On Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 8:28:22 AM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, November 12, 2019 at 1:24:44 AM UTC-7, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Monday, November 11, 2019 at 5:58:30 PM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, November 11, 2019 at 2:52:25 PM UTC-7, Philip Thrift wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Monday, November 11, 2019 at 3:44:24 PM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> In the case of a radioactive atom in state |decayed> + |undecayed>, >>>>> what's the justification and advantage of the interpretation that it's in >>>>> both states simultaneously? AG >>>>> >>>> >>>> None, since it isn't. >>>> >>>> @philipthrift >>>> >>> >>> But doesn't the either/or situation imply no interference? AG >>> >> >> In the case of radium atom decay or no-decay which kills or doesn't kill >> the cat, there is no interference of the two possible histories (as I >> understand what physically is going on). Only one history survives. >> >> @philipthrift >> > > Forget about the cat. For the radioactive source, can it ever be decayed > and undecayed simultaneously, and if so, why? AG >
No. It can "be" *possibly-decayed* and *possibly-undecayed *simultaneously. That's as much as we can model the quantum nature of it. @philipthrift -- 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/467dd80e-2b19-4bb8-ad66-84acdfd0e890%40googlegroups.com.
