On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 12:57:34 AM UTC, Jason wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 7:42 PM Bruce Kellett <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> From: Jason Resch <[email protected] <javascript:>> >> >> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 7:22 PM Bruce Kellett <[email protected] >> <javascript:>> wrote: >> >>> From: Jason Resch <[email protected] <javascript:>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 2:38 PM Brent Meeker <[email protected] >>> <javascript:>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 7/30/2018 7:39 AM, Jason Resch wrote: >>>> >>>> Does it exist and happen, or does the final result merely materialize >>>>>> magically like the live or dead cat? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *In my view, we don't know how the final result materializes; the >>>>> great unsolved problem in QM, aka the measurement problem, or a large >>>>> part >>>>> of it. But why introduce intermediate values, which IIUC the theory says >>>>> don't exist. AG * >>>>> >>>> >>>> Where does it say that? If I recall correctly, Schrodinger did not put >>>> a caveat on his equation which said it cannot be used to refer to anything >>>> that is real. >>>> >>>> >>>> That was the point of Schroedinger's cat experiment. Schroedinger >>>> invented it to show the fallacy of regarding the wf as real because it led >>>> to the absurdity of a cat that was both alive and dead. >>>> >>>> >>> That was a bit before he started to realize that the equation for which >>> he won the Nobel prize might be true. >>> >>> >>> In physics, equations are neither true nor false. They are either useful >>> or not. And they require interpretation. >>> >> >> The point is, Shrodinger went from: >> A) believing that what mathematics of his equation plainly said was >> happening about the cat lead to a contradiction/paradox/negative result >> to >> B) Starting to come around to believing it might actually be >> describing reality as it is. >> >> >> Not every useful description tells us what reality is "really" like. >> >> Besides, we have come a long way since Schrödinger, so he isn't the final >> word on anything at all. >> > > If you follow the comments above, you will see this was a response to > someone saying that Schrodinger introduced the cat experiment to show the > absurdity of believing the wave function was real. >
*You might be referring to my comments. I didn't exactly say that the wf isn't real. I was focused on the superposition being wrongly interpreted, and IMO this is what Schroedinger showed with his cat experiment. I then concluded that superposition, and hence the wf which is described by a superposition, contains information only. Whether this qualifies for "real" depends on what "real" means. But if the wf contains information only, I suppose we can say it is real in some sense even though no one has seen one! AG * > > Jason > -- 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.
