On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 10:18:42 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 10:14:56 PM UTC, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 6/12/2018 3:02 PM, [email protected] wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 8:20:00 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 6:13:04 PM UTC, Brent wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 6/12/2018 10:51 AM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 5:28:05 PM UTC, Brent wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 6/12/2018 1:01 AM, [email protected] wrote: >>>>> >>>>> *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 * >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Don't you see that you're just repeating the old debate about the >>>>> Heisenberg cut. Where's the line between micro and macro? You think >>>>> simplistically by considering only really big stuff as classical and >>>>> ignoring the fact that there is a whole range of sizes. >>>>> >>>>> Brent >>>>> >>>> >>>> * I have NOT. I have stated several times that some macro objects are >>>> EXCLUDED, such as those with well defined deBroglie wave lengths like >>>> billiard balls and Buckyballs. For the vast set of applicable macro >>>> objects, my claim remains; that there is a fallacy of including these >>>> objects in superpositions, as doing so leads to a foolish conclusion; MW. >>>> AG* >>>> >>>> >>>> You're missing the point that in every QM experiment there's a step >>>> where micro goes to macro. It doesn't solve anything to rant about de >>>> Broglie wavelengths of cats. >>>> >>>> Brent >>>> >>> >>> *Before the Masters of the Universe included Observers, Instruments, and >>> Environments in the wf's, did quantum experiments imply MW (excluding the >>> MWI based on the SWE)? AG* >>> >> >> *As I see it, decoherence theory "solves" the cat paradox by assuming >> (falsely) that the cat can be isolated and then decoheres with extreme >> rapidly, But then we're still left with a cat which is alive and dead >> simulteously, but only for a very very short duration. So No, I don't see >> this as a solution. CMIIAW. AG* >> >> >> The cat is never isolated (that's a condition you just invented), but >> that doesn't mean it can't be split into (FAPP) orthogonal states by >> becoming entangled with the poison gas which is entangled with the >> radioactive atom which is in a superposition of decayed and not-decayed. >> >> Brent >> > > *Doesn't the superposition of states used in the cat problem. or indeed > any quantum superposition, requires the system being measured to be > isolated? AG * >
*As I see it, the total system represented by the wf ( (Alive, Undecayed) + (Dead, Decayed) ), leaving out Dirac symbols, must be isolated if it's regarded as a superposition. If so, this implies the cat is also isolated. AG * -- 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.
