[MD] Quantum Physics

[David M]

Hi Ant

I certainly have enjoyed Barrow too, he actually
seems to have read some philosophy of science
unlike some of the people writing about science
for the general public. Well worth checking
his books out.

Regards
David M


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ant McWatt" <antmcwatt at hotmail.co.uk>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 12:41 AM
Subject: [MD] Quantum Physics


> Laird asked:
>
> Anybody have any insight on this stuff?
>
>
> Laird,
>
> I found the work of John D Barrow more helpful than most in understanding
> quantum physics.  His work is written in accessible, lively prose and
> illuminates understanding without dumbing down too much.  Barrow's work
> includes 400 plus academic papers and 17 books such as: The World within A
> World (1988), Theories of Everything: the quest for ultimate explanation
> (1991) and Impossibility: the limits of science and the science of limits
> (1998).  His latest book is The infinite: a short guide to the boundless,
> timeless and endless.
>
> The BBC says the following about him:
>
> The 53-year-old professor of mathematics at Cambridge University has drawn
> from many disciplines to explore the realm of ultimate questions -
> condensing complex ideas about the Universe into many popular books and
> lectures, and even a play.
>
> His work explores the mysteries of infinity and nothingness.
>
> He says neither science nor religion offer the ultimate truths we seek.
>
> And he challenges scholars to cross boundaries if they want to fully 
> realise
> what they understand - and do not understand - about where we came from 
> and
> where we are heading.
>
> (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4811266.stm)
>
> It is therefore not too surprizing to hear that Barrow recently won the
> Templeton Prize (the largest religious prize in the world) which is 
> designed
> to highlight positive work that draws the scientific and the spiritual
> realms closer together.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Anthony.
>
>
>>Laird Bedore wrote November 30th:
>>
>>I found the intro link I was looking for. It's an attempt to describe
>>Hilbert space in terms a non-quantum-physicist can grasp. Despite the
>>title, it still requires a fairly strong command of mathematic principles.
>>
>>http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/hilberts.html
>>
>>After I read this the first time, I stared at the ceiling for quite some
>>time. As my imagination wandered, I got the sensation that some
>>'crystallization' was taking place. First I was imagining the orthogonal
>>dimensions of Hilbert space unfolding into a 3D (euclidian) visual
>>representations, then further into nonlinear dimension morphing.
>>Excited, I tried to write down something describing my imaginings, but
>>nothing intelligible came out.
>>
>>The link is actually a portion of a larger quantum mechanics discussion
>>circa 1996 (http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/mmq.html). It sounds really
>>interesting, but it's way over my head. I'm currently searching for a
>>normal-person-friendly definition of "quantum collapse", but it's
>>evading me. These Q-people are ruthless with their lingo!
>>
>>Skipping ahead to page 3 (http://www.qedcorp.com/pcr/pcr/mmq3.html) it
>>looks like they're discussing quantum interaction between ideas and the
>>physical brain. Lots of mention of William James too. My head hurts just
>>glancing over it, but it sounds intriguing. Anybody have any insight on
>>this stuff?
>>
>>-Laird
>>
>>
>
> .
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows LiveT Messenger has arrived. Click here to download it for free!
> http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/?locale=en-gb
>
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/