zeno

All you need is a radiation detector

I've tunneled this topic over from another thread that was getting a little too off-topic I don't know much about TEW. Can it explain this phenomenon? This video explains it very well and is scientifically accurate as far as I can tell:

There's a funny essay written by a novelist/essayist-turned-reporter who's sent by Gourmet Magazine to cover the Maine Lobster Festival. He generally hates tourist venues and he loathes the MLF. So instead of covering the festival and confronted by his own feelings regarding the World's Largest Lobster Cooker he turns the article into a moral inquiry concerning the ethics of boiling lobsters alive. Great essay I remember I found his philosophical definitions and framing to be convenient too. I'll have to re-read now. FYI The essay was "Consider the Lobster" by David Foster Wallace

Quantum tunneling is based on a particle moving through a barrier it should be unable to classically, i.e continuously with a certain energy level, cross. Alpha decay is a good example because it demonstrates wave/particle duality very well. Yes, the particle exists within a continuous spatial probability distribution because position is a continuous parameter in QM. But this is no proof that a particle's path is continuous. Let's go back to the case of alpha decay. We definitely know when the particle is inside the nucleus of a radioactive atom, and we can clearly tell when the particle spontaneously "hops out" of the nucleus. Clearly the particle moves throughout its specific probability distribution. So to stay with a specific example of quantum tunneling, alpha decay, how can an alpha particle move continuously when it crosses the potential barrier of a uranium atom? It would violate the law of conservation of energy for an alpha particle to, without impetus or energy input, suddenly continuously shoot through the potential barrier and be emitted.

I don't see why a discrete universe requires a privileged coordinate system any more than a continuous universe does. I was careful not to make any claims about what kind of movement quantum tunneling represents except to suggest that it wasn't classical continuous motion. Now I'm intrigued -- how does quantum tunneling assume a continuous universe?

I'm sort of halfway between meat eater and vegetarian. I still eat "wild caught" fish but I think the factory farm system is cruel and I no longer want to support it. I eat a lot more fruits and vegetables now and I have to say, I feel much healthier -- no more hormone/antibiotic-treated meat.

I loved it. Nothing struck me as being pro-Objectivist really but I guess you could say the theme of Plainview's rational cynicism towards religion and the hypocrisy of religion represented by the ersatz exorcist Eli. The trusting, non-rational, non-empirical flock (which the film seems to purposefully keep blobby and shapeless ) vs. the rational individualist, path striking Plainview. I read online somewhere that the scene at the end is supposed to be an homage to Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey.

The paradox doesn't refer to an absolute or privileged frame of reference. I agree that location is a relationship among entities. We need to consider the location of the runner relative to the start and finish lines. It is true that macroscopic objects always seem to move continuously -- this is our daily experience. But it's not always the case at atomic or subatomic scales. Take alpha decay for example. An alpha particle does not have the kinetic energy to overcome the strong nuclear force and escape from the nucleus of a Plutonium atom. However, the wave function of the alpha particle can extend beyond the potential barrier of the nucleus allowing it to spontaneously hop out and escape. This is because of the hybrid, wave-particle nature of the alpha particle. Quantum mechanics has been very successful in explaining phenomena like this. Classical mechanics would have a hard time somehow asserting a continuous path out of the nucleus in the case of alpha decay. Quantum tunneling works with other particles too. Its used in Flash memory to cause electrons to hop through thin layers of electric insulator.

Please explain how an object can occupy a position for no quantity of time.

To dismiss the Runner's Paradox as rationalist drivel is to abandon a brilliantly conceived thought experiment. Here's my take on the Runner's Paradox. I think the argument can be distilled down to this form, and still be true to its original essence: Zeno sees the distance the runner must traverse as though its the Real Number Line. The Real Number Line represents an infinite series of points, no matter the length of the line. In the paradox these points represent the positions the runner must traverse in order to finish the race. Now the question becomes, well is the runner really occupying an infinite number of positions in traveling from the start to the finish? And to think that he (or she) is seems to defy common sense, for how can an object exist in an infinite number of locations at all! much less over a finite duration, i.e. the time it takes for the runner to complete the race. And I think that solving it mathematically, i.e. showing that the infinite number of points between two adjacent integers on a number line add up to the smaller integer+1 misses the point of the argument. In I think a big way, it boils down to whether our mathematical depiction of the world is correct. I would argue that this is a solid argument against the applicability of the Real Number Line to distances in the physical world (though it was not originally conceived to be so). The paradox is resolved if you consider that the number of positions an object occupies in traversing any distance is finite. Representing the distance as an Integer Number Line where at the quantum scale the runner is moving discontinuously from position to position, hopping from integer to integer, would be more accurate.

Also, I'd mention that the idea of the universe existing as a plenum does seem to be true, though not in a strict Parmenidean sense exactly. Consider for instance deep interstellar space which is filled with cosmic microwave background radiation. And though a specific portion of interstellar space may be w/o matter, QM posits that particles pop in and out of existence in otherwise "empty" regions of space.

Ah, back to Parmenides, whom I believe is the earliest known proponent of the universe existing as a continuous, indivisible plenum. The universe, to Parmenides, was an undifferentiated oneness or unity, completely filled and without voids or interstices in its constituent material any kind. In Parmenides universe there was no emptiness. In other words, Parmenides's universe was a plenum. Apparently Aristotle agreed with this point to at least some degree, famously stating that: "Nature abhors a vacuum." Zeno's paradoxes concerning motion were developed to bolster his pedagogue's (Parmenides was Zeno's teacher) view regarding reality as a universal plenum. We can see why Zeno would have been concerned with motion when we consider the following argument made by Parmenides. Parmenides argued that motion was illusory because in a plenum motion is impossible. Why? Because in a plenum there is no emptiness into which material can move. I find Zeno's arguments against motion more inspired and suggestive of a different conclusion. I don't know what Ayn Rand's view on Parmenides and the universal plenum are but I'd appreciate edification if someone would elaborate. Also, I think Zeno's Runner Paradox has been borne out to be in agreement with what QM has shown about the discrete nature of matter. Pretty cool to strike upon truth when you're actually arguing something as ostensibly silly as the implausibility of motion!