On Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 6:25:37 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: > > > > On 11/7/2019 5:01 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: > > There is no paradox. It's just some hang up you have that a cat can't be >> dead and alive at the same time. It's as though your physics was stuck in >> the time of Aristotle and words were magic so that "Alive implies >> not-dead." was a law of physics instead of an axiom of logic. >> >> In fact a moments thought will tell you that quite aside from quantum >> mechanics there would be no way to identify the moment of death of the cat >> to less than a several seconds. It would be simply meaningless to say the >> cat was alive at 0913:20 and dead at 0913:21. >> >> Brent >> > > You can imagine a different experiment, without cats, with the same > paradoxical result. The point of Schroedinger's thought experiment was to > demonstate tHE title of this thread; that there's something wrong with the > prevailing interpretation of superposition. In your view I am hung up with > Aristotle? In my view, you're seduced by some quantum nonsense. AG > > > Prevailing when? 1927? There is no problem in the prevailing 2019 > interpretation, except in your mind because you assume that a cat cannot be > in a superposition of alive/dead even for a fraction of a > nano-second...because...WHY? The radioactive atom can be in a > superposition of decayed and not-decayed for a nanosecond. Why doesn't > that violate your Aristotelean logic? > > Brent >
What's wrong with the interpretation that the radioactive atom is either decayed OR undecayed with probabilities calculated by Born's Rule? AG -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/94d1bb85-b4d3-4cf4-abab-dea19d58f7c4%40googlegroups.com.
