dlthomas comments on Configurations and Amplitude - Less Wrong

26 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 10 April 2008 07:41AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (375)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Desrtopa 16 April 2012 11:27:14PM *  4 points [-]

You know, that comic has always bugged me a bit. The quantum electrodynamics bit makes sense, but I see no way all that GPS devices are dependent on relativity to work. To get them to work right, we have to design them to account for the predictions of relativity, rather than just classical mechanics, but if the universe ran on classical mechanics rather than relativity, I can't see any way in which it would prevent us from creating GPS devices; it seems to me that it would be even easier.

Relativity has loads of experimental support, but unless you count nuclear energy, which was already observed before the advent of the theory of relativity, if not explained, then I'm stuffed for examples on how industry's benefited from it being true.

Comment author: dlthomas 19 April 2012 02:41:13AM 0 points [-]

Relativity works describing reality, so companies are making a killing using it to build accurate GPS devices. A bit more roundabout than some of the others, but doesn't seem "wrong".

Comment author: Desrtopa 19 April 2012 03:08:02AM 1 point [-]

But unlike all the others, if Relativity weren't true, they'd still be able to do that. They'd just do it by not incorporating the predictions of Relativity.

If electricity worked by classical models, we wouldn't be building semiconductor circuits differently, we wouldn't be able to build them at all. All the others could be implemented for initiatives that would be possible if they were real, but impossible otherwise, so Relativity is the odd one out.

Comment author: dlthomas 20 April 2012 01:25:53AM 0 points [-]

There are doubtless other models by which electricity could hypothetically work that would allow circuits that do interesting things. I don't see where the focus on specific "classical models" is drawn from.