Timeline for On independence and large cardinal strength of physical statements
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Mar 15, 2022 at 9:33 | history | suggested | The Amplitwist | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
fixed broken link to springerlink.com
|
| Mar 15, 2022 at 7:22 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Mar 15, 2022 at 9:33 | |||||
| Jun 15, 2020 at 7:27 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Nov 19, 2017 at 8:14 | answer | added | Peter Gerdes | timeline score: 3 | |
| Nov 5, 2017 at 11:28 | history | protected | Asaf Karagila♦ | ||
| Sep 14, 2017 at 9:06 | answer | added | Jakob | timeline score: 25 | |
| Aug 31, 2017 at 15:51 | comment | added | Morteza Azad | @Heinrich I am somehow familiar with the views in quantum mechanics suggesting that reality doesn't exist until we measure it. It resembles the set theoretic multiverse view which suggests something of the same spirit about nature of mathematical reality that in this view is undeterministic and depends on the mathematical model that you live in. Find more along these lines in the lectures of the Set Theoretic Pluralism symposiums. | |
| Aug 31, 2017 at 6:21 | answer | added | Dmytro Taranovsky | timeline score: 4 | |
| Aug 31, 2017 at 4:34 | answer | added | bof | timeline score: 5 | |
| Aug 31, 2017 at 3:47 | answer | added | Thomas Benjamin | timeline score: 8 | |
| Aug 30, 2017 at 22:49 | comment | added | Morteza Azad | @Heinrich Sorry, but I can't figure out what you mean properly! Could you please add more explanations? What do you mean by non-existence of full information? Are you pointing out to a physical phenomenon similar to black hole information loss? | |
| Aug 30, 2017 at 14:22 | answer | added | none | timeline score: 6 | |
| Aug 30, 2017 at 8:01 | comment | added | Morteza Azad | @JeffHarvey Please note that the existence of physical statements which are independent or have large cardinal strength DOESN'T mean that there are some paradoxes in physics necessarily. They actually don't imply such a matter in mathematics as well. In fact such statements simply indicate that some necessary axioms for understanding the universe are missing or there are some fundamental barriers to our knowledge of the universe based on the current framework/model/paradigm. It is similar to Heisenberg's uncertainty barrier which prevents us from getting the full information as we like. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 23:57 | comment | added | Jeff Harvey | EPR is not a paradox. It is just the way the world is. | |
| Aug 29, 2017 at 20:53 | answer | added | Zoltan Zimboras | timeline score: 12 | |
| Aug 28, 2017 at 21:28 | answer | added | Shai Ben-David | timeline score: 22 | |
| Aug 28, 2017 at 20:28 | history | edited | Morteza Azad | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 19:15 | review | Close votes | |||
| Aug 29, 2017 at 6:11 | |||||
| Aug 28, 2017 at 18:53 | history | edited | Morteza Azad | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 15 characters in body
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 17:56 | history | edited | Morteza Azad | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 17:48 | history | asked | Morteza Azad | CC BY-SA 3.0 |