth  Alternate Universe Reality Activation  get full access to new meditations, new lectures, recordings from the reality con and the 90 day AURA meditation schedulehttps://realityrevolutionlive.com/aura45338118  BUY MY BOOK! https://www.amazon.com/Reality-Revolution-Mind-Blowing-Movement-Hack/dp/154450618X/  Listen to my book on audible https://www.audible.com/pd/The-Reality-Revolution-Audiobook/B087LV1R5V  Like us on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/The-Reality-Revolution-Podcast-Hosted-By-Brian-Scott-102555575116999  Join our Facebook group The Reality Revolution https://www.facebook.com/groups/523814491927119  Contact us at media@advancedsuccessinstitute.com  For all episodes of the Reality Revolution – https://www.therealityrevolution.com  Follow Us on Reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRealityRevolution/  Follow me on Instagram https://www.instagram.com/the_reality_revolution/  Follow me on Twitter https://twitter.com/mediaprime  Follow me on MeWe https://mewe.com/i/brianscott71  All My Interviews -- https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKv1KCSKwOo_Y78_zt_zv9TI1AGx-WimT  All my Audiobooks - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKv1KCSKwOo-ArT_9WQ-SrKaEP7VgIPb5  #multiverse #simulation #mandela

In this Quotable Monday, Daniel feature and talks about a quote from Fred Alan Wolfe, a quantum physicist and teacher. He was featured in the film WHAT THE BLEEP.Fred said, “Consciousness is the creative element in the universe. Without it, nothing would appear.”Daniel goes onto elaborate about the Copenhagen Interpretation, Quantum Entanglement and what it means about the Law of Attraction and Manifesting.Mindfulness Meditation: http://yesdaniel.comGet The Manifesting Study Guide Here: Daniel's Courses THE WISDOM VAULT: Manifestation Mastery CourseLINKSTHE ALIGNED SELF COACHING PROGRAM: http://yesdaniel.comTHE COURSE: REFINING YOUR MAP OF REALITY to uncover and reconnect to lost, deleted, distorted, and generalized information is available in Daniel's membership program; THE VAULT OF INNER WISDOMFREE VIDEO TRAINING: 5 Mindset Shifts to Up Grade Your Money GameCheckout Daniel's new membership program THE VAULTDANIEL D'NEUVILLE's WEBSITE: http://dneuville.comDaniel's YouTube CHANNELFACEBOOK GROUPSPODCAST LISTENER'S FB COMMUNITYEXTREME GRATITUDE PROJECTBass Slap Intro written and performed by bass player & producer: Miki SantamariaMiki's YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In honor of Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, we wanted to talk about the multiverse as it's portrayed in our favorite fandoms. Don't worry, most of us aren't quantum physicists and the only science we'll be going into is science fiction. So Geeks, grab your portal guns and let's jump into the multiverse. Timestamps 00:00:15 Intro 00:00:38 What Is The Multiverse? 00:10:13 Ways The Multiverse Becomes A Popular Sci-Fi Concept 00:12:57 Great Stories Involving The Multiverse 00:32:45 What Perspective Does DragonBall Offer 00:45:56 Any Multiverse Stories In The Realm Of Manga/Anime? 00:53:02 Would The Star Wars Books Count As A Multiverse? 01:03:17 Star Trek, Kingdom Hearts, Etc. Handled The Multiverse Well 01:04:13 Joe Is Excited For Chip N' Dale: Rescue Rangers 01:06:26 Final Thoughts On The Multiverse 01:16:26 Conclusion/Outro References https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9419884/ Doctor Strange In The Multiverse Of Madness https://www.disneyplus.com/series/wandavision/4SrN28ZjDLwH Wanda Vision https://www.disneyplus.com/series/loki/6pARMvILBGzF Loki https://www.netflix.com/ca/title/81002747 Spider-man: Into The Spider-verse https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10872600/ Spider-man: No Way Home https://a24films.com/films/everything-everywhere-all-at-once Everything Everywhere All At Once https://www.dragonball-multiverse.com/en/read.html DB Multiverse https://mobile.twitter.com/herms98/status/811481529142558720 Dragon Ball Timeline/Multiverse After Goku Black Saga https://www.hulu.com/series/steinsgate-1e6bb91f-1b9f-471e-8bd3-ec7cb0de1869 Steins;Gate https://www.crunchyroll.com/rezero-starting-life-in-another-world- Re:Zero Starting Life In Another World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation Many World's Interpretation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation Copenhagen Interpretation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XglOw2_lozc PBS Space Time: How Many Universes Are There? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-syaCoqkZA PBS Space Time: Where Are The Worlds In The Many Worlds? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzKWfw68M5U PBS Space Time: The Many Worlds Of The Quantum Multiverse Do you have a favorite multiverse story? Leave your comments!   Thanks for tuning into Geeks Represent! If you've enjoyed this discussion subscribe to our podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Stitcher, and everywhere podcasts can be found. If you want to add to this discussion, visit GeeksRepresent.com. Thanks for listening and sharing with your friends

