On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 10:20:09 PM UTC, Pierz wrote: > > Obviously you can't measure the particle simultaneously in the up and down > state. Nobody believes that.
Bruno does. Nobody is arguing it. Bruno argues it. Honestly it's hard to understand why you have such an agitated bee in your > bonnet about superpositions. I don't like misleading ideas. The mathematical expression of the photon polarised at 45 degrees to the > measurement apparatus is a normalised vector spanning the space of both up > and down. I guess what you interpret that to mean is up to you since the > mathematical predictions that arise from it are the same: 50% chance of up > or down. Once again, you're simply arguing at cross purposes with Bruno, > who clearly understands QM perfectly well. Not in my opinion. He thinks that an Up or Dn measurement is the same as measuring Up + Dn or Up - Dn because the wf can be written that way in some basis. He's not saying the photon can be measured as up and down at the same time. > He's just saying that any superposition of up and down is an eigenvector in > some other orientation of the apparatus. It's not. My last post proved this with utmost clarity. Up + Dn or Up - Dn is never an eigenfunction regardless of the orientation of the apparatus. How could it be if measuring Up and Dn separately exhausts the total probability of unity? I think you need to rethink this issue. -- 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.
