On Thursday, December 14, 2017 at 1:41:37 AM UTC, Brent wrote: > > > > On 12/13/2017 5:24 PM, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 10:44:14 PM UTC, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 12/13/2017 2:20 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wednesday, December 13, 2017 at 9:15:36 PM UTC, Brent wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 12/13/2017 2:45 AM, [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> * BUT for a nucleus of a radioactive element, the nucleus is never >>> Decayed and Undecayed SIMULTANEOUSLY.* >>> >>> Sure it is. It's in a coherent superposition of those states until it >>> interacts with the environment. >>> >>> Brent >>> >> >> * That's the conventional QM wisdom and the cause of the paradox of a cat >> Alive and Dead simultaneously. As I explained, the fallacy is rooted in an >> unjustified generalization of the double slit experiment where the >> probability waves do, in fact, exist simultaneously. What waves do you >> claim are interacting for the radioactive nucleus to produce coherence? >> Tell me about them. I am from Missouri. AG* >> >> >> You seem to think that coherence requires two different waves. This is >> the wrong way to look at it. In Young's slits experiment there is only one >> wave, which goes through both slits and interferes with itself. >> > > > *That's exactly how I see it! Interference requires two waves which > interact with each other. * > > > *NO. This is false! * *There are not two waves.* You can write it as > two parts, just as you can write a description of an ocean wave as the part > on your left and the part on your right. But so long as they are coherent, > maintaining a fixed phase relation, they are one wave. > > > *This is exactly what we see in Young's slits experiments. AG * > >> And unstable nucleus has a probability amplitude that includes a >> "decayed" part and a "not decayed" part. It's a tunneling problem. >> > > *I don't doubt the existence of amplitudes. What I do doubt. and in fact > deny, is interference between two waves that don't exist simultaneously. * > > > You keep referring to two waves. * There are not two waves. *There's > only one wave which interferes with itself. It is typically written as > |not-decayed> + |decayed>, but that's just a choice of basis. It could as > well be written |unstable nucleus>. >
*How can one wave interfere with itself? Using double slit model, the one wave you're referring to, must somehow split. How does that splitting occur in a nuclear decay? If no splitting, then the concept of interference makes no sense. Without interference, the cat is never simultaneously Alive and Dead. AG* > Us -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
