Comments for Confused at a higher level

Comment on About by William Lee

William Lee — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:49:47 +0000

Our website Science.org is a informational databases and online news publication for anything and everything related to science and technology. We recently ran a poll asking our website users regarding what online informational resources they use to keep up to date or even to simply find great information. It seems many of our users have labeled your blog as an excellent source of Space information. We have reviewed your blog and must say, we absolutely love the information you have made available to the public and would love to make your blog a part of our top science blogs. After browsing your blog, our research team has decided to award you a Top science Blogs award banner.

Comment on One snapshot of physics in urban schools by Brandon

Brandon — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:22:56 +0000

That’s a shame that things are like that. It seems that we’ve let our public education slip so much…

Brandon
http://www.alumniclass.com

Comment on One snapshot of physics in urban schools by quantummoxie

quantummoxie — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 15:46:56 +0000

This is unfortunate though not new. The trouble is still that too many ’star’ physicists either view physics education activism as ‘beneath them’ or have ideas for fixing things that are wildly impractical.

Comment on Random thoughts: matter & interactions, nanoscience & disciplines by quantummoxie

quantummoxie — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 02:26:40 +0000

I haven’t used Chabay and Sherwood to actually teach a course before, but I have it on my shelf and use it as reference material. Personally, I’m a Tom Moore acolyte (Six Ideas That Shaped Physics).

Comment on [0811.4542] Mathematical undecidability and quantum randomness by Steve Faulkner

Steve Faulkner — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 11:30:04 +0000

If the Paterek et al. paper interests you, you may find interesting undecidability I have found in the quantum formalism itself. This derives from a logical excluded middle under the Field Axioms and relates to scalars whose logical status are distinct. Some scalars exist as theorems of the Field Axioms, others merely satisfy them.

This undecidability propagates through a full theoremology indicative of causelogy in Nature that explains the “causal anomalies” of Quantum Physics. Some details are in my blog.

Comment on Workshop at ICTP by quantummoxie

quantummoxie — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 23:13:42 +0000

Cool! Thanks! Honestly, the Cerf-Adami stuff is pretty simple – entropic Bell inequalities. The original paper by those guys is fairly easy to understand.

I should definitely talk to Partovi. I had been hoping to meet him at the APS March Meeting last year (I was chair of the quantum foundations session and he was supposed to present but withdrew). His results suggesting the existence of macroscopic entangled states in thermal systems were really interesting. It throws a wrench into the whole quantum-classical/macro-micro debate (what *is* a quantum state?).

Comment on Workshop at ICTP by arjendu

arjendu — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 21:20:22 +0000

Hello Ian, about (1) I’m not holding my breath and never was .

About (2), I took a quick look at it and it’s definitely near what I do, but yet far enough that most of what you are saying is alien language. I’ll take a longer look at some point and get back to you if I understand enough to ask questions. What about talking with Hussein Partovi, though, a fellow Anacapite?

Comment on Workshop at ICTP by quantummoxie

quantummoxie — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 16:29:12 +0000

Arjendu,

Two things:

1. I need to get back to you on that Anacapa Society thing. Being department chair has it’s drawbacks, one of which is an increase in meetings and paperwork, so this has fallen to the backburner. But I plan to put it on the front burner ASAP.

2. Since you’re a stat. mech. guy and a quantum guy, I’m looking for help with something. I’ve been working on a now infamous paper for years and it is still not getting anywhere. Click here for the latest version. There are two related older papers on the arXiv as well that gives you some sense for my line of thinking. I’ve had no luck getting this published as it stands and am now seeking a co-author who can add their own twist to it to hopefully get it over the hump.

Comment on Playing a humanist by Bitsy

Bitsy — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 15:20:41 +0000

I think, that when talking about CCST, there is something that is, sort of a solution that you should be leading them toward, that is recognising when thing in there own behaviour are problematic or reinforced things that one might not want reinforced, and perhaps through that knowledge starting to change those behaviours.

(Or maybe the problem as one of sheding light on society, and therefore you are focused on a solution, trying to learn how to view things in different ways. But this is from some one who never fully got what solving for some dynamic systems meant.)

Comment on Exploring the laboratory landscape: How much and to what end? by Cumulative Links Dump « The First Excited State

Cumulative Links Dump « The First Excited State — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 17:27:15 +0000

[...] Advanced physcis labs — What we expect from them, what we should expect from them, how to change them. My experience with advanced lab didn’t teach me all that much, and wasn’t all that rigorous. I didn’t mind, since I had my mind made up to be a theorist anyway. Plus, we were all required to do a senior research project, which filled in many holes, along with our fairly demanding modern physics lab. But a more challenging advaced lab might have been like foul-tasting medicine that would make me better off today. [...]