My Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and The Universe at Large

In fact alphanumeric, listen to me, and listen good, because i am getting very pissed off, and i will take an eppy with you if you continue this.

YOU ARE A TROLL... And if you are not, you are quickly becoming one. You are not coming into threads anymore to participate in the OP, but instead coming in for a quick brawl. Fuck off. I don't need this kind of behaviour, and neither does anyone else. You've insulted me, and insulted other members here.

Now, shut it about my education. I have told you, i am at college studying physics. Then a few weeks back, you kept interrogating me for my grades from school. What the fuck has any of that got to do with you? It was only after your constant whining did i tell you what i got at school in a PM.

I'd rather you get a fucking grip on your ego, and have another look at your last post, and answer to yourself what the fuck it has to do with anything of the OP... and even if you where answering me, what was the first set of posts you made got anything to do with the OP?

Eh?

Grow up. Don't answer me in my posts, because as you keep saying, its OBVIOUS i'm not competent, so why are you waisting your time, mmm?

Take that as a nice warning, before i say something i do regret.
 
I offer advice from someone whose been through what you want to do. If you posted these essays along with serious attempts at doing physics, like saying "I was reading this textbook and I don't understand how this result is derived...." like Quarkhead or StMartin do, then it would show that you're interested in both concepts and the specifics.

I don't deny that I had plenty of weird and wonderful (but misinformed) ideas as a 17 year old who'd read a lot of pop science books. But I also knew that didn't mean I could 'do' quantum mechanics or that I was mathematically competant. I remember looking at a 3rd year QM textbook at the end of my 1st year in uni (I knew a bit of vector calculus but zero specifics about QM) and I was completely unable to understand it. What I now consider to be second nature (bra-ket notation, annihilation and creation operators, inner products, momentum space) I didn't understand at all.

Students who are clearly pasting their 1st QM course I give lecture notes of the next course to, because if they are that good they shouldn't be wasting their time 'spinning their wheels'. A few don't grasp the physics of it, so I honestly recommend a pop science book or two, but then that's because they have the maths down but not the concepts. It's important to have a balance.

You don't have a balance.

I have repeatedly said I'd be happy to help you (as would others here) if you made an honest effort to begin the journey you claim you want to make, ie the learning of actual quantum mechanics. I've got plenty of lecture notes you can have, book recommendations, a bunch of e-books if you don't want to use a library and as you work through the questions in the book and get stuck, you can ask here and people will help.

This is something you MUST do if you are get to where I am, doing a PhD in theoretical physics. And I'll tell you now, I wish I'd worked harder in those times I found things easier, because when you get to the hard stuff you want more time! So why are you putting it off? It's for your benefit! If you're honest in your wish to do a PhD in physics, why do you ignore the advice of the people who are already there? Aren't we likely to be giving the best advice?

You complain I'm all about my ego. Offering honest advice has suddenly become an ego trip? What about you? You never take advice and you refuse to accept you might be wrong on concepts you know I'm more knowledgable than you on (and that's not egotistical, it's a fact!).

Swallow your ego and if you're honest about your plans to want to do a physics PhD, start down that path. I've seen you post for the better part of a year now and you haven't made a single post asking about or doing actual physics expected of someone in education.
 
Ok AlphaNumeric
If you offer advice.... and you are so much more advanced that the rest of us. Then why do you have to keep braging?
Why not instead look at our simple attempt to understand as a sign of mentale evolution.
atleast we are using logic to precive the world instead og magic, gods and religion.
so what if have do not the same education as you, if you are as smart as you claim, then you can make it simple so that we can understand.. right?
 
I have given simple explainations to a lot of mainstream physics on another forum where I first came across Reiku (PhysOrg). He doesn't want to listen. He doesn't want to discuss actual physics. He doesn't like being corrected. He will repeat incorrect things he has been corrected on.

