I find Weinberg much more palatable. At least he understands the big structure of the arguments at stake. By the way, Weinberg also devoted an entire chapter to the measurement problem in his textbook, Lectures on Quantum Mechanics.

]]>The youtube link to the Earth time-lapse is broken.

]]>You shouldn’t be intimidated. They make a point of looking for students with potential from any background, not just top-tier places. I’m not on the acceptance committee, but I’d wager that few of the applicants have publications. I encourage you to apply. Email the program manager if you have questions or worries.

]]>well.. ]]>

1. Models in theoretical physics often get applied in other fields, so you get spillover benefits.

2. Room temperature super conductivity could be another massive breakthrough (and is probably even more neglected than fusion). Climate physics seems important too.

3. If you’re considering a career in theoretical physics, bear in mind you can become a theoretician who works on an applied physics team.

]]>I computed with finite Ã©lÃ©ments and ddf, by Lagrangian models and Eulerian models.

Theory of strings is a Lagrangian model and point of view.

They are Lagrangian strings.

Why don’t we have a Eulerian point of view ? Wilh Eulerian string ?

In Quantum phydics, we can’t know at the same time the position and the speed.

With Lagrangian model, first made for solid, you first access to gÃ©omÃ©tric position than speed by intÃ©gration.

With Eulerian model, first made for fluid, you first access to speed of particle, than position by dÃ©rivation.

Just like in Quantum physics.

New Eulerian strings Theory ?

The Eulerian string don’t move and matter gores from string to the next string.

So instead of thinking to entangled partcles, why not thinking to entangled volume, so as you do ????

How to entangle volumes ?

Using two entangled light ray of photon that ” sweep”or illuminate two volumes ? Using a mirror on one of the two light ray in order that They have both the same orientation, E and B.

So The two volumes should be entangled. So you can have teleportation from one volume to the other one.

But you have to respect the fact that the same reality can’t be observed at the same time in two diffÃ©rent places. It’s a principle of Quantum physics.

What do you think of my point of view ?

Could you make an experiment to prove it works.

Possible spin-offs other than pure SRS that would tend to result from spending money on the goal: More robust / less disruptable supply chain. Better machines for certain purposes (such as 3D printing). Better open source CAD/CAM software. Standardized modules that enable companies to do more in-house manufacturing and prototyping. Space based factory / mining systems that use asteroid or lunar materials to produce most of their mass.

]]>Now for your questions: The explicit way to see it is to write down the Hamiltonian with the field variables, it will have a term

int d^3 x g phi(x)^4, if g<0 this will make the Hamiltonian unbounded from below. This is basically the same thing as the Hamiltonian of a simple anharmonic oscillator being unbounded from below if we have a -x^4 term in the Hamiltonian.

Of course, the spectrum condition is a sufficient for the non-locality of the vacuum, and that does not mean it is necessary. Unfortunately, I don't know if it can be relaxed in a way that you still get some kind of sensible theory, but local correlations, but I doubt it.

]]>My intuition is that you've relaxed the spectrum condition, but not in a way that actually reduces the non-locality of the vacuum. In other words, the spectrum condition is a sufficient but not necessary condition for non-locality; relaxing it only reduces non-locality if you relax it in the right way.

]]>