Message from @fuguer
Discord ID: 638307682977185792
because more things are possible, an object will seem "drawn" to the concentration of energy
because that's the most probable outcome
i.e. say there's 7 possible futures where the object gets close, and only 3 when it goes away
from what i've learned, you can pretty much just do an anova on any physics data and it gives you anything you need to know about the system. I'm not much of a modeler.
iterate this smoothly over time, you'll see an object fall smoothly towards energy
but to truly understand this, you have to blow apart your classical understanding of how time works,
get real confortable with spin statistics theorem of boson and fermions is a good start
yeah you can do anova
if you have enough data
its not as good as theory though
ill just stick to newtonian
i'm happy bending time. but i'm not so happy with ideas like cutting time in a place and reattaching it somewhere else. quantum physics is really unintuitive. i'm probably just a physics normie though.
usually we do permutations about a harmonic interval to evaluate the path intergral
we cant do the true intergral because its infinite
and save myself the headache that wil never pay off
to me it pays off because the purpose of life is to understand what i am, and the world i inhabit
at least for me
never lose that drive.
doesnt pay the bills though
yours isnt the end all either
its just a more complex model
very true
and not the real thing
i see what you mean
well yes, we can never prove we have the final model
i think we might be close honestly. QM is fantastically good the only flaw is its not background independent like GR
the final model is the universe itself.
Nothing we can invent can explain the real model, because it would be made up of parts of the real model
we need a model for QM where spacetime is emergent instead of baked in
whats M ?
you can't make it more simple without cutting corners and generalising.
the thing is QM is ridiculously simple
and it works everywhere but black holes
M for Mexican
To understand QM you need nothing more than basic linear algebra, basic calculus, and abstract algebra
yeah but i think qm is a general idea, it doesn't account for every single action at every point in time... i understand that sentence i just made can be broken apart easily though .lol
but theres always deeper layers
can you explain what you mean by that
it can explain almost everything, it just cant predict all outcomes
basically we need better resolution at smaller scales to really see what's happening. qm is predictive, but not an exact model of reality.