|
sungam
Jul 30, 2012, 9:10 PM
Post #26 of 31
(873 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
rsd212 wrote: sungam wrote: rsd212 wrote: The Copenhagen interpretation Not that it makes his claim any less incorrect, but I think he was talking about quantum theories that are still taken seriously. I made an assumption from the OP's question that we were dealing with that era's thought experiments, so it seemed appropriate.  I saw the chance to be pedantic and couldn't stop myself.
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Jul 30, 2012, 11:48 PM
Post #27 of 31
(850 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
cracklover wrote: ninepointeight wrote: Fortunately for those who are leading on gear, what applies to reality at scales approaching Planck length does not apply in our full size world. Just because a single electron may both exist and not exist until observed does not mean your cam is and isn't there when you can't see it. Tell that to poor Schrodinger's cat. Your assurances don't make her feel better about being both dead and alive. And, um, I guess they also do. G
It's pretty clear that Schrodinger's cat is dead by now.
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Jul 30, 2012, 11:50 PM
Post #28 of 31
(849 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
dan2see wrote: rsd212 wrote: The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics doesn't say the cam may not be there when not observed, it says the cam is both there and not there, existing in all possible states simultaneously until its wave function is collapsed by an intelligent observer. Only when you fall does the cam come into a definite state of being there or not being there. As to whether or not your belayer is still there, I guess its for you to decide whether or not they are an intelligent observer... This is the correct interpretation of the Copenhagen interpretation. You could also plan your route based on the "Many Worlds" interpretation of QM. So instead of the cam's problematic there/not-there uncertainty, you know that of all the outcomes of your fall, you survived at least one of them.
And didn't in at least one of them.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jul 31, 2012, 3:21 PM
Post #29 of 31
(811 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
shockabuku wrote: cracklover wrote: ninepointeight wrote: Fortunately for those who are leading on gear, what applies to reality at scales approaching Planck length does not apply in our full size world. Just because a single electron may both exist and not exist until observed does not mean your cam is and isn't there when you can't see it. Tell that to poor Schrodinger's cat. Your assurances don't make her feel better about being both dead and alive. And, um, I guess they also do. G It's pretty clear that Schrodinger's cat is dead by now.
Are you saying we're beating a dead horse cat?
GO
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Jul 31, 2012, 3:42 PM
Post #30 of 31
(801 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
Lemme check...
|
|
|
|
|
onrockandice
Aug 1, 2012, 7:07 PM
Post #31 of 31
(756 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2009
Posts: 355
|
Are we in a vacuum?
What is the air speed of the African Swallow?
I mean it's still theoretical right? I never understood why my test scores on theoretical and abstract topics could be so damned concrete. Who the hell could prove I was wrong?
The cam no longer exists as you placed it. I pulled draws behind you and stole it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