It's one thing to say "Okay, I've been reading Wikipedia and I'm a bit confused about how Josephson relates quantum mechanics to conciousness. Can someone give me a hand?". It's another thing to say "I've been reading Wikipedia, but not actual quantum mechanics books, and it's clear to me that quantum mechanics says....". The former situation is an acceptance of ignorance and a request for help. The latter is the opposite, ignoring ignorance and assuming understanding.

I understand basic quantum mechanics. I can do basic quantum mechanics. I do not assume this makes me a world leading field theorist. I regularly knock on my supervisor's door and say "I've no idea about ..." or "I just don't understand...". When I open a book on string theory, I don't automatically assume I know it all because I understand the first chapter or that if I skim read it once I'd understand it.

Reiku seems to be employing this mentality. He's not read a book but he knows about it anyway. Because Wikipedia's given a short synopsis of the topic. He's not done the maths but what he doesn't know he can quickly infer from what he does know. Never mind it's taken many thousands of professional physicists/mathematicians decades (or centuries!) to get from where he is now to where he thinks he is.

Anyone want help with these? Great. I'm happy to help. That's the first homework sheet of a first course in QM. Anyone claiming to be able to do QM should be able to do those. Reiku won't when I ask him to. Reiku can't. And I'm sure he'll whine about me saying that but he won't prove me wrong. He never does.

If you want to understand QMs, you need to learn some QM. If you want to understand QM and it's applications to something as complex as neurology then you need to be damn competant at QM.

Or do you think you can understand the application of one staggeringly complicated topic applied to another staggeringly complicated topic by knowing nothing about either of them?

Remember, QM is about 100 years old and the culmination of the work of countless geniuses. More than half of the Nobel Prizes for physics have gone to QM researchers. It's not a trivial topic. Yet Reiku posts essay after essay after essay talking about the details of it without actually knowing the details.

Oh and I assume from the fact you ignored my request you derive the uncertainty principle using your 'logic without maths' that you can't?
 
Wow... again you just have to have it your way............. or no way at all.

So Reiku is not on the same level as you are..... and as long as he is at a lower level he is not allowed to teorice.....
if this aplies to you too.... then because there are others who are at a higher level than you .... then you are not allowed to do it either. But you do, do it.

Ok so you gave me a challange and I did not respond to it.

That is because I do not do challanges.......... I challange my self, and that´s enough for me at the moment.
What I do is I re-think thoughts.
If one person is able to come to a certain fact, then another person should be able to do the same.... and he might just find out something new along the way, because the curcumstances are diffrent.
 
Reiku said:
Thank you Pharoe and Yinyang for your thoughts. Its always helpful.

Pharoe

As for these thoughts, i am only speculating. I have had a few paranormal activities in my life, and i need to come to explain them through physics, with an acceptable model. Even though i believe not every crevice of the mind will ever be known, i am still a believer we will make a definate model that will become universal over time. But because of the strange nature of the mind, and the paranormal activities, some of these theories need to be quite strange. One of the stranger theories i have shown and you and yingyang have picked up, is the potential layout of information embedded in the pysche..
Click to expand...

Well you've helped bring some of my more subconscious thoughts to the surface. If you ever think of writing a book on the subject i want the first signed copy! Honestly I think a book combining actual paranormal experiences with physics would fly off the shelves and might open up some new questions to tackle for the generations to come.

I'd love to give you some pointers for furthering your paranormal experiences but it's not that easy. I think much of it has to do with where a person is relative to the big picture. If you're in favor and have the mind for it then a lot will be revealed, just make sure you know where to draw the line as some routes may end in madness. Some advice though would be to know your mind and thoughts. Watch your thoughts and forcefully command your mind to quiet your thoughts. When thinking think in packets of information rather than word by word, you'll find that it is far more efficient. Go to places with lots of activity and you my find that your mind actually picks up on patterns and sounds that 'bend' with your mind. It will seem like coincidence after coincidence at first but with practice you may even experience time distortions or transcendence of time. Good luck. :bravo:
 
AlphaNumeric said:
I offer advice from someone whose been through what you want to do. If you posted these essays along with serious attempts at doing physics, like saying "I was reading this textbook and I don't understand how this result is derived...." like Quarkhead or StMartin do, then it would show that you're interested in both concepts and the specifics.

