> On 24 Jul 2018, at 21:53, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 6:37:19 PM UTC, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
>
>
> Le mar. 24 juil. 2018 à 20:30, <agrays...@gmail.com <javascript:>> a écrit :
>
>
> On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 12:58:43 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>> On 24 Jul 2018, at 09:19, agrays...@gmail.com <> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, July 23, 2018 at 4:27:03 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>>> On 20 Jul 2018, at 23:12, agrays...@gmail.com <> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Friday, July 20, 2018 at 10:17:04 AM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 20 Jul 2018, at 04:40, agrays...@gmail.com <> wrote:
>>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Nevertheless, I still stand with Schroedinger that in any quantum
>>>> superposition, other than for slit experiments, the system cannot be in
>>>> all eigenstates simultaneously before measurement.
>>>
>>> Then you can no more explain the working of an interferometer, or
>>> polariser, or even the structure of the hydrogen atoms, molecules, etc. You
>>> are just saying that QM works for the double slit, but not for anything
>>> else. That is contrary to the fact that QM has just never been shown wrong,
>>> at any scale and level.
>>>
>>> Sorry, but I see you have no clue what I have been claiming in this thread.
>>> Although I infer that English isn't your native language, you know it well
>>> enough to understand my claim; yet you do NOT. How can you expect to posit
>>> new theories about reality, such as based on arithmetic, if you are unable
>>> to understand simple English?
>>>
>>> OK, let me start again. I am NOT questioning the CALCULATED results of QM.
>>
>>
>> That is ambiguous. Is it SWE + COLLAPSE, or just SWE (+ Mechanism) ?
>>
>> That you ask this question, shows you still have no clue what I am arguing
>> about. Thanks for your time. AG
>
>
> What are you arguing about? I’m afraid you are unclear in many of your
> replies, including to others. But you seem to believe that there is no
> superposition,
>
> I never claimed that, never. You have no clue what I am arguing. NONE! AG
>
> Could you use a bigger font and a redder color? Because it's too small for us
> to read... Also please stop taking time to explain yourself it is as we all
> know useless, instead I propose for you to directly insult people in blinking
> red 66pt sized font... It will be at last interesting.
>
> Thank you.
>
> How many times do I have to state that I was objecting NOT to superposition
> per se, but to its INTERPRETATION until Bruno understands? We use
> superpositions to calculate probabilities, which obviously works, but why do
> the Masters of the Universe assume a system in a superposition of eigenstates
> (which, btw, are orthogonal, so no mutual interference, and form a basis) is
> SIMULTANEOUSLY in all component states when the base is NOT unique? I don't
> see that claim or hypothesis used in solving standard quantum problems, such
> as the H-atom, tunneling, etc., so it seems SUPERFLUOUS and leads to problems
> such as a cat which is alive and dead simultaneously. AG
I am just mentioning the superposition principle, the one Dirac said to be the
essence and the mystery of quantum mechanics. QM is just the empirical
discovery that the linear sum of two physical states is still a physical state.
That has been verified directly and indirectly by molecular and atomic physics,
and even black hole and cosmology. It is not a question of interpretation: it
is a fact that a state like up+down will pass with probability one a
“polariser” (analyser) measuring in the base {up+down, up-down}, and that is
not the case for a mixture of up and down particles, each of which pass with a
probability 1/2.
Before discussing any interpretation, we need to agree on the theory we are
using. I am discussing Everett theory, which is Copenhagen minus the collapse
postulate. Without the collapse postulate, no superposition ever reducse into a
singular state projection. That contradicts the quantum linearity.
Being a pure state like “up” is always relative to an instrument measure. All
state are superposition when develop in other bases, and those are real, we can
test them. A state like up is really up’ + down’. That is exploited in quantum
computing, where some algorithm can superposed many computations at once, and,
despite we cannot observe each individual result, we can test global
information on all results, like "are they all the same or different? or
question of parity of results, etc.
The so called “many-world” interpretation is just QM-without-collapse taken
seriously. No need to add some metaphysical world(s) here or there. A world can
be defined by just any completion of a state that we can measure, but it is an
open problem if that exists (except with mechanism: we have good reason to
disbelieve such worlds).
The instrumentalist idea that the superposition are only tools to calculate
probabilities was inspiring a long time ago, but it does not work. Nature
confirms their physicalness, notably by testing the observable difference
between mixed state and superposition. We can add hidden variable, or Bohm’s
Guiding particles Potential, but this has been shown to lead to FTL (even
instantaneous) influence(*) and other magic things or to many-worlds.
In my opinion, you are just saying that the physical reality do not obey
Everett quantum mechanics, i.e. that some collapse occurs somewhere,
instantaneously. In 1927 Einstein gave a simple thought experience, the one
particle in a sphere, and explain that if the collapse is physical, it has to
violate special relativity. Hs EPR paper is closer to an experimental
treatment, as Bell has shown, and QM seems to be vindicate, so the choice is
really between many-worlds, or the abandon of special relativity (or the bandit
that QM says anything about the physical reality).
Bruno
>
>
> makes me doubt you have study QM,
>
> which is all about superposition. I do miss something, you might perhaps try
> to clarify.
>
> Bruno
>
>
>>
>> Personally by QM I mean the SWE or its Dirac Version, or DeWitt-Wheeler,
>> etc. Once I understood that Bohr’s perturbation act needs FTL influence, I
>> have ceased to judge the collapse plausible.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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 <>.
>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com <>.
>> 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-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
> <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.
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.
