#TIL that #Bohr responded to Einstein's "God does not play dice" quote with "Einstein, don't tell God what to do", and I find this amusing

@nichni Giv endelig an anmeldelse af filmen, når I har set den. Jeg overvejer, men blev lidt skeptisk efter anmeldelse i Politiken - men andre anmeldere mener åbenbart, at den er rigtig god. #oppenheimer & #bohr

RT @Nereide
Werner #Heisenberg (left) with Niels #Bohr at a Conference in Copenhagen in 1934.

Both (Heisenberg not yet 30) produced the #Copenhagen Interpretation, the dominant understanding of #quantumphysics.

Photo: #Fermilab, U.S. Departm. of Energy

#QuantumMechanics
#History
#Science

"Einstein, Bohr and the Great Debate About the Nature of Reality" by Jørgen Veisdal 👉 🔗 https://www.cantorsparadise.com/the-bohr-einstein-debate-baa0929a78b5

\[c^2\Delta m\Delta t=\Delta E\Delta t\geq h\]

#Einstein #Bohr #Debate #NatureOfReality #Physics #Reality #Photon #Lorentz #WaveFunction #Heisenberg #QuantumTheory #BornRule #Uncertainty #QuantumMechanics

Does the #Universe Create Itself?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8p1yqnuk8Y&ab_channel=PBSSpaceTime

#Physics #Cosmology #Realism #Objectivity #QM #QuantumMechanics #NielsBohr #Bohr #JohnWheeler #Wheeler #Superposition #BigBang #TheBigBang #PBS #Spacetime #PBSSpacetime

Lev Landau - Scientist of the Day - Linda Hall Library
https://www.lindahall.org/lev-landau/
In addition to his award-winning work in #physics, he is also remembered for a scale he devised to rank 20th-century physicists. It was an exponential scale, according to which 0 was the highest possible (indeed infinite) score, followed by 1 through 5, and because the scale was logarithmic, a “1” was considered 10 times more productive than a “2”, and a “2” ten times better than a “3”. #Newton was a “1”, as were Niels #Bohr and Paul #Dirac and several others. #Einstein was given the highest rank, a “0.5”, which made him about three times smarter, or at least more productive, than Newton and Bohr. #Landau initially ranked himself as a “2.5”, but later decided that he really deserved to be a “2” and moved himself up the scale.

Follow up on Causality as an emergent phenomenon...

(Ref. to: https://qoto.org/@Pat/106722620334765036)

I found sources on the topic:

Causality – Complexity – Consistency:
Can Space-Time Be Based on Logic and Computation?
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1602.06987.pdf

Causal Emergence in Quantum Mechanics
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.07471.pdf

Perfect signaling among three parties
violating predefined causal order
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.5916.pdf

Causality theory for closed cone structures with applications
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1709.06494.pdf

Plus an older article, "CPT Violation Implies Violation of Lorentz Invariance" by O.W. Greenberg, which might be related to the topic.
https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0201258

I just found these yesterday on arXiv and really haven't vetted them much. There's more out there, mostly from the last decade or so. Not sure why I couldn't find this before -- I tried multiple times this year to find this stuff and now a week after I posted here I find a bunch of stuff. Go figure...

Some of it is about non-locality and some also on temporal non-causality like disordered cause/effect. (Some authors use the term acausality instead of non-causality.)

Also, there's a prof at U. Miss. (Luca Bombelli, www.phy.olemiss.edu/~luca/) with some nice reference lists:

Causality in Quantum Field Theory
https://www.phy.olemiss.edu/~luca/Topics/st/causal_qft.html

Causality in Quantum Theory
https://www.phy.olemiss.edu/~luca/Topics/st/causal_qm.html

Causality
https://www.phy.olemiss.edu/~luca/Topics/st/causal.html

Hope this useful.

-------------
#einstein #bohr #causality #spacetime #belltest #epr #paradox #light
#atom #atoms #electron #proton #quark #neutron #electricity #stem #technology
#cern #matter #energy #higgs #particle #lorentz #simultaneity #lightcone
#physics #QM #relativity #gravity #time #space

More detail on the non-causality poll...

I'd expect adherents to quantum mechanics to choose "sometimes".

Since QM appears to introduce uncertainty (probabilistic) in place of causality (deterministic) (i.e., it moves from certainty toward randomness), I don't see why a deeper dive couldn't move entirely to randomness (non-causality).

Non-causality appears to be a generalization of nonlocality (or perhaps complimentary to it).

Because of the results of the Bell test experiments, there appears to be renewed interest in explicit theories of nonlocality (e.g., extentions of de Broglie–Bohm theory) to make QM more palatable.

I think the development of a construct for a non-causal extent with causality emergent at macroscopic levels (or emergent at the quantum/macro interface) could serve the same purpose, but I haven't been able to find anything on that.

*** Does anybody know of anyone who is working on that? ***

Here are some more hashtags to cast the net a bit wider. (feel free to comment even after the poll is complete):

#einstein #bohr #causality #spacetime #belltest #epr #paradox #light
#atom #atoms #electron #proton #quark #neutron #electricity #stem #technology
#cern #matter #energy #higgs #particle #lorentz #simultaneity #lightcone
#physics #QM #relativity #gravity #time #space