I don't deny that I had plenty of weird and wonderful (but misinformed) ideas as a 17 year old who'd read a lot of pop science books. But I also knew that didn't mean I could 'do' quantum mechanics or that I was mathematically competant. I remember looking at a 3rd year QM textbook at the end of my 1st year in uni (I knew a bit of vector calculus but zero specifics about QM) and I was completely unable to understand it. What I now consider to be second nature (bra-ket notation, annihilation and creation operators, inner products, momentum space) I didn't understand at all.

Students who are clearly pasting their 1st QM course I give lecture notes of the next course to, because if they are that good they shouldn't be wasting their time 'spinning their wheels'. A few don't grasp the physics of it, so I honestly recommend a pop science book or two, but then that's because they have the maths down but not the concepts. It's important to have a balance.

You don't have a balance.

I have repeatedly said I'd be happy to help you (as would others here) if you made an honest effort to begin the journey you claim you want to make, ie the learning of actual quantum mechanics. I've got plenty of lecture notes you can have, book recommendations, a bunch of e-books if you don't want to use a library and as you work through the questions in the book and get stuck, you can ask here and people will help.

This is something you MUST do if you are get to where I am, doing a PhD in theoretical physics. And I'll tell you now, I wish I'd worked harder in those times I found things easier, because when you get to the hard stuff you want more time! So why are you putting it off? It's for your benefit! If you're honest in your wish to do a PhD in physics, why do you ignore the advice of the people who are already there? Aren't we likely to be giving the best advice?

You complain I'm all about my ego. Offering honest advice has suddenly become an ego trip? What about you? You never take advice and you refuse to accept you might be wrong on concepts you know I'm more knowledgable than you on (and that's not egotistical, it's a fact!).

Swallow your ego and if you're honest about your plans to want to do a physics PhD, start down that path. I've seen you post for the better part of a year now and you haven't made a single post asking about or doing actual physics expected of someone in education.
Click to expand...

Well, what do you know then? With particular questions on calculus i have done, ''just a few things'', Ben has been helping me on the side by lookingat them. Just because i am not running to you for help, doesn't mean i don't seek it.
 
AlphaNumeric said:
I have given simple explainations to a lot of mainstream physics on another forum where I first came across Reiku (PhysOrg). He doesn't want to listen. He doesn't want to discuss actual physics. He doesn't like being corrected. He will repeat incorrect things he has been corrected on.

It's one thing to say "Okay, I've been reading Wikipedia and I'm a bit confused about how Josephson relates quantum mechanics to conciousness. Can someone give me a hand?". It's another thing to say "I've been reading Wikipedia, but not actual quantum mechanics books, and it's clear to me that quantum mechanics says....". The former situation is an acceptance of ignorance and a request for help. The latter is the opposite, ignoring ignorance and assuming understanding.

I understand basic quantum mechanics. I can do basic quantum mechanics. I do not assume this makes me a world leading field theorist. I regularly knock on my supervisor's door and say "I've no idea about ..." or "I just don't understand...". When I open a book on string theory, I don't automatically assume I know it all because I understand the first chapter or that if I skim read it once I'd understand it.

Reiku seems to be employing this mentality. He's not read a book but he knows about it anyway. Because Wikipedia's given a short synopsis of the topic. He's not done the maths but what he doesn't know he can quickly infer from what he does know. Never mind it's taken many thousands of professional physicists/mathematicians decades (or centuries!) to get from where he is now to where he thinks he is.

