Welcome to Tyrannogenius!
Hello, visitors!
My name is Neil Bates, and I welcome you to Tyrannogenius - the first post of my first blog. I'm just introducing myself here, and will have more to say later. However, to give you a taste...
1. I like scientific paradoxes, and I propose them too. Enter "quantum measurement paradox" into Google, and a thread I started on sci.physics.research (a quality, refereed newsgroup) comes up first. I'll describe the paradox in these pages later.
2. The great philosophical questions interest me greatly. I think that the unwit I call "Witlesstein" is one of the worst philosophers ever. Someday I will post a refutation of his undeservedly renowned "beetle-in-a-box" argument against private languages. (It's mostly an indulgence of logical positivism. Hey - can you logical positivists tell me what the operational meaning of "things continue to exist even while not being observed" is? Nor can we find out what happened yesterday because of quantum uncertainty, but we don't pretend things aren't a definite way to be today for the sake of the poor bastards of tomorrow who can't do a Laplacian track-back...)
Well, that's all folks 'til next time!
My name is Neil Bates, and I welcome you to Tyrannogenius - the first post of my first blog. I'm just introducing myself here, and will have more to say later. However, to give you a taste...
1. I like scientific paradoxes, and I propose them too. Enter "quantum measurement paradox" into Google, and a thread I started on sci.physics.research (a quality, refereed newsgroup) comes up first. I'll describe the paradox in these pages later.
2. The great philosophical questions interest me greatly. I think that the unwit I call "Witlesstein" is one of the worst philosophers ever. Someday I will post a refutation of his undeservedly renowned "beetle-in-a-box" argument against private languages. (It's mostly an indulgence of logical positivism. Hey - can you logical positivists tell me what the operational meaning of "things continue to exist even while not being observed" is? Nor can we find out what happened yesterday because of quantum uncertainty, but we don't pretend things aren't a definite way to be today for the sake of the poor bastards of tomorrow who can't do a Laplacian track-back...)
Well, that's all folks 'til next time!
posted by Neil Bates at 21:37
1 Comments:
Neil,
Re the questions you asked over on CosmicVariance: I published on my own private website, in LaTeX. I sent a one-page letter to Yoshio Koide explaining how to extend his formula. The letter pretty much only had algebra and trig, and was neatly printed in LaTeX. (Physicists don't have time to read more than 1 page or to check your complicated equations, and appreciate someone who knows how to typeset. Universities frequently throw away emails that come from outside .edu, so use a paper letter.)
I think sci.physics.*** is a crappy place to show new results. It is a great place to put stuff if you want the same old people to criticize it without understanding it. It is probably a good place for grad students to ask how to find the green's function for Schroedinger's equation and that sort of thing. New work needs to be sent to the people in the industry who are working with that specialty as they probably don't read sci.physics.***
Also, the original idea for the formula came from something I read at Physics Forums. PF is a lousy place to discuss new ideas for the same reason that sci.physics.*** is. Better is to set up a blog on WordPress which allows LaTex in the posts and comments.
Post a Comment
<< Home