SERVING THE QUANTITATIVE FINANCE COMMUNITY

  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
 
User avatar
N
Topic Author
Posts: 2808
Joined: May 9th, 2003, 8:26 pm

I'm losing faith in physicists

March 31st, 2006, 3:14 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: rmaxQuoteOriginally posted by: NThe particle is a type of (fancy) wave and as a wave it goes through both slits. To observe it, you need to time-average or take the absolute value.But when I place my detector at a slit, I measure a single discrete event at one slit, and no on the other. I also no longer get a diffraction pattern on my screen, but get two spikes...That's exactly right... A detector in order to work, must interact with the wave and thus changes the geometry of the experiment.It turns out that this is a very hard experiment to instrument properly. That's why I stick to math and QF.
 
User avatar
TraderJoe
Posts: 11048
Joined: February 1st, 2005, 11:21 pm

I'm losing faith in physicists

March 31st, 2006, 4:27 pm

What one needs here is the generalised uncertainty principle.QuoteWhile understanding the details of string and superstring theories requires considerable mathematical sophistication, some qualitative properties of quantum strings can be understood in a fairly intuitive fashion. For example, quantum strings have tension, much like regular strings made of twine; this tension is considered a fundamental parameter of the theory. The tension of a quantum string is closely related to its size. Consider a closed loop of string, left to move through space without external forces. Its tension will tend to contract it into a smaller and smaller loop. Classical intuition suggests that it might shrink to a single point, but this would violate Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. The characteristic size of the string loop will be a balance between the tension force, acting to make it small, and the uncertainty effect, which keeps it "stretched". Consequently, the minimum size of a string must be related to the string tension.Everything you wanted to know about String Theory but were afraid to ask.
 
User avatar
zeta
Posts: 1969
Joined: September 27th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

I'm losing faith in physicists

March 31st, 2006, 6:03 pm

out of curiosity N just how is the very sticky issue of measurement treated in your neo theory? You started to allude to the problem of the indivisibility between a system and measuring device to test your ideas and here perhaps some reality is creeping in....
 
User avatar
N
Topic Author
Posts: 2808
Joined: May 9th, 2003, 8:26 pm

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 1st, 2006, 6:29 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: zetaout of curiosity N just how is the very sticky issue of measurement treated in your neo theory? You started to allude to the problem of the indivisibility between a system and measuring device to test your ideas and here perhaps some reality is creeping in....If I've mentioned it once I've mentioned it 100 times, z, there is no neo theory; I'm just using plain old classical mechanics. And for measurements, I use a stopwatch and ruler, remember I'm just a quant.
 
User avatar
TraderJoe
Posts: 11048
Joined: February 1st, 2005, 11:21 pm

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 1st, 2006, 11:14 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: NQuoteOriginally posted by: zetaout of curiosity N just how is the very sticky issue of measurement treated in your neo theory? You started to allude to the problem of the indivisibility between a system and measuring device to test your ideas and here perhaps some reality is creeping in....If I've mentioned it once I've mentioned it 100 times, z, there is no neo theory; I'm just using plain old classical mechanics. And for measurements, I use a stopwatch and ruler.Way to go, Albert .
 
User avatar
N
Topic Author
Posts: 2808
Joined: May 9th, 2003, 8:26 pm

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 2nd, 2006, 5:15 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: GrenvilleCrollQuoteOriginally posted by: NQuoteOriginally posted by: zetanot bloody likely, Nz,RC... It was a chip shot. A cake walk. All l-functions are like that. I just love polynomials. NHe's blagging about it being easy, but I wouldnt put it past him.N reminds me of Ramanujan (but without the modesty). Whereas Andrew Wiles had to work his ass off for seven years, I think N just sees it, much as Ramanujan did.I just hope he doesnt get run over by a bus before spilling the beans on the RH and the other puzzles to which he has inside info.If you are up for it N (and anyone else interested of course), you are welcome to submit a paper for presentation at the next (28th) annual meeting of the Alternative Natural Philosophy Association at Wesley College, Cambridge in August this year. PM me for submission details.GC,I'm not sure a topic that interests me fits in with 'Alternative Natural Philosophy'... How about a pure math paper on the parallel relationship between the 'double helix' of DNA and basic structure of Fermions (aka T.O.E.)?Nedit: I'll show how certain manifold coverings generate those nicely colored quarks.
Last edited by N on April 1st, 2006, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
GrenvilleCroll
Posts: 359
Joined: July 29th, 2004, 8:03 am