Although the UFO phenomenon tends to be associated with aliens, there are a few even more fantastical theories about its origins.Many of most respected scientists and researchers in ufology don't think that the evidence points to any of the more conventional explanations — and that whoever is creating UFOs might not be from the stars at all, but from right here on Earth.But how could an advanced civilization be here without our knowledge? In this episode we explore the possible answers. Get the full show notes along with photos, videos, declassified documents, source list, bonus materials, & more. Follow the podcast on social: Twitter Facebook YoutubeMusic: Eleven Hours A Night by Yehezkel Razhttps://yehezkelraz.com/TIMESTAMPS:00:00:00 Introduction00:05:14 Jacques Valleé & J. Allen Hynek00:10:10 Valleé's 5 Arguments Against The Extra Terrestrial Hypothesis00:10:46 Argument 1 - The Reports Are Too Numerous00:12:11 Argument 2 - Humanoid “Aliens” Are Not Likely To Have Originated On Another Planet00:13:00 Argument 3 - The Behavior Of These Beings Doesn't Make Sense00:14:46 Argument 4 - The Phenomenon Has Been Present Throughout Recorded Human History00:16:51 Argument 5 - The Technology Suggests Something More Than Extraterrestrial00:17:44 Valleé's New Hypotheses00:18:10 The Interdimensional Hypothesis00:19:50 The Ultraterrestrial Hypothesis00:20:59 Is The UFO Phenomenon A Control Mechanism?00:24:06 Music Break 00:25:30 Do Other Dimensions Exist?00:25:52 The Double Slit Experiment Revisited00:29:43 The Copenhagen Interpretation00:32:23 The Many Worlds Interpretation00:34:01 Grappling With Infinity00:34:58 The Free Will Problem00:36:49 Infinity And The Self00:37:24 An Unprovable HypothesisSupport the show (https://www.patreon.com/uforabbithole)

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Asymmetric Justice, published by Zvi on the LessWrong. Related and required reading in life (ANOIEAEIB): The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics Epistemic Status: Trying to be minimally judgmental Spoiler Alert: Contains minor mostly harmless spoiler for The Good Place, which is the best show currently on television. The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics (in parallel with the similarly named one in physics) is as follows: The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics says that when you observe or interact with a problem in any way, you can be blamed for it. At the very least, you are to blame for not doing more. Even if you don't make the problem worse, even if you make it slightly better, the ethical burden of the problem falls on you as soon as you observe it. In particular, if you interact with a problem and benefit from it, you are a complete monster. I don't subscribe to this school of thought, but it seems pretty popular. I don't say this often, but seriously, read the whole thing. I do not subscribe to this interpretation. I believe that the majority of people effectively endorse this interpretation. I do not think they endorse it consciously or explicitly. But they act as if it is true. Another aspect of this same phenomenon is how most people view justice. Almost everyone agrees justice is a sacred value. That it is good and super important. Justice is one of the few universally agreed upon goals of government. Justice is one of the eight virtues of the avatar. Justice is up there with truth and the American way. No justice, no peace. But what is justice? Or rather, to avoid going too deeply into an infinitely complex philosophical debate millenniums or eons old, how do most people instinctively model justice in broad terms? In a conversation last night, this was offered to me (I am probably paraphrasing due to bad memory, but it's functionally what was said), and seems common: Justice is giving appropriate punishment to those who have taken bad action. I asked whether, in this person's model, the actions needed to be bad in order to be relevant to justice. This prompted pondering, after which the reply was that yes, that was how their model worked. I then asked whether rewarding a good action counted as justice, or failing to do so counted as injustice, using the example of saving someone's life going unrewarded. We can consider three point-based justice systems. In the asymmetric system, when bad action is taken, bad action points are accumulated. Justice punishes in proportion to those points to the extent possible. Each action is assigned a non-negative point total. In the symmetric system, when any action is taken, good or bad, points are accumulated. This can be and often is zero, is negative for bad action, positive for good action. Justice consists of punishing negative point totals and rewarding positive point totals. In what we will call the Good Place system (Spoiler Alert for Season 1), when any action is taken, good or bad, points are accumulated as in the symmetric system. But there's a catch (which is where the spoiler comes in). If you take actions with good consequences, you only get those points if your motive was to do good. When a character attempts to score points by holding open doors for people, they fail to score any points because they are gaming the system. Gaming the system isn't allowed. Thus, if one takes action even under the best of motives, one fails to capture much of the gains from such action. Second or higher order benefits, or surprising benefits, that are real but unintended, will mostly not get captured. The opposite is not true of actions with bad consequences. You lose points for bad actions whether or not you intended to be bad. It is your responsibility to check yourself before you wreck yourself. When (Spoiler Alert fo...

