On 12 Dec 2017, at 02:02, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 12/12/2017 11:44 am, smitra wrote:
On 11-12-2017 23:15, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 12/12/2017 1:12 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 10 Dec 2017, at 23:38, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 11/12/2017 2:19 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Dec 2017, at 00:03, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 9/12/2017 4:21 am, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Similarly, a shroedinger car, once alive + dead, will never
become a pure alive, or dead cat. It will only seems so for
anyone looking at the cat, in the {alive, dead} base/apparatus.
Superposition never disappear, and a coin moree or less with a
precise position, is always a superposition of a coin with more
or less precise momenta. The relation is given by the Fourier
transforms, which gives the relative accessible states/worlds.
I pointed out that for a macroscopic object such as a coin, the
uncertainty relations give uncertainties in positions and/or
momentum far below any level of possible detection.
Of possible practical detection. That is good FAPP, but
irrelevant
for theoretical consideration.
This is a purely rhetorical objection, Bruno. And when you trot
this out, as you do regularly, I know that your purpose is to
obfuscate, and hide the fact that you have no rational argument to
offer.
You confuse physics and metaphysics. The difference is not
rhetorical, but fundamental in this thread.
Rubbish. The central point of contention on this thread is whether a
coin toss can be regarded as a classical event, with probabilities
given by ignorance of the initial conditions, or as a quantum event
with probabilities given by purely quantum uncertainties.
This is a straightforward question of physics, and has nothing to do
with metaphysics. As usual, you introduce the term 'metaphysics'
merely to obfuscate, because you have no intelligent response to the
clear physics of the situation.
That the probabilities are given by classical physics does not imply
that there is no branching due to the coin toss.
It does, because there is no superposition of head/tails -- no
possibility of interference between heads and tails.
You are begging the question. The point was that without collapse, the
shaking of the dice or coin can make the superposition of the
positions (inherent in the Heisenberg uncertainty) can add up to make
the coin behaving sufficiently differently to obtain a superposition
of the head+tail or 1+2+...+6 superposition.
Bruno
Bruce
--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
