>him [paraphrased]: quantum makes universe predictable/deterministic in a linear fashion
>me: ehhhhh
>him: do you agree that quantum models can be used to predict future events?
>me: well yes but there’re kinda some framing issues with that, like “what is future-”
>him: there’s obviously a linear sequence to stuff
>me:sure our experience of time is thermodynamically linear, but that’s not necessarily the case at the quantum scale, like how there’s the fact of temporal nonlocality -
him: quantum mechanics has thermodynamics
me: well thermodynamics is more like an emergent property of qm, thermodynamics is macro, qm is micr -
him: no, thermodynamics apply to quantum particles, quarks have entropy, shut up and read wikipedia quantum thermodynamics
me: um I know ab-
him: read it, stop talking
me: *reads article:*
>Currently quantum thermodynamics addresses the emergence of thermodynamic laws from quantum mechanics.
>Emergence of time derivative of first law of thermodynamics
When O=HS the first law of thermodynamics emerges...
>Emergence of the second law
>The second law of thermodynamics is a statement on the irreversibility of dynamics or, the breakup of time reversal symmetry (T-symmetry).
>Entropy
>In thermodynamics, entropy is related to a concrete process. In quantum mechanics, this translates to the ability to measure and manipulate the system based on the information gathered by measurement. An example is the case of Maxwell’s demon, which has been resolved by Leó Szilárd.[15][16][17]
MFW THAT’S EXACTLY WTF I WAS TRYING TO SAY
am I the idiot or is he?
according to him, there’s no debate about quantum interpretations, he seems to think Copenhagen is a complete and closed theory. but he thinks it’s somehow deterministic, which sounds more like bohmian mechanics, but even that one explicitly depends on nonlocality, which he won’t hear a word about
>me: ehhhhh
>him: do you agree that quantum models can be used to predict future events?
>me: well yes but there’re kinda some framing issues with that, like “what is future-”
>him: there’s obviously a linear sequence to stuff
>me:sure our experience of time is thermodynamically linear, but that’s not necessarily the case at the quantum scale, like how there’s the fact of temporal nonlocality -
him: quantum mechanics has thermodynamics
me: well thermodynamics is more like an emergent property of qm, thermodynamics is macro, qm is micr -
him: no, thermodynamics apply to quantum particles, quarks have entropy, shut up and read wikipedia quantum thermodynamics
me: um I know ab-
him: read it, stop talking
me: *reads article:*
>Currently quantum thermodynamics addresses the emergence of thermodynamic laws from quantum mechanics.
>Emergence of time derivative of first law of thermodynamics
When O=HS the first law of thermodynamics emerges...
>Emergence of the second law
>The second law of thermodynamics is a statement on the irreversibility of dynamics or, the breakup of time reversal symmetry (T-symmetry).
>Entropy
>In thermodynamics, entropy is related to a concrete process. In quantum mechanics, this translates to the ability to measure and manipulate the system based on the information gathered by measurement. An example is the case of Maxwell’s demon, which has been resolved by Leó Szilárd.[15][16][17]
MFW THAT’S EXACTLY WTF I WAS TRYING TO SAY
am I the idiot or is he?
according to him, there’s no debate about quantum interpretations, he seems to think Copenhagen is a complete and closed theory. but he thinks it’s somehow deterministic, which sounds more like bohmian mechanics, but even that one explicitly depends on nonlocality, which he won’t hear a word about
