kdavis

Hawking radiation and the Unruh effect both rely upon the fact that there is no absolute Hilbert space in which QFT unfolds, the Hilbert space used is observer dependent.

For example, in the Unruh effect an inertial observer sees the vacuum in their Hilbert space as having no particles. However, a uniformly accelerating observer sees that same vacuum as containing particles.

This state of affairs is addressed via algebraic quantum field theory (AQFT), which doesn't take a Hilbert space as the primary thing one starts with, but views Hilbert spaces as derived concepts.

Surprising that he could have that intuition in 1935, before the Unruh effect was known of, before AQFT was invented, and really before most of QFT was formulated.

But then again, he was John von Neumann.

> There is only one reason you can fail from that point: You're a complete social inept.

Harsh words for someone you've had no social interactions with. To me this statement says more about you than Jack Weis.

"Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho, hold my beer!" -DJT

The problem is there's no "ever better opponent" to play against---in Go it was a slightly different version of the model itself---and creating one, e.g. creating an ever improving model that generates ever more difficult theorems to prove, hasn't AFAIK occurred yet.

More of this on the net!

Unfortunately moderated out of existence in 10, 9, 8, 7....

I don't have access to the entire article, but it doesn't mean much to physics.

Physicists knew Navier-Stokes was an approximation that breaks down at some scale, e.g. the molecular scale. This AI solution just exhibits such a breakdown.

All your datum are belong to us!