quantum_mcts

First of all, your example doesn’t show any «instantaneous travel». You can shuffle two playing cards, send them by light years. Flip one of them and instantaneously determine what on the other one.

There are more complicated correlations in QM than cannot be explained by hidden variables - but those are still correlations and, analogously, don’t imply any «instantaneous travel»

Yeah, and the fact that this type of guys coalesce around Bohmian mechanics topics sealed the deal for me....

Skimmed the paper briefly. Looks like reformulation of single-particle QM with no new predictions. Most importantly (and as I mentioned above) doesn’t address particle creation and annihilation, which is where Bohmian-style approaches usually struggle.

Authors seem to be aware of that, but make a weird tap-dance around the problem throughout the paper, seemingly scared to even "Voldmort" it. In that context, citing 1930 Dirac paper is laughably ironic.

The whole idea of Bohmian mechanics is to preserve the notion of « classical trajectory » while trying to cover existing experimental evidence for QM. I was a fan of it ant the University - but slowly realised that the strategy seems to be just add the classical-limit consequences of the QM as extra postulates. And even that approach faced larger and larger obstacles - like fermions statistics, the QFT with creation / annihilation of particles, spinor fields requiring Grassmanian « classical trajectories » and the whole thing still requires preferred reference frame - in obvious contradiction with basic SR.

This whole story is very similar to attempts of physics fringe to preserve the notion of « aether » while satisfying the experimental evidence for SR.

Yeah, searching for videos and news of extreme events will give you a comprehensive picture of a life in a country. I once offered a guy to literally film how I would cycle across Paris filming - so he can count garbage piles/rioting gangs/radical muslims or (oh horror!) black people - whatever he is panicking about of at that moment. He dismissed me simply accusing me of “lying”...what?

It honestly feels like French economic/social model is under pretty coordinated propaganda attack recently. I live and run a business in France - and, while it is not without drawbacks, the overall balance is quite comfortable. When I tell that to people online or someone outside France - they paint for this picture of a hellscape of bureaucracy, crippling taxes, marauding gangs of immigrants and overblown public sector. Which I, weirdly, cannot dispel even by saying “dude, I live there”.

The popular retelling of how Einstein created Special Relativity to "Resolve the contradictions of Michelson-Morly experiments" is very reductive to the history of the question. The epitome is the quote from the paper:

> From the two postulates, Einstein derived the Lorentz trans- formation ...

If Einstein derived them, who is "Lorentz"?

The groundwork for Special Relativity was the study of electrodynamics and symmetries of Maxwell equations. The Einsteins paper was literally called "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" and never cites Michelson and Morley.

Around 2018 I got obsessed with slings - I've made a couple from paracord and was practicing almost every day. After about a year I only managed to consistently launch stones in the rough desired direction. Another (COVID) year and got to the level where my spread was about 5 degrees. Systematically hitting a reasonably sized target was still beyond my ability. Plus early symptoms of tennis elbow...

Slinging is hard, requires a lot of dedication and systematic practice. Stil, the feeling when the rock hits a target and "explodes" is worth it.

“Oh it’s about ME now?!..”

Total amount of reactor*years so far is roughly 20000. 3 core meltdowns amounts for 0.015% per reactor per year.

0. There's money laundering.

It is sort of like saying that crypto is less money-laundery than banks because more money gets laundered through banks than through crypto.

Here’s an exercise. Go to Wikipedia for “Money Laundering” -> “Notable cases” and sum the amounts laundered by all famous banks for the last 10 or 5 years.

Then try to say again that “crypto is for money laundering” with a straight face.

Yes