On 6/12/2018 4:45 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 11:04:21 PM UTC, Brent wrote:
On 6/12/2018 3:18 PM, agrays...@gmail.com <javascript:> wrote:
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 10:14:56 PM UTC, Brent wrote:
On 6/12/2018 3:02 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 8:20:00 PM UTC,
agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 6:13:04 PM UTC, Brent wrote:
On 6/12/2018 10:51 AM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 5:28:05 PM UTC, Brent
wrote:
On 6/12/2018 1:01 AM, agrays...@gmail.com 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
*
You seem to lack common sense about everything. The cat is never alive
and dead. Even with a stick of dynamite instead of a poison vial it
would take the cat a long time on the scale of atomic interactions to go
from alive to dead. With a poison vial it would be minutes, and during
those minutes parts of the cat would be functioning normally and others
would not. How are you going to define "dead"? are you going to ask
for a brain wave scan?
Why dead? The cat starts out alive. So what state do you think it will
evolve to? ...transcendent?
Brent
*
*
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