In this episode, we begin by complaining about the monopolized internet service provider industry. Then we pivot and announce our respective and official retirements from certain activities, debate the merits of walking on all fours as a way to get jacked and vascular forearms, consider the Copenhangen Interpretation of Ethics--which essentially says anyone who tries to solve a problem will end up being blamed for that very problem--and finally conclude with an On The Podium of companies with the worst customer service. Like and subscribe.

Episode: 2727 Quantum Theory's Copenhagen Interpretation and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) Paper.  Today, we get spooky.

Episode: 2627 Clash of the Titans: The Bohr-Einstein Debates.  Today, a clash of titans.

Brian Greene is a theoretical physicist, mathematician, an author and the Director of Columbia University’s Centre for Theoretical Physics. Nothing short of fascinating stuff today with one of the most popular public physicists of our age. Brian is an absolute titan. Expect to hear answers to some of the biggest and most fundamental questions we have. What happens if the universe is infinite? When will time end? What is time? What is the relationship between entropy and evolution? What do people get wrong about the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum physics? Just how finely tuned for life is our universe? Why does the Planck Scale exist? Is there such a thing as meaning in a universe which doesn't care if we live or die? How will ultra-advanced civilisations behave in the future? Sponsors: Get 83% discount & 3 months free from Surfshark VPN at https://surfshark.deals/MODERNWISDOM (use code MODERNWISDOM) Get 20% discount on Reebok’s entire range including the amazing Nano X at https://geni.us/modernwisdom (use code MW20) Extra Stuff: Buy Until The End Of Time - https://amzn.to/3mtBqY8  Follow Brian on Twitter - https://twitter.com/bgreene Get my free Ultimate Life Hacks List to 10x your daily productivity → https://chriswillx.com/lifehacks/ To support me on Patreon (thank you): https://www.patreon.com/modernwisdom - Get in touch. Join the discussion with me and other like minded listeners in the episode comments on the MW YouTube Channel or message me... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chriswillx Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/chriswillx YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/ModernWisdomPodcast Email: modernwisdompodcast@gmail.com

Its well established in Quantum Physics, ever since it's beginning, that the observation/measurement of quantum phenomena affects the results. Not only that, its well established in every day life that mentally intending to say, lift your arm, corresponds to your arm lifting. This connection between the mind and what occurs in physical reality in observation and other mental activity, is clear in Quantum Physics, so why are mental phenomena deemed to be determined and described by physical interactions alone? Does observation collapse all the possibilities into one outcome based on the subjective perception/mental-state of the observer? Is this the Law of Mentalism and the Law of Attraction in action in the Quantum Field? Does determination of objective reality via Wavefunction Collapse occur among brain synapses? Is the brain built to determine physical reality? Does the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Physics scientifically prove Pantheism to be true? This is a reading from the text: Quantum Theory and Free Will. How Mental Intentions Translate into Bodily Actions. Henry P. Stapp. Published by Springer Nature, of Springer International Publishing. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. University of California. Berkeley, CA, USA, 2017.

