when is Schroedinger's cat dead, and when is it not?

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

This is not true some of our daily life objects need the knowledge of modern physicists to be applied to they can work properly I just provided you with an example in my last post. Please also note that incomplete theories are not straight "wrong"...they rather miss explain some deeper parts of the puzzle but they are based on sound scientific investigation and have practical value.

provable not true.
There really is NOT ONE THING because of 'modern physics'!

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Thank you for finally admitting time dilations are there.....yes I pointed out they may be infinitesimal to a Graham's number scale in my VERY FIRST POST Bubba !

The ability to posing questions and problems should start in pre school and if you have an interesting answer other then negligible please bring it up or shut up ! Intellectually you are clearly not qualified to talk about anything I just had to spend 4 or 5 posts so you understood what I was addressing since your previous grasp of my points was a mess top to bottom...you have to do better then that Bubba !

Alright, then, let's see if you have any knowledge whatever about physics. A car travelling at 40 miles per hour is brought to a stop in a distance of 100 feet. Assume the braking force is applied in a constant manner until the car is stationary. The car weighs 3000 pounds. Find the braking force and the time required to stop.

Any student halfway through high school physics and getting a decent grade should be able to answer. I would guess that dozens of A2K members could answer this. If you don't like this problem, I'll give you an elementary quantum mechanics calculation, but I am trying to keep things on the level of high school physics.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

Alright, then, let's see if you have any knowledge whatever about physics. A car travelling at 40 miles per hour is brought to a stop in a distance of 100 feet. Assume the braking force is applied in a constant manner until the car is stationary. The car weighs 3000 pounds. Find the braking force and the time required to stop.

Any student halfway through high school physics and getting a decent grade should be able to answer. I would guess that dozens of A2K members could answer this. If you don't like this problem, I'll give you an elementary quantum mechanics calculation, but I am trying to keep things on the level of high school physics.

Why the question? And why the QM question? QM is realy stupid!
And...being to able to do some math doesn't mean one UNDERSTANDS physics! There are even university physicist who admit that!
Doing some stupid high school math doesn't prove a thing, mate!

oh btw one can use F=m*a and d=t*v Wink

But is doesn't say a thing!

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Please at least try to check it before dismissing it so easily...its a well established fact. I don't have any idea why you or anyone else would think it probably is not true. Why would so many people working with atomic clocks in satellites lie about it ? Is this yet another conspiracy theory "they" against "us" sort of thing ?

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

I won't bother to reply to such a dumb assed preposterous post...either he is a kiddo or a young college student who clearly has no understanding how the thinking process works...he lacks creativity and basic grasp of fairly simple philosophical questions...replying to the average Joe when the average Joe tries to chew up more then he can bite is a waste of time for both sides.

PS - By the way smart 4th grade kiddos can solve that problem once they understand speed affects the weight of objects exponentially. Given a constant speed and given the the lenght it took you to stop the car with constant breaking force the problem almost self solves itself. Very Happy

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

I won't bother to reply to such a dumb assed preposterous post...either he is a kiddo or a young college student who clearly has no understanding how the thinking process works...he lacks creativity and basic grasp of fairly simple philosophical questions...replying to the average Joe when the average Joe tries to chew up more then he can bite is a waste of time for both sides.

So, we've established that you cannot solve an extremely elementary physics question. I would have thought that at least you could have had Q mail you the answer so that you could present it as your own. It stands to reason that someone who cannot work with physics at the high school level doesn't have a lot of business throwing out theories about quantum mechanics. What's next, you opine about brain surgery and tell doctors on the board who correct you that they can't keep up with you intellectually?

PS: Interesting that you discuss my likely age without even doing the work of checking my profile, where I state my year of birth.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Read up Bubba !
The only thing you have established is that you are a moron ! Very Happy

PS - Oh I couldn't bother to check you out but if you are an adult all the worse you pretty much are resembling Homer Simpson right now...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Read up Bubba !
The only thing you have established is that you are a moron !

So, why do you believe that lacking even the most elementary knowledge of physics you can discourse on quantum mechanics? Should I actually give you an elementary quantum mechanics problem from, say, the freshman college level?

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Not anyway near 1/graham's number but very small nevertheless. Time dilatation is in a factor of v^2/c^2, which if applied to blood cells at top velocity (0.4 m/s) yields a gamma factor of approx. 1 + 1^-18. Meaning a difference of one thousandth of a fetmosecond per second. A femtosecond is the SI unit of time equal to 10^−15 of a second.

For context, a femtosecond is to a second as a second is to about 31.7 million years.

A thousands of a fetmosecond is to a second what a second is to 31.7 billion year.

Typical time steps for molecular dynamics simulations are on the order of 1 fs.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

...oh dear...Graham's number was is being used for metaphor on how far we could potentially go talking about time dilation, since Graham's number is to my knowledge the biggest number know so far.... far far bigger then googleplex...obviously you wouldn't need nothing that big not even google big to measure the exact time dilation effect at the human body molecules scale.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

You have a hard time reading post scriptums haven't you ?

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

Please at least try to check it before dismissing it so easily...its a well established fact. I don't have any idea why you or anyone else would think it probably is not true. Why would so many people working with atomic clocks in satellites lie about it ? Is this yet another conspiracy theory "they" against "us" sort of thing?

I don't care what anyone calls it s long as it is the truth!
And the number of people talking about something is no measure of truth,
as you might be well aware.

