> Il 12 giugno 2018 alle 10.01 [email protected] ha scritto: > > > > On Monday, June 11, 2018 at 9:12:41 AM UTC, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sunday, June 10, 2018 at 4:36:37 PM UTC, [email protected] > > wrote: > > > > > > > Later, hopefully soon, I will make the case > > that Schrodinger's Cat implies that Decoherence Theory false, since the > > former shows the fallacy (or, if you will, the absurdity), of incorporating > > macro systems in superpositions, which is more or less the starting state > > equation used in the latter. Stay tuned. AGT > > > > > > > > > > The simplest argument is that macro objects (other than the > > precious few exceptions previously noted, such as Buckyballs) have no well > > defined deBroglie wave lengths. Hence, they cannot participate in a > > superposition of states which inherently implies interference among its > > components. A macro object has a huge set of individual entanglements, each > > with its own well defined deBroglie wave length, but the net interference > > among them statistically washes out to zero. We can go further. A macro > > object, virtually by definition, can NEVER be isolated from its > > environment. Thus, it can NEVER manifest a well defined wave length to make > > a superposition possible. It's NOT the case that a macro object can > > participate in a superposition for even a very short time and then > > decohere. This is where Schroedinger went wrong. He assumed a non existent > > superposition of states, which if existent would imply the cat must be > > alive and dead simultaneously, even if for a very short duration if > > decoherence theory is applied. But decoherence theory posits a solution for > > a non existent problem. It assumes that a superposed state can exist for a > > macro object for an exceedingly short time until it decoheres. However, as > > is the case for Scroedinger's cat or any macro object, it can NEVER be > > ISOLATED from its environment, which is the necessary condition for > > positing a superposition. Thus, decoherence theory need not be applied; > > indeed, should not be applied. And if it isn't generally applied for macro > > entities, then the wf cannot imply other worlds. CMIIAW. AG > > > > > > > The bottom line, or if you will, the 800 pound elephant in the room, is > that the macro entities which are included in the seminal superposition of > states for decoherence, are in thermal equilibrium with their environments, > constantly emitting and absorbing photons -- before, during, and after their > inclusions in said state. Thus, they never are, nor can they ever be isolated > from their environments, making this seminal superposition of states an > illusory construction. AG >
In the August 8, 1935 letter to Schrödinger Albert Einstein says that he will illustrate a problem by means of a “crude macroscopic example”. The system is a substance in chemically unstable equilibrium, perhaps a charge of gunpowder that, by means of intrinsic forces, can spontaneously combust, and where the average life span of the whole setup is a year. In principle this can quite easily be represented quantum-mechanically. In the beginning the psi-function characterizes a reasonably well-defined macroscopic state. But, according to your equation [i.e., the Schrödinger equation], after the course of a year this is no longer the case. Rather, the psi-function then describes a sort of blend of not-yet and already-exploded systems. Through no art of interpretation can this psi-function be turned into an adequate description of a real state of affairs; in reality there is no intermediary between exploded and not-exploded. -- 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.
