On 9/24/2012 11:17 PM, meekerdb wrote:
On 9/24/2012 8:02 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote:
Citeren meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>:
On 9/24/2012 9:28 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/24/2012 12:02 PM, John Clark wrote:
Thus the moon does not exist when you are not looking at it.
I expected better from you! This quip is based on the premise
that "you" are the only observer involved. Such nonsense!
Considering that there are a HUGE number of observers of the moon,
the effects of the observations of any one is negligible. If none
of them measure the presence of the moon or its effects, then the
existence of the moon becomes pure the object of speculation. Note
that being affected by the moon in terms of tidal effects is a
So who or what counts as an observer. Young's slit experiments on
fullerenes seem to indicate that a few IR photons or gas molecules
If I don't observe it, then it doesn't matter who/what else observes
something, the rest of the universe is still a superposition. It
doesn't matter whether or not an interference pattern can be detected.
?? I could matter. Suppose I bet you $100 there's no interference
pattern when the buckyballs are hot? Then it would matter. But
apparently it wouldn't matter whether anyone observed the IR photons
If we are consistent with the rules of QM, the mere possibility of
detection of position basis information is sufficient to prevent the
interference pattern. Thus my prediction is that the temperature of the
buckyballs is irrelevant for the two slit experiment, so long as a
position basis measurement is not possible. Very hard to do...
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at