On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 10:06 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 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]> >> wrote: >> >>> From: Jason Resch <[email protected]> >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 7:22 PM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> From: Jason Resch <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 2:38 PM Brent Meeker <[email protected]> >>>> 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 * > >> >> Well the wave function contains you, me, Earth, etc. So in a sense everything we see exists in some part of the wave function. No one can see it, but no one can see a universe either.
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.