Last episode, we discussed the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics. The episode got quite deep and interesting, as we delved deeper into some of the more complex topics that plague the great scientific minds of our generation. We made typical mechanical physics, often regarded as one of the most difficult high school classes that exists, look like a child's play. Quantum mechanics is, without a doubt, a heavy topic. The difficulty and uncertainty that exists with quantum mechanics is not isolated merely to quantum mechanics; there exists many other scientific paradigms and phenomena that plague scientific minds and force innovation. In this episode, we will explore yet another aspect of quantum mechanics, this time particle physics. Even with all that exists in the Copenhagen Interpretation and quantum field theory, there is still far more to be learned surrounding quantum mechanics. We have only begun to dip our smallest toe on the surface, but now we shall bring that toe a little deeper, as we begin to explore another aspect of physics, specifically particle physics, and the model that defines this particular field of physics. In this episode, we will explore the Standard Model of particle physics. References Standard Model of Particle Physics - CERN https://home.cern/science/physics/standard-model Standard Model - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model Gauge Theory - Britannica https://www.britannica.com/science/gauge-theory Strong Nuclear Force - Britannica https://www.britannica.com/science/strong-force Weak Nuclear Force - Britannica https://www.britannica.com/science/weak-force Electromagnetic Force - Bozeman Science https://www.youtube.com/watch/NcnZ2AigrCs Electromagnetic Force - Energy Education https://energyeducation.ca/encyclopedia/Electromagnetic_force Types of Hadrons - CheggStudy https://www.chegg.com/learn/physics/introduction-to-physics/hadrons

Physics has always existed as the horrible and confusing class that high school teenagers have to fight to survive through. It has existed as a unanimously difficult class with much room for confusion. Through my own experiences, I have observed that teenagers generally hate physics; they take the class for the credit it provides, but they often gain nothing from the class. Many go on to fail their physics classes, whether it is an AP class or a normal class. In this episode, we will look into the main interpretation comprising quantum mechanics, the Copenhagen Interpretation, and we will look into how all of it works. Brace yourselves as we attempt to understand one of the only indeterminist (not having cause) scientific concepts in existence, a concept that fundamentally rejects our natural understanding of patterns. If you have any questions, comments, concerns, or corrections, please email me using the address provided: learningbywilliam@gmail.com Reference: Copenhagen Interpretation - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-copenhagen/ Copenhagen Interpretation - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copenhagen_interpretation Bohr's Correspondence Principle - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correspondence_principle Indeterminism in Quantum Mechanics - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminism Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle Old Quantum Theory - University of California - Riverside https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/spin/node3.html Principle of Complementarity - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarity_(physics) Wave Function Collapse - StackExchange https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/35328/why-does-observation-collapse-the-wave-function Superposition - WhatIs.com https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/superposition Various Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics Universal Darwinism - Cambridge University Press https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/nature-of-life/universal-darwinism/0939B49903C60A59B57DC5C007415ECF

Into the Quantum Multiverse

We keep talking about the Multiverse. What does that even mean? Is it actually a thing? Why is sad Stuart sad? It is because of his dead cat? Which human should we put in a supercollider, and why? Are Stuart’s dreams actually interdimensional travel, or just crazy talk? What is reality? All these questions and more are answered with even more questions by a theoretical physicist who also happens to be a Burner, Adam Brown.LIVE.BURNINGMAN.ORG

Hello! In this episode of the Quantum to Infinity podcast, we discuss one of the most important interpretations in all of Quantum Mechanics : The Copenhagen Interpretation! I hope you enjoyed this episode, stay tuned for more content!

Athena & Raafae join one of the nerds to have a chat about one of the most mysterious areas in physics... quantum mechanics!This chat was really an overview of the major ideas in the field. Quanta and photons. Wave particle duality. Matter as a wave. The Uncertainty Principle. Schrodinger's Equation & the Wave function. The measurement problem & the Copenhagen Interpretation. Entanglement & Bell's Theorem. Hidden Variables and Many Worlds.It is near impossible for us to explore all of the mysteries of Quantum Mechanics in one sitting! But if you would like us to do more in-depth chats about more specific topics, let us know!If you would like to see what the nerds look like, check us out on YouTube at:https://www.youtube.com/c/BetweenTwoNerdsAnd for more information about Curiosity Lab, how we make kids fall in love with science, check out:https://www.curiositylab.ae

