On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 11:04:21 PM UTC, Brent wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/12/2018 3:18 PM, [email protected] <javascript:> 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 *
>
>
> No.  The experimentally interesting cases tend to need isolation so the 
> cross-terms of the superposition can be known and controlled, but it's not 
> a mathematical requirement.  Suppose Schroedinger, his lab, his box, and 
> the cat were all perfectly isolated.  There would be some eigenstates 
> corresponding the cat being alive and some corresponding to it being dead 
> and there would be others corresponding to the cat being alive+dead.
>
 
*Eigenstates of what operator? AG*
 

> But the latter would be unstable in the sense that the state of the system 
> would evolve quickly through those to ones where the cat is dead. 
>



*Why unstable? Because we never see it? Maybe it doesn't exist. How does 
decoherence explain the unintelligible state of alive and dead 
simultaneously even if for a short time? Why dead? AG *

> In theory, being perfectly isolated, it would have a Poincare' recurrence 
> time...but it would be many times longer than the age of universe.  So what 
> do you call the states that the system is in most of the time, where the 
> cat is dead.  They are superpositions of different microscopic states which 
> are macroscopically indistinguishable.  Just as were the states when the 
> cat was alive. 
>
> Brent
>
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to