Anyone want help with these? Great. I'm happy to help. That's the first homework sheet of a first course in QM. Anyone claiming to be able to do QM should be able to do those. Reiku won't when I ask him to. Reiku can't. And I'm sure he'll whine about me saying that but he won't prove me wrong. He never does.

If you want to understand QMs, you need to learn some QM. If you want to understand QM and it's applications to something as complex as neurology then you need to be damn competant at QM.

Or do you think you can understand the application of one staggeringly complicated topic applied to another staggeringly complicated topic by knowing nothing about either of them?

Remember, QM is about 100 years old and the culmination of the work of countless geniuses. More than half of the Nobel Prizes for physics have gone to QM researchers. It's not a trivial topic. Yet Reiku posts essay after essay after essay talking about the details of it without actually knowing the details.

Oh and I assume from the fact you ignored my request you derive the uncertainty principle using your 'logic without maths' that you can't?
Click to expand...

Why do you keep mentioning wiki? I hardly ever go in wikipedia, because it is full of errors. You should know that too.

And i will post essay after essay, till the day sciforums falls and crumbles around us like Babylon because i enjoy it. Other people enjoy what i write. That's an acheivement in itself i would say, wouldn't you?
 
Pharoe

:)Yes... i am quite sure the para-physical side of things is a real alarmer!!! :) God knows how physics can answer for some of these things... i'm not even entirely sure whether my model alone is good enough. :) But thank you for your support. It is most kind.
 
Yinyang

Ignore alphanumeric. He enjoys to brawl. Don't feed his habit. I have found, if you try not answer him, he tends to shy away.
 
YinyangDK said:
So Reiku is not on the same level as you are..... and as long as he is at a lower level he is not allowed to teorice.....
Click to expand...
There's a difference between wondering what QM is about and posting essay after essay after essay which isn't pondering things in a vague way but making specific statements about topics you don't know about.
YinyangDK said:
if this aplies to you too.... then because there are others who are at a higher level than you .... then you are not allowed to do it either. But you do, do it.
Click to expand...
Do you see me posting lengthy essays on interpretations of the Bible? Nope. Do you see me posting lengthy essays about the politics of 19th century Prussia and how it lead to World War I? Nope.

Why? Because I don't know anything about them and if I started waxing lyrical about them and posting them all over theology and history forums I'm sure I'd get a few people who are very well read in that area correcting me.

And the things I do do work on in string theory is at the forefront of results. In the last 3 weeks I've come up with a result noone else has. It's not in any papers and infact it solves a problem noone else has solved before. And I'm not just spinning wordy BS, I actually have a mathematical method and construction which always solves a particular equation. One step closer to understanding string vacua. Two guys from Madrid will be coming here next week to talk about the details and then we can publish a few papers on our work before the summer.

If someone asks me "How do you know your ideas work?" I can show step by step the derivation and that when I put it all together, the functions satisfy the main equation. Something noone else has done in a general way before. I can put my physics where my mouth is.
YinyangDK said:
What I do is I re-think thoughts.
Click to expand...
How can you rethink things you don't know?

Where are you getting your information about QM from? If you don't read pop science sources and you don't read anything to do with mathematical physics, what do you read?
Reiku said:
Well, what do you know then?
Click to expand...
Enough to get a degree and masters from Cambridge and do a PhD.
Reiku said:
With particular questions on calculus i have done, ''just a few things'', Ben has been helping me on the side by lookingat them.
Click to expand...
Give a few examples.
Reiku said:
Why do you keep mentioning wiki? I hardly ever go in wikipedia, because it is full of errors. You should know that too.
Click to expand...
It's error rate is comparible to other encyclopedias. And I keep mentioning Wiki because nothing you post goes beyond the level which can be attained by any layman who spends a bit of time reading Wikipedia.
Reiku said:
Other people enjoy what i write. That's an acheivement in itself i would say, wouldn't you?
Click to expand...
People enjoy a lot of things which are pointless or even a hinderance to them.