DK, Aura, Kagyu and Storm split some atoms and crack open a few electrons in an exploration of Buddhism and science. Addressed in this issue: What were the core findings that led to the birth of quantum mechanics, and how does it compare to Buddhist ideas about the nature of reality? How can we square the classical Buddhist idea of indivisible dharmas with seemingly contradictory teachings about the illusory nature of samsara? And we talk about how both Buddhism and QM wrestle with the central conundrum of how observation seems to actually "create" the reality we see. Atomic energy levels https://khanacademy.org/science/physics/quantum-physics/atoms-and-electrons/v/atomic-energy-levels… Wave-particle duality  https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry_Textbook_Maps/Supplemental_Modules_(Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry)/Quantum_Mechanics/09._The_Hydrogen_Atom/Atomic_Theory/Electrons_in_Atoms/Wave-Particle_Duality… The Double Slit Experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment… The Copenhagen Interpretation https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-copenhagen/… The Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics - John von Neumann https://amazon.com/Mathematical-Foundations-Quantum-Mechanics-Neumann/dp/0691028931… Yogācāra http://acmuller.net/yogacara/articles/intro.html… Alan Watts: "You didn't come into this world, you came out of it." https://youtube.com/watch?v=lXRPjdXGjjg

In this episode we counter the Copenhagen Interpretation and try to deal with teen suicide. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/mathematical-basis-for-re/support

Learn about a version of Schrödinger's cat that might break quantum physics; a study hack that makes you think about how you study; and why you’re not as mysterious as you think you are, thanks to a cognitive bias called asymmetric insight. In this podcast, Cody Gough and Ashley Hamer discuss the following stories from Curiosity.com to help you get smarter and learn something new in just a few minutes: Adding a Second Cat to Schrödinger's Cat Experiment Might Break Quantum Physics This Study Hack From a Stanford Researcher Gets A's out of B+ Students Asymmetric Insight Is Why You're Not as Mysterious as You Think You Are Please tell us about yourself and help us improve the show by taking our listener survey! https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/curiosity-listener-survey If you love our show and you're interested in hearing full-length interviews, then please consider supporting us on Patreon. You'll get exclusive episodes and access to our archives as soon as you become a Patron! Learn about these topics and more on Curiosity.com, and download our 5-star app for Android and iOS. Then, join the conversation on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Plus: Amazon smart speaker users, enable our Alexa Flash Briefing to learn something new in just a few minutes every day!

We pick up from last week's episode with the next speaker. Kara Lamb followed Andrew Sicree; her research is about the atmosphere and climate. She mostly talked about climate, and got a ways into specifics about her research on black carbon soot in the atmosphere. She did stop to draw a parallel between Laudato Si and Pacem in Terris, that in both cases the Popes stopped to address humanity at large and not just the Church. Juan Martin Maldacena was after her, and was presented the St. Albert Award. You don't schedule Juan Maldacena and not have him talk about his own physics research; he is famous for research on workable forms of string theory in anti-de Sitter space and some results on the shape and nature of black holes. His talk was very technical and rather hard to summarize, but an intriguing aspect of it was the recurring notion that black hole singularities and the original singularity of the Big Bang might have a lot in common. Sunday morning after Mass Michael Dennin led off with a talk structured around a book called "The Big Picture" by somebody I think I've heard of but don't know why named Sean Carroll. In this book Carroll apparently divides reality into "poetic naturalism", where "poetic" means "stories we tell ourselves about large complicated objects" and "naturalism" means "quantum physics, which is actually reality". Dennin made four points: Emergence. Reality does not appear to be just quantum physics (or, I would elaborate, not even just a unified theory that somehow gets gravity and relativity united with quantum physics). There are really new laws that emerge as you go to larger, composite, varied objects...the laws of thermodynamics, entropy in particular, are an example. Physical reality. It's a little much to talk about "reality" so cavlierly; it ignores basically metric tons of philosophical questions people have spent centuries debating. Is physical reality basically sense data? Is it the particles we theorize to be out there to explain, ultimately, our sense data in the context of the experiments we do and the natural objects we observe? Isn't there nonphysical reality: mathematics, wavefunctions (they can't be completely physical), conscious reality / qualia? How can we be sure there aren't nonphysical "forces" acting on physical objects? In some way, don't they have to? (mathematics and logic in some way constrain reality, that's a rumination of mine while writing this) Free will...the Comptonesque observation that quantum physics leave room for this nonphysical soul or mind to affect the physical body MIracles. Dennin actually led off the talk with an exercise, asking us to define miracles, and then he went on a fairly vigorous campaign against the idea that miracles ever incorporate the violation of physical law, or at least that they require it, that that should be in the definition. I noted "Contrasting focus on God's will/purpose..." but I cannot really reconstruct what he seemed to be driving at. Craig Lent, a professor at Notre Dame, went next and gave an interesting talk that interfaced with others. He actually seemed to conflict with Barr in that he commented early on that the "state vector," which had be be the wavefunction since it had the same Greek letter psi for its symbol, contained all the information possible to have about a system and not just one observer's (the concept Barr used). He also addresses the measurement problem, but my note broke off mid-sentence. He went on to summarize the content of Scarani's talk, that Bell inequality experiments all show that the universe is not deterministic. He then addresses the claim that while atom-scale particles show quantum indeterminism, larger stuff does not, and nerves are enough larger that the human brain must be deterministic. That's probably not true; even 10,000 atomic mass unit molecules like neural transmitters show quantum behavior in experiments. We are left again with the Arthur Compton point that while obviously physics constrains us, our brains are not deterministic machines; if our souls are not affecting them, then at the very least some of their functionality is random. The final talk was by (Padre) Javier Sanchez-Canizares on "Mind, Decoherence, and the Copenhagen Interpretation." This again comments on many of the topics in previous talks. Unfortunately the talk seemed to paw about problems already discussed without coming to any new realizations. I cannot tell from my notes whether I learned anything about decoherence, which I was really hoping to do; I think I had to look it up afterward, and even then the answers I've found so far are not satisfying. He asked the "Wigner's friend" question that Barr mentioned about the "cut" between the observer and the system in a quantum physics observation. He also made some intriguing comments on the nature of classical physics: if quantum physics is reality, why is it so hard to get rid of classical physics terminology? We still describe things that way. A recent physicist, Zurek, comments that classical physics entities somehow embody a "survival of the fittest" (the sort of comment I start questioning for influence of the divine name of evolution). Heisenberg apparently said that classical physics terms are just unavoidably part of how humans interact with the world.

