On 6/12/2018 7:24 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 12:50:05 AM UTC, Brent wrote:
On 6/12/2018 4:45 PM, agrays...@gmail.com <javascript:> wrote:
On Tuesday, June 12, 2018 at 11:04:21 PM UTC, Brent wrote:
On 6/12/2018 3:18 PM, agrays...@gmail.com 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.
*In the real world, of course, but Schroedinger was idealizing the
life/death transition. I have no problem with that, and neither should
you. Idealizing systems is done physics frequently, for example like
writing equations for particles which strictly don't exist. But QM
might have a problem if you are allowed to choose a basis in which the
cat is simultaneously alive and dead, even if for a very short time. AG*
Why? You've just agreed that over short time scales it's impossible to
say whether the cat is alive or dead. If you're going to use an
idealization then you have to stick with it; you can't throw it over
half way through your analysis and say, "...but the cat can't be both
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?
*
When the experiment ends, that is when the box is opened, the cat
might still be alive. AG*
Which in the idealization means it didn't evolve.
Brent
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-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com
<javascript:>.
Visit this group at
https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
<https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout
<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
<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.
