On Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 6:27:22 PM UTC-7, Bruce wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 12:01 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> On Thursday, November 7, 2019 at 5:25:56 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: >>> >>> On 11/7/2019 4:13 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> They've sent 2000-atom sized molecules through double slits. >>>> >>>> What about sending cats? >>>> >>>> >>>> You will loss the ability to get the interference, because it is hugely >>>> more complex to isolate a cat from the environment, so its alive or dead >>>> state will be pass on you unavoidably very quickly. See my explanation to >>>> Grayson why any (unknown) interaction of an object in a superposition >>>> state >>>> makes it logically impossible to remain in a superposition relatively to >>>> you. It uses only very elementary algebra. The quantum effect, to be >>>> exploited, require perfect isolation, which is impossible for most >>>> macroscopic object. But some “macro-superposition” have been obtained with >>>> superconducting device. In fact, superconductor is a quantum macroscopic >>>> effect. >>>> >>>> >>>> Aside from the isolation problems the de Broglie wavelength of a cat is >>>> extremely small so to get an interference pattern the slit and slit >>>> spacing >>>> must be correspondingly small. The C60 experiment was only made possible >>>> by the development of the Tablot-Lau interferometer. >>>> >>>> Brent >>>> >>> >>> I've made this point before; the decoherence time for a cat is very very >>> short, but how does this effect the point Schroedinger wanted to make, >>> since the cat is in that paradoxical superposition for some short but >>> finite duration? AG >>> >>> >>> 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 >> > > We have moved on somewhat in the 80-plus years since Schrodinger's thought > experiment. The "prevailing view" is now different from his, so what he > thought he had demonstrated is no longer particularly relevant. > > Bruce >
Fair enough. So what is the "prevailing view" now? Isn't it (in the context of Brent's last post) that a radioactive atom can be simultaneously decayed and undecayed? How is this different from the days of Schroedinger? 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/e869a71c-1df4-4f8a-9fcf-85f7c14d28a6%40googlegroups.com.