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 2nd, 2006, 9:39 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: NQuoteOriginally posted by: GrenvilleCrollQuoteOriginally posted by: NQuoteOriginally posted by: zetanot bloody likely, Nz,RC... It was a chip shot. A cake walk. All l-functions are like that. I just love polynomials. NHe's blagging about it being easy, but I wouldnt put it past him.N reminds me of Ramanujan (but without the modesty). Whereas Andrew Wiles had to work his ass off for seven years, I think N just sees it, much as Ramanujan did.I just hope he doesnt get run over by a bus before spilling the beans on the RH and the other puzzles to which he has inside info.If you are up for it N (and anyone else interested of course), you are welcome to submit a paper for presentation at the next (28th) annual meeting of the Alternative Natural Philosophy Association at Wesley College, Cambridge in August this year. PM me for submission details.GC,I'm not sure a topic that interests me fits in with 'Alternative Natural Philosophy'... How about a pure math paper on the parallel relationship between the 'double helix' of DNA and basic structure of Fermions (aka T.O.E.)?Nedit: I'll show how certain manifold coverings generate those nicely colored quarks.Been there (or rather seen there) and got the T-shirtIts doable.And would fit the ANPA remit. If John Horton Conway other esteemed but unnamed delegates had the patience to listen to my stuff last year and ask pertinent questions, I'm sure they could find the time to listen to your proposition.Presumably you'd be able to explain how two distinct classes of manifold give rise to the two distinct classes of Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac Statistics?
 
User avatar
N
Topic Author
Posts: 2808
Joined: May 9th, 2003, 8:26 pm

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 2nd, 2006, 10:43 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: GrenvilleCrollQuoteOriginally posted by: NQuoteOriginally posted by: GrenvilleCrollQuoteOriginally posted by: NQuoteOriginally posted by: zetanot bloody likely, Nz,RC... It was a chip shot. A cake walk. All l-functions are like that. I just love polynomials. NHe's blagging about it being easy, but I wouldnt put it past him.N reminds me of Ramanujan (but without the modesty). Whereas Andrew Wiles had to work his ass off for seven years, I think N just sees it, much as Ramanujan did.I just hope he doesnt get run over by a bus before spilling the beans on the RH and the other puzzles to which he has inside info.If you are up for it N (and anyone else interested of course), you are welcome to submit a paper for presentation at the next (28th) annual meeting of the Alternative Natural Philosophy Association at Wesley College, Cambridge in August this year. PM me for submission details.GC,I'm not sure a topic that interests me fits in with 'Alternative Natural Philosophy'... How about a pure math paper on the parallel relationship between the 'double helix' of DNA and basic structure of Fermions (aka T.O.E.)?Nedit: I'll show how certain manifold coverings generate those nicely colored quarks.Been there (or rather seen there) and got the T-shirtIts doable.And would fit the ANPA remit. If John Horton Conway other esteemed but unnamed delegates had the patience to listen to my stuff last year and ask pertinent questions, I'm sure they could find the time to listen to your proposition.Presumably you'd be able to explain how two distinct classes of manifold give rise to the two distinct classes of Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac Statistics?Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac are conjugate duals of a manifold. I know because I got the supersymmetry T-shirt last year. Who's Conway?
 
User avatar
MikeCrowe
Posts: 388
Joined: January 16th, 2006, 8:20 am

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 3rd, 2006, 4:10 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: NQuoteOriginally posted by: rmaxQuoteOriginally posted by: NThe particle is a type of (fancy) wave and as a wave it goes through both slits. To observe it, you need to time-average or take the absolute value.But when I place my detector at a slit, I measure a single discrete event at one slit, and no on the other. I also no longer get a diffraction pattern on my screen, but get two spikes...That's exactly right... A detector in order to work, must interact with the wave and thus changes the geometry of the experiment.It turns out that this is a very hard experiment to instrument properly. That's why I stick to math and QF.It sounds then that your initial post was rather tabloid and trollish in nature. Since what you actually mean to say is not that Uncertainty Principal is a bunch or c**p, but rather that you have found an explanation for uncertainty principal, the underlying mechanics as it were. Uncertainty still exists in your theory, and whenever you transform back to the observables you will recreate uncertainty principal, otherwise you're theory would not tally with experiment. You have merely found the mechanics behind it. Such a would be equivilent to Einstein calling Newtons work a bunch of c**p, while relativity still produces the same results slow speeds/low gravity.Perhaps this is a result of too long in finance, where your idea is only heard if you market it and shout about it. In Physics it is not generally the way, and people will read most intently an understated paper (read the bell labs one on cosmic background for an excellent example). Perhaps Newton is your role model, rather than the more admirable Faraday. Remember Newton died alone, without friends, but with many enemies.Should you decide to publish, and I would urge you to since a result such as this could be of immense value, particularly if you can find some experimental evidence, then please let us know so that we can read it. If you are looking for someone to peer review then I might be able to suggest some string theorists who would be able to help.Good luck!I look forward to your paper.
 
