20
   

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

 
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jan, 2015 07:05 pm
@Brandon9000,
Given the kinetic energy of a car in motion has a squared relation with speed when you have the speed and the weight of the car you multiply to know what is the actual amount of energy the car has at X speed. Given the actual braking distance you can then calculate how much constant force you must apply during the lenght of the braking distance. This was already explained the process is correct, but you keep coming back with it because you have nothing else to reason about. Its quite honestly sad you really believe this is relevant for the topic.

You are a resentful mediocre thinker that in spite of multiple times being explained understanding a process has nothing to do with actually making the calculations, or the opposite, that making calculations per se doesn't immediately imply you need to understand the formula you are using just that you know it and know how to apply it.

Of course ideally both things are necessary for a complete flawless process that presents a practical useful number value X but not for the purpose of discussing the underlying logical principles applied in the reasoning on how a process works.

It is obvious but the obvious escapes you. Since your desire in this thread is to produce noise not clarity and since you have nothing to say on the underlying reasoning problems of QM my talk with you is now over and done.
You are wasting your time and mine. Speaking about forces and energy go waste yours with someone else with enough patience to suffer your mediocre inputs.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jan, 2015 07:48 pm
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jan, 2015 09:01 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:
Given the kinetic energy of a car in motion has a squared relation with speed when you have the speed and the weight of the car you multiply to know what is the actual amount of energy the car has at X speed. Given the actual braking distance you can then calculate how much constant force you must apply during the lenght of the braking distance. This was already explained the process is correct, but you keep coming back with it because you have nothing else to reason about.

And yet, you were unable to answer. Or, if you maintain that you were able to answer and just didn't for some reason, I can give you another trivial high school physics problem.

Fil Albuquerque wrote:
Its quite honestly sad you really believe this is relevant for the topic.

I can give you the simplest possible quantum mechanics problem, if you consider it more relevant. I was attempting to give you a really introductory physics problem.

Fil Albuquerque wrote:
You are a resentful mediocre thinker that in spite of multiple times being explained understanding a process has nothing to do with actually making the calculations, or the opposite, that making calculations per se doesn't immediately imply you need to understand the formula you are using just that you know it and know how to apply it.

Of course ideally both things are necessary for a complete flawless process that presents a practical useful number value X but not for the purpose of discussing the underlying logical principles applied in the reasoning on how a process works.

But one thing that actually is necessary to produce any meaningful answers related to quantum mechanics is some knowledge of quantum mechanics. One thing is certain. People who are able to solve complex problems in quantum mechanics are able to answer the most basic questions about quantum mechanics, and people who are unable to answer the most basic questions about quantum mechanics are unlikely to produce correct answers to advanced questions in quantum mechanics. If I'm such a mediocre thinker compared to you, isn't it odd that I've been thoroughly familiar with most areas of physics for decades and you don't know the first thing about it?
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jan, 2015 09:10 pm
There is more then one road to get to Rome. Anyone really enlightened understands this. Most of the problems are languaging disconnects between distinct processes of description. But reality is always one. While some systems might be more efficient, all good thinking inevitably leads to similar conclusions even if often with different wording.
Human beings are tribal and as such spend 90% of their energy defending tribal languaging instead of focusing in understanding how different forms of answering say the same and speak of the same things...Same old same old. Mediocrity is everywhere and quite often in the most unsuspecting places.

carloslebaron
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 12:28 am
I just saw Schroedinger's cat last night walking around my neighbor's house.

The cat is alive.

When this quantum theory works, and when it not?
0 Replies
 
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 01:04 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
stopped talking to me now? If so, why?
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 06:44 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:
If it does matter or not....in the holistic picture it must whatever the scale we are talking

No, it's too small to matter. A guy spining around himself for 30 billion years (twice as old as the universe) whould have accumulated a WOOPING one second of time dilatation in his extended fingers.

