On 7/5/2018 11:27 AM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote:


On Wednesday, July 4, 2018 at 10:57:06 AM UTC-6, Brent wrote:



    On 7/4/2018 1:57 AM, 'scerir' via Everything List wrote:

    *No. I am asserting that the INTERPRETATION of the superposition
    of states is wrong. Although I have asked several times, no one
    here seems able to offer a plausible justification for
    interpreting that a system in a superposition of states, is
    physically in all states of the superposition SIMULTANEOUSLY
    before the system is measured. If we go back to those little
    pointing things, you will see there exists an infinite
    uncountable set of basis vectors for any vector in that linear
    vector space. For quantum systems, there is no unique basis, and
    in many cases also infinitely many bases, So IMO, the
    interpretation is not justified. AG*

    ***SIMULTANEOUSLY*** was used by EPR in their paper, but that did
    not have much meaning (operationally, physically).

    Can we say that the observable, in a superposition state, has a
    ***DEFINITE*** value between two measurements?

    No - in general - we cannot say that.


    It's in some definite state.  But it may be a state for which we
    have no measurement operator or don't intend to measure; so we say
    it is in a superposition, meaning a superposition of the
    eigenstates we're going to measure.  So it does not have one of
    the eigenvalues of our measurement.

    Brent

*
*
*So for the radioactive source, the superposed state, Decayed + Undecayed, does NOT imply the system is in both states simultaneously? *

No, it is in a state that consists of Decayed+Undecayed.  So in a sense it is in both simulatnaeously.  If you are sailing a heading of 45deg you are on a definite heading.  But you are simultaneously traveling North and East.  And if someone was watching you with a radar that could only output "moving north" or "moving east" it would oscillate between the two and you might call that a superposition of north and east motion.

Brent

*Same for cat, Alive + Dead? Same for ( (Undecayed, Alive)  + (Decayed, Dead) ) for Schroedinger's composite system? If that's the case, why would anyone think these states are in any way paradoxical or contradictory? 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 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.

Reply via email to