User avatar
GrenvilleCroll
Posts: 359
Joined: July 29th, 2004, 8:03 am

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 3rd, 2006, 10:27 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: NQuoteOriginally posted by: GrenvilleCrollQuoteOriginally posted by: NQuoteOriginally posted by: GrenvilleCrollQuoteOriginally posted by: NQuoteOriginally posted by: zetanot bloody likely, Nz,RC... It was a chip shot. A cake walk. All l-functions are like that. I just love polynomials. NHe's blagging about it being easy, but I wouldnt put it past him.N reminds me of Ramanujan (but without the modesty). Whereas Andrew Wiles had to work his ass off for seven years, I think N just sees it, much as Ramanujan did.I just hope he doesnt get run over by a bus before spilling the beans on the RH and the other puzzles to which he has inside info.If you are up for it N (and anyone else interested of course), you are welcome to submit a paper for presentation at the next (28th) annual meeting of the Alternative Natural Philosophy Association at Wesley College, Cambridge in August this year. PM me for submission details.GC,I'm not sure a topic that interests me fits in with 'Alternative Natural Philosophy'... How about a pure math paper on the parallel relationship between the 'double helix' of DNA and basic structure of Fermions (aka T.O.E.)?Nedit: I'll show how certain manifold coverings generate those nicely colored quarks.Been there (or rather seen there) and got the T-shirtIts doable.And would fit the ANPA remit. If John Horton Conway other esteemed but unnamed delegates had the patience to listen to my stuff last year and ask pertinent questions, I'm sure they could find the time to listen to your proposition.Presumably you'd be able to explain how two distinct classes of manifold give rise to the two distinct classes of Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac Statistics?Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac are conjugate duals of a manifold. I know because I got the supersymmetry T-shirt last year. Who's Conway?OK N, we're cooking on gas. Send me a draft (I'm not hard to find) and we'll take it from there. I'll reciprocate with pdf's of the papers I presented last year, plus an agenda for the 05 ANPA meeting so you can get an idea of the format. John Horton Conway is a fellow Liverpudlian, as, coincidentally, are several other members.In my blind search for more detail on ANPA, it was Brian Josephson who kindly got me there, literally on the day.You will be in good company.
 
User avatar
TraderJoe
Posts: 11048
Joined: February 1st, 2005, 11:21 pm

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 3rd, 2006, 11:26 pm

QuoteRemember Newton died alone, without friends, but with many enemiesThe fate of many a genius. Misaligned and misunderstood.
Last edited by TraderJoe on April 3rd, 2006, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
ppauper
Posts: 70239
Joined: November 15th, 2001, 1:29 pm

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 4th, 2006, 12:50 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: NN reminds me of Ramanujan (but without the modesty).I was quite modest until I changed careers and became a wild and crazy quant!I'm sure N has something to add to the thread on Ramanujan ....
 
User avatar
phenomenologist
Posts: 97
Joined: November 14th, 2003, 5:06 pm

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 4th, 2006, 1:34 pm

QuoteOriginally posted by: TraderJoeQuoteRemember Newton died alone, without friends, but with many enemiesThe fate of many a genius. Misaligned and misunderstood.N and Newton, hmmm...For me N looks more like a speech generating algorithm fed in with a restricted set of consepts like "supersymmetry ", "string theory" and "Riemann conjecture". Semantics is probably still on a TODO list.
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Posts: 61515
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 4th, 2006, 2:24 pm

doubled
Last edited by Cuchulainn on April 3rd, 2006, 10:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.datasimfinancial.com
http://www.datasim.nl

Every Time We Teach a Child Something, We Keep Him from Inventing It Himself
Jean Piaget
 
User avatar
Cuchulainn
Posts: 61515
Joined: July 16th, 2004, 7:38 am
Location: Amsterdam
Contact:

I'm losing faith in physicists

April 4th, 2006, 2:25 pm

QuoteSemantics is probably still on a TODO list.Choose between algebra and analysis. Don't mix them.I would like to see Cayley maps for PDE.
http://www.datasimfinancial.com
http://www.datasim.nl

Every Time We Teach a Child Something, We Keep Him from Inventing It Himself
Jean Piaget
ABOUT WILMOTT

PW by JB

Wilmott.com has been "Serving the Quantitative Finance Community" since 2001. Continued...


Twitter LinkedIn Instagram

JOBS BOARD

JOBS BOARD

Looking for a quant job, risk, algo trading,...? Browse jobs here...


GZIP: On