In any case it has no relevance whatsoever to the darn cat. Just a waste of perfectly good posting time.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 08:51 am
@Olivier5,
...you certainly are aware that GPS would fail big time if very small adjustments made to atomic clocks accounting for time dilation weren't made while they go around in their orbit. It just happens that it matters quite a big deal. A whooping 1 second is eternity at QM scale. You could go well under that figure and take into account just the life span of the cat and still find a big enough number at atomic scale to argue that it MIGHT matter. It is highly speculative to straight out state that it doesn't matter or that it does....but if in doubt its better to take a positive approach and proceed investigating then drop the subject to find later that it did matter after all.
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 09:32 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:
...you certainly are aware that GPS would fail big time if very small adjustments made to atomic clocks accounting for time dilation weren't made while they go around in their orbit. It just happens that it matters quite a big deal


This is really NOT TRUE and very easy to show!
You are epaating the propaganda from the mainstreamline, that is all!
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 09:50 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
I wanna go on the record here Fil: You are not "epaating the propaganda from the mainstreamline" at all.
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 10:23 am
Quote:
Real-World Relativity: The GPS Navigation System

People often ask me "What good is Relativity?" It is a commonplace to think of Relativity as an abstract and highly arcane mathematical theory that has no consequences for everyday life. This is in fact far from the truth.

Consider for a moment that when you are riding in a commercial airliner, the pilot and crew are navigating to your destination with the aid of the Global Positioning System (GPS). Further, many luxury cars now come with built-in navigation systems that include GPS receivers with digital maps, and you can purchase hand-held GPS navigation units that will give you your position on the Earth (latitude, longitude, and altitude) to an accuracy of 5 to 10 meters that weigh only a few ounces and cost around $100.

GPS was developed by the United States Department of Defense to provide a satellite-based navigation system for the U.S. military. It was later put under joint DoD and Department of Transportation control to provide for both military and civilian navigation uses.

The current GPS configuration consists of a network of 24 satellites in high orbits around the Earth. Each satellite in the GPS constellation orbits at an altitude of about 20,000 km from the ground, and has an orbital speed of about 14,000 km/hour (the orbital period is roughly 12 hours - contrary to popular belief, GPS satellites are not in geosynchronous or geostationary orbits). The satellite orbits are distributed so that at least 4 satellites are always visible from any point on the Earth at any given instant (with up to 12 visible at one time). Each satellite carries with it an atomic clock that "ticks" with an accuracy of 1 nanosecond (1 billionth of a second). A GPS receiver in an airplane determines its current position and heading by comparing the time signals it receives from a number of the GPS satellites (usually 6 to 12) and trilaterating on the known positions of each satellite[1]. The precision achieved is remarkable: even a simple hand-held GPS receiver can determine your absolute position on the surface of the Earth to within 5 to 10 meters in only a few seconds (with differential techiques that compare two nearby receivers, precisions of order centimeters or millimeters in relative position are often obtained in under an hour or so). A GPS receiver in a car can give accurate readings of position, speed, and heading in real-time!

To achieve this level of precision, the clock ticks from the GPS satellites must be known to an accuracy of 20-30 nanoseconds. However, because the satellites are constantly moving relative to observers on the Earth, effects predicted by the Special and General theories of Relativity must be taken into account to achieve the desired 20-30 nanosecond accuracy.

Because an observer on the ground sees the satellites in motion relative to them, Special Relativity predicts that we should see their clocks ticking more slowly (see the Special Relativity lecture). Special Relativity predicts that the on-board atomic clocks on the satellites should fall behind clocks on the ground by about 7 microseconds per day because of the slower ticking rate due to the time dilation effect of their relative motion.

Further, the satellites are in orbits high above the Earth, where the curvature of spacetime due to the Earth's mass is less than it is at the Earth's surface. A prediction of General Relativity is that clocks closer to a massive object will seem to tick more slowly than those located further away (see the Black Holes lecture). As such, when viewed from the surface of the Earth, the clocks on the satellites appear to be ticking faster than identical clocks on the ground. A calculation using General Relativity predicts that the clocks in each GPS satellite should get ahead of ground-based clocks by 45 microseconds per day.

