On Tuesday, July 10, 2018 at 4:42:44 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote: > > > > On 7/10/2018 3:01 PM, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > *IIRC, the above quote is also in the Wiki article. It's not a coherent > argument; not even an argument but an ASSERTION. Let's raise the level of > discourse. It says we always get a or b, no intermediate result when the > system is in a superposition of states A and B.. Nothing new here. Key > question: why does this imply the system is in states A and B > SIMULTANEOUSLY before the measurement? AG * > > > Because, in theory and in some cases in practice, there is a direct > measurement of the superposition state, call it C, such that you can > directly measure C and always get c, >
*Is c an eigenvalue of some operator? How can you always get c, if C is not an eigenstate of some operator? And if it is an eigenstate, why do you assert it is a superposition? AG* > but when you have measured and confirmed the system is in state c and then > you measure A/B you get a or b at random. The easiest example is SG > measurements of sliver atom spin orientation where spin UP can be measured > left/right and get a LEFT or a RIGHT at random, but it can be measured > up/down and you always get UP. Any particular orientation can be > *written* as a superposition of two orthogonal states. > *I'm not clear what a left/right measurement is, and how it might be measured. I assume you mean the directions perpendicular to Up / Dn. In any event, how is this related to the simultaneity of Up / Dn? AG* > > This is true in general. Any state can be written as a superposition of > states in some other basis. But it is not generally true that we can > prepare or directly measure a system in any given state. So those states > we can't directly access, we tend to think of them as existing only as > superpositions of states we can prepare. > *I'm OK with superpositions, only their interpretation of simultaneity of component states. We can measure Up or Dn, and represent the situation before measurement as a superposition and calculate probabilities, but the assumption of simultaneity seems unsupported and produces apparent paradoxes. AG * > > 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.