Quantum mechanics is quite odd, and difficult to interpret! So difficult in fact, that physicists do not agree about what this area implies about the nature of reality. There are a number of camps: Copenhagen Interpretation, Many-Worlds Interpretation, Objective Reduction, and many more. This informative yet light-hearted conversation is not to be missed for any physics enthusiast! Guest: Michael Enciso Moderator: Julian Michael All music created by Simulated Sun: www.simulatedsun.com Check out educational tutorials by Professor Dave: www.professordaveexplains.com

Many Worlds The interpretations of quantum physics that gives Rick & Morty the “multiverse.” Probabilities and determinism. Shrödinger’s Cat Shringer’s thought experient, initially a criticism of the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum physics cum go-to example. Universes Organizing and labeling universes. The “central finite curve.” AI Foibles Rules-lawyering with a genie, again. Elon Musk vs Mark Zuckerberg. Kevin Kelly’s take. Keeping them in the box. Universes in Universes Energy efficiency in multiverse batteries. Creating universes. the Kardashev scale. Community also by Darn Harmon: iTunesAmazon Rick and Morty - Finding Meaning in Life by Will Shoder: YouTube Support the show!

Physics Colloquium 26th May 2017 delivered by Professor Miles Padgett, University of Glasgow Ghost imaging and ghost diffraction were first demonstrated by Shih and co-workers using photon pairs created by parametric down-conversion. They were able to obtain an image or a diffraction pattern using photons that had never interacted with the object, relying instead on the correlations with photons that have. In a typical ghost-imaging configuration, the down-converted photons are directed into two separate optical arms. The object is placed in one arm and a single-pixel “heralding” detector detects the photons transmitted through this object. The signal from this detector triggers a camera positioned in the other arm, which then detects the spatial position of the correlated photon. The image is recovered from the coincidence detection of the two photons. But what sets the resolution of the resulting images? The resolution of the heralding arm, the resolution of the camera optics, or something else? This talk will present an examination of the resolution limits of the ghost imaging and ghost diffraction. Beyond consideration of these limits, our ghost diffraction is an implementation of Popper's thought experiment, and while our results agree with his experimental predictions, we show how these results do not contradict the Copenhagen Interpretation.

A clear setting out of the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Theory and a discussion of some of the philosphical issues it brings forward.

Observations on a quantum infection