Put a bunch of alcoholics in a room with plenty of bottles of vodka and they'll have a good time. They won't acheive anything though. What are you acheiving, in regards to heading towards a PhD? What books on vector calculus are you reading?
 
So it's too much to ask you to provide a few examples? Rather than just giving a few links you decide to insult me?

Like every crank I call out, you cannot back up your claims, even though it's only need a 1 line post.
 
AlphaNumeric said:
There's a difference between wondering what QM is about and posting essay after essay after essay which isn't pondering things in a vague way but making specific statements about topics you don't know about.
Do you see me posting lengthy essays on interpretations of the Bible? Nope. Do you see me posting lengthy essays about the politics of 19th century Prussia and how it lead to World War I? Nope.

Why? Because I don't know anything about them and if I started waxing lyrical about them and posting them all over theology and history forums I'm sure I'd get a few people who are very well read in that area correcting me.

And the things I do do work on in string theory is at the forefront of results. In the last 3 weeks I've come up with a result noone else has. It's not in any papers and infact it solves a problem noone else has solved before. And I'm not just spinning wordy BS, I actually have a mathematical method and construction which always solves a particular equation. One step closer to understanding string vacua. Two guys from Madrid will be coming here next week to talk about the details and then we can publish a few papers on our work before the summer.

If someone asks me "How do you know your ideas work?" I can show step by step the derivation and that when I put it all together, the functions satisfy the main equation. Something noone else has done in a general way before. I can put my physics where my mouth is.
How can you rethink things you don't know?

Where are you getting your information about QM from? If you don't read pop science sources and you don't read anything to do with mathematical physics, what do you read?
Enough to get a degree and masters from Cambridge and do a PhD.
Give a few examples.
It's error rate is comparible to other encyclopedias. And I keep mentioning Wiki because nothing you post goes beyond the level which can be attained by any layman who spends a bit of time reading Wikipedia.
People enjoy a lot of things which are pointless or even a hinderance to them.

Put a bunch of alcoholics in a room with plenty of bottles of vodka and they'll have a good time. They won't acheive anything though. What are you acheiving, in regards to heading towards a PhD? What books on vector calculus are you reading?
Click to expand...

Ok Alpha.....
I had hoped that I would have been able to apeel to your social intelligens, but it seems to be a dead end.
So now Im gonna apeel to your imagination;

Imagine you were interested in robotics.
Imagine that you used time on working out the logics of the robotbrain, because you thought it was fun, interesting and produktiv in it´s own way.

Imagine that you find a web-forum where you can chat with others who have thought somewhere along the same lines.
Imagine that every time you write no a thread, some "degree and masters from Japan and do a PhD of robotics" at Toyota, desides to pick a fight.

Now IF you are able to understand the logic of this paralle, then you must be smart enough to find something better to do.
 
Last edited:
Reiku: Just calm down. You and others asked for Alpha's credentials, and he gave them. I confess I wold not have stooped to that particular bait, but there we are.

The point is this, however. This is a "crackpot theory" forum, that is what Pseudoscience means. So post away, with your gibberish, and welcome. What some of here object to, however, are your repeated claims claims that you are "studying physics at college" and that that you know math.

I repeat the assertion I made in another thread: this is a demonstrable lie. What Alpha pointed out to you was simply that, if you do not even know the rudiments of vector calculus (the most fundamental tool in the physicists tool-box, so I am told) or any other math, by the look of it, then it is open to doubt you have even done A-level physics.

Why do you lie about this? Are you ashamed of your ignorance? Why be? I didn't do A-level physics. Am I ashamed of this? No! Would I lie about it, in public? Of course not; some "smart-aleck" would find me out, as you have been, repeatedly.

As Alpha has said over and over: ask a polite and friendly question, there are good people here who would try to help. Claim you are something that you are not, and you can be guaranteed a roasting
 
Lie? I am not lying i did physics at school, and now studying in a college course... Why you say i am not, i don't know where you are getting this from.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top