The combination of these two relativitic effects means that the clocks on-board each satellite should tick faster than identical clocks on the ground by about 38 microseconds per day (45-7=38)! This sounds small, but the high-precision required of the GPS system requires nanosecond accuracy, and 38 microseconds is 38,000 nanoseconds. If these effects were not properly taken into account, a navigational fix based on the GPS constellation would be false after only 2 minutes, and errors in global positions would continue to accumulate at a rate of about 10 kilometers each day! The whole system would be utterly worthless for navigation in a very short time. This kind of accumulated error is akin to measuring my location while standing on my front porch in Columbus, Ohio one day, and then making the same measurement a week later and having my GPS receiver tell me that my porch and I are currently about 5000 meters in the air somewhere over Detroit.

The engineers who designed the GPS system included these relativistic effects when they designed and deployed the system. For example, to counteract the General Relativistic effect once on orbit, they slowed down the ticking frequency of the atomic clocks before they were launched so that once they were in their proper orbit stations their clocks would appear to tick at the correct rate as compared to the reference atomic clocks at the GPS ground stations. Further, each GPS receiver has built into it a microcomputer that (among other things) performs the necessary relativistic calculations when determining the user's location.

Relativity is not just some abstract mathematical theory: understanding it is absolutely essential for our global navigation system to work properly!


Source: http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

Long version:

Short version:
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 10:51 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Quote:
Real-World Relativity: The GPS Navigation System


yeah, yeah, yeah,
I know all that all ready!
However a description doesn't make it suddenly true!
GPS can very easily do and work without relativity corrections!
That has been proven.
No problem at all!!!
I said and I really mean it that there is NOTHING because of ´modern science`
and that includes GPS!
All sheer propaganda!
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 11:04 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
Unlike you, i did my homework: i calculated the magnitude of the time dilatation involved. Thus I know it is negligeable for any reasonnable purpose. I also know it's totally irrelevant to the Schroedinger cat thought experiment. Two things you fail to understand because you fell in love with your own simplistic thoughts.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 11:18 am
@Olivier5,
For starters it matters when claims like being both dead and alive at the same time are done. They are scientifically inaccurate. You are the one failing to grasp the evident mistake this claim represents. if there are more serious consequences or not is open for investigation. By the way your analysis is poor homework as molecule scale is irrelevant for the discussion you need to go further down to get something interesting. While you do so along the way I advise to read some papers on quantum Biology, they might help.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 11:29 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
You're not even understanding what I write. Never mind...
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 11:32 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
If I can give you just one example where GPS corrections were not needed,
will that be sufficient for you to convince you that relativity is not needed for gps?
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 11:50 am
@Quehoniaomath,
Whether it convinces me or not depends on what you bring up.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 11:59 am
@Olivier5,
You wrong I perfectly understand what you mean when you consider the centre of rotation and the speed at the extremities...as usual you are arrogant and jump to conclusions all to fast. It spells French French French all over you...

I am referring at atomic scale regarding the motions of particles in atoms themselves that may impact quantum biology. You are the one not understanding what I am talking about. Self rotation speed on your own centre is not even relevant for the example I wanted to illustrate as was in my original post, although you can take it to state that there is no quantum superposition whatsoever if time dilation no matter how small is in place. That is a FACT that works against the claim itself !
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 12:08 pm
In very straight forward terms a existing living thing suffers from time dilation while a non existing one don't. (forget about the poison vial because what the thought experiment ultimate wants to refer to is things both existing and not existing in a quantum superposition)
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Jan, 2015 12:18 pm
What is the time dilation effect for a quantum superposition for a galaxy existing not existing that was not yet observed for the past billion years while running away from us at half the speed of light ? Say we will be able to see it in the sky next week for the first time as light catches up with us.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 03:12:42