Re: No new Einstein
- From: Eugene Stefanovich <eugenev@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2005 07:46:32 +0000 (UTC)
cmaj10@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> The real question is: Is nature deterministic or not? You seem to
> adhere to the view that it is not deterministic. But let's confirm this
> with this question: Given a pair of perfectly identical nuclei having
> EXACTLY THE SAME STATE {to every imaginable and inimaginable detail),
> and with similar neighborhoods. Does it seem plausible to you that they
> will take different amounts of time to decay?
I cannot say about "unimaginable detail", because I cannot imagine it.
But if two nuclei are prepared in exactly (to every imaginable detail)
the same states, they will surely take different amounts of time to
decay. The nature is not deterministic. This is the main lesson of
quantum mechanics.
Of course, one can hope that this is not true, and that there are
some yet unknown hidden parameters that someday will allow us
to return to the classical deterministic picture; some "alarm clock"
hidden within the nucleus that tells the nucleus at what exact time
to disintegrate. I don't share these hopes. Though I don't have a proof
that such hopes are groundless.
Eugene.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: No new Einstein
- From: cmaj10
- Re: No new Einstein
- References:
- Re: No new Einstein
- From: Eugene Stefanovich
- Re: No new Einstein
- From: cmaj10
- Re: No new Einstein
- Prev by Date: Re: The time it takes to emit one photon
- Next by Date: Re: The time it takes to emit one photon
- Previous by thread: Re: No new Einstein
- Next by thread: Re: No new Einstein
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|