Quote:

Please at least try to check it before dismissing it so easily

I don't want to sound rude, because you sound like a nice decent chap to me.
However, in this case, it is you who haven't checked before dismissing it.
I know the so called 'facts; . I have studied physics at university level.
Later I found out it is all wrong. yes ALL of it!
There is really nothing that works because of 'modern physics' and that includes gps etc.

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Modern physics is in trouble this has recently become public knowledge but you jumping in with "its all wrong" rather then its an incomplete puzzle is a bit far fetched no ? You are not sounding rude at all ! Wink

By the way one thing is QM problems and another general relativity... Could you elaborate on the problems regarding general relativity ?

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

You have a hard time reading post scriptums haven't you ?

Yes, I saw your comparison between me and Homer Simpson. But back to the topic, is it your position that you could solve my problem, but won't lower yourself, or is it your position that people who know nothing about a subject can opine about advanced areas of the subject with a reasonable chance of being correct?

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Man...just keep going up for PS...you are truly amazing ! You have the answer in 2 different places from 2 different posters but you keep coming back...
...also is pretty clear making calculations and understanding the philosophical nature of what those calculations refer to are two different subjects, just like Economy and Accounting...I suppose you can do basic maths but are truly lacking in basic reasoning skills...

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

I know a bigger number than ghaham's number... Smile

anyway. The point was that at this range of smallness, it really does not matter.

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

Modern physics is in trouble this has recently become public knowledge but you jumping in with "its all wrong" rather then its an incomplete puzzle is a bit far fetched no ?

In trouble? No mate, it is all bollocks.
Of course I am aware that is sounds far fetched! But that doesn't mean it isn't true what I am saying. It only sounds far fetched because it is not in line with your belief system. 'modern physics' is just an indoctrination tool and in reality has nothing to do with real physical world. (actually there is no real physical world.)
I used to laugh at people who said this to me. But is it fair, to laugh at something I haven't researched? No of course it isn't.
So I have researched a lot of the things I assumed to be true!
I found out it were ALL LIES.

Quote:

You are not sounding rude at all !

ok, thanks for that. I have no intention being rude.
Some call me a troll because I go against the public opinion most of the time.
But I only do that because public opinion is far removed from any truth.

Quote:

By the way one thing is QM problems and another general relativity... Could you elaborate on the problems regarding general relativity ?

General and special relativity have stalled 'physics' for years and years.
There hasn't been any progress in physics since years!
(All this by design by the way.)
Both theories , relativity and qm are bollocks, and haven't contributed one single thing to our world!
Yes, I am aware of the popular sayings about inventions because of these theories but they are all untrue!

Once you start digging some other things that are untrue:
Biggie bangie, never happened, black holes don't exist, gravity is not a force,
and so on and so fotrth.

Now, you can think of me as a loonie, as most people do, and dismis what I say by reflex action. Or you can start to investigate and find out for yourself. Because I never say to people to believe what I say or write. I encourage people to do their own research! Why the heck don't teachers ask that to pupils in school, one may wonder? Wink

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Well I like the first line...just ad 1 to Graham's number and give it a name...
If it does matter or not....in the holistic picture it must whatever the scale we are talking. If it does have anything to say on QM weirdness, that is an entirely different matter, it might just as it might not. I also pointed out this very soon in my first or second post precisely because I was expecting someone interpreted my "dissertation" on the Schroedinger's cat problem as a feeble attempt to dismiss the whole subject of QM which I didn't as explained plentifully in previous posts. Now that we got that out of the way what is your input on this regard ? Do you like (I think he is French) your fellow countryman Yves Couder's wave-guided particle effect potential solution ?

1 Reply

@Fil Albuquerque,

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Man...just keep going up for PS...you are truly amazing ! You have the answer in 2 different places from 2 different posters but you keep coming back...
...also is pretty clear making calculations and understanding the philosophical nature of what those calculations refer to are two different subjects, just like Economy and Accounting...I suppose you can do basic maths but are truly lacking in basic reasoning skills...

No, I don't have the answer. The problem was:

Brandon9000 wrote:

A car travelling at 40 miles per hour is brought to a stop in a distance of 100 feet. Assume the braking force is applied in a constant manner until the car is stationary. The car weighs 3000 pounds. Find the braking force and the time required to stop.

Q posted:

Quehoniaomath wrote:

oh btw one can use F=m*a and d=t*v

and you posted:

Fil Albuquerque wrote:

Given a constant speed and given the the lenght it took you to stop the car with constant breaking force the problem almost self solves itself.

Neither of these is the answer. The answer is a calculation resulting in a number:

vf = Car final velocity
vi = Car initial velocity
a = car acceleration (negative)
t = time spent braking

vf^2 = vi^2 + 2as
2as = vf^2 - vi^2
a = (vf^2 - vi^2)/2s = [0 - (40 mi/hr)^2]/[(2)(100 ft/s)]

vi = 40 mi/hr = 40 mi/hr (5280 ft/1 mi) (1 hr/3600 s) = 58.67 ft/s
a = - (58.67 ft/s)^2/[(2)(100 ft/s)] = 17.21 ft/s^2

t = vi/a = (58.67 ft/s) / (17.21 ft/s^2) = 3.41 s
F = ma = (3000 lb / g) a = 3000 lb [(17.21 ft/s^2) / (32.17 ft/s^2)] = 1604.9 lbs

The post in which I gave the problem was #5,853,102 on page 11. Please identify either of the "2 different places" where the answer was posted. You saying "the problem almost self solves itself" doesn't constitute an answer.

1 Reply

This is interesting enough:

0 Replies

when is Schroedinger's cat dead, and when is it not?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know