From: Richard McGough (richard@biblewheel.com)
Date: Wed Jul 02 2003 - 18:51:54 EDT
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Glenn Morton" <glennmorton@entouch.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 16:21:23 -0500
>Richard wrote:
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
>>Behalf Of Richard McGough
>>Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 1:10 PM
>
>>What has happened to sciam?
>
>Nothing.
>>
>>The article under discussion was featured on the cover of the May
>>2003 Scientific American, where it was flatly asserted, with no
>>question or qualification, that parallel universes really exist.
>>This is ludicrous in the extreme. At best Tegmark has some
>>evidence for his hypothesis. He certainly has nothing like
>>scientific proof. This makes the cover of sciam look rather like
>>the National Enquirer.
>>
>>How Tegmark ever got his article past peer review is beyond me.
>
>Sciam has never been peer-reviewed to my knowledge. While it used to have
>fewer reporter written articles than it does today, it was always a general
>science journal to communcate ideas to non-professionals.
>
>And it seems to me that you are illustrating exactly the kind of attitude on
>peer-review which Tipler (in my opinion) correctly complains about in that
>other thread). One simply can't have a peer review process which only
>publishes that which agrees with the consensus otherwise progress doesn't
>happen.
>
>
>
>>When I first looked at his basic claim, I knew it was false. It
>>took only minutes to prove it false. I refer to these calculations
>>from his article:
>>
>>http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000F1EDD-B48A-1E90-8EA58
>>09EC5880000&pageNumber=2&catID=2
>>
>>
>>>About 10 to the 10^92 meters away, there should be a sphere of
>>radius 100 light-years identical to the one centered here, so all
>>perceptions that we have during the next century will be identical
>>to those of our counterparts over there. About 10 to the 10^118
>>meters away should be an entire Hubble volume identical to ours.
>>
>>>These are extremely conservative estimates, derived simply by
>>counting all possible quantum states that a Hubble volume can have
>>if it is no hotter than 10^8 kelvins. One way to do the
>>calculation is to ask how many protons could be packed into a
>>Hubble volume at that temperature. The answer is 10^118 protons.
>>Each of those particles may or may not, in fact, be present, which
>>makes for 2 to the 10118 possible arrangements of protons.
>>
>>
>>It appears Tegmark only counted the eigenstates. He ignored the
>>fact that each superposition of these eigenstates corresponds to a
>>different physical configuation of the system.
>
>I don't think he ignored the fact that each eigenstate corresponds to a
>different physical configuration of the hubble volume. That is the basis of
>his calculation These eigenstates he counted refer to the eigenstate of the
>hubble volume which are not superposed with others unless one wants to
>speak about the eigenstate of the entire universe. But then I am probably
>incompetent to argue with the discoverer of the sevenfold symmetric
>perfection of the Holy Bible.
>
>
Glen,
You seem to be repeating Tegmark's mistake. The fact that there are a finite number of eigenstates corresponding to an energy less than 10^8k does not mean that there is not an infinite number of distinct physical configurations corresponding to linear superpositions of said eigenstates. You failed to address my points and my calculations. If a single electron can exist in a continuous infinity of states, do you really think a tiny little finite number like 2^10^118 really represents all the physical configurations possible in a Hubble volume with 10^50 interacting particles? I repeat, Tegmark's calculations are patently absurd.
Re: Peer review. Ooops, I didn't realize sciam was not peer reviewed. Of course, the general principle implied by peer review is really what I had in mind, which is that somebody who knew first year quantum physics should have mentioned that physical states generally involve infinite superpositions of eigenstates.
As for your lack argumentative competence, I fear you may have proven your point with your own comment.
In service of Christ the King,
-- Richard Amiel McGough Discover the sevenfold symmetric perfection of the Holy Bible at http://www.BibleWheel.com --
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jul 02 2003 - 18:57:53 EDT