On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 3:04:37 AM UTC, Bruce wrote:
> *So if one chooses a basis where the cat is simultaneously alive and dead,
> is this a problem for QM? AG *
>> No problem for QM -- one does it all the time. It might not be the most
>> useful basis, but that doesn't mean it isn't possible.
> *Since you earlier acknowledged that Schroedinger showed the "absurdity"
> of alive/dead simultaneously, are you now saying the absurd is not only
> possible in QM, but even when it's never observed? AG*
> I didn't acknowledge that Schrödinger showed the absurdity of the
> superposition, all I said was that he claimed that it was absurd. I see no
> absurdity at all in this superposition.
*Where do you draw the line? Is there any conclusion you would find absurd?
> Remember that a superposition is just the sum of a number of vectors,
> expressed in some basis that does not include the said sum as a basis
> vector. There is nothing mysterious in this, and the quantum situation is
> entirely analogous to superpositions of vectors in conventional linear
*OK. but this is where I may be confused. If the component states of a
superposition are orthogonal, won't there still be interference between
them due to Born's Rule? Isn't this what distinguishes classical from
quantum probability, how the cross terms are manifested to yield quantum
probabilities? TIA, 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 post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.