Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #714459 > unrolled thread

Scientists could improve their game ( qBism [cubism] ).

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Scientists could improve their game ( qBism [cubism] ). Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-11-24 11:52 -0800
    Re: Scientists could improve their game ( qBism [cubism] ). Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 20:03 +0000
      The cat is both dead and alive ? Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-11-24 12:20 -0800
        Re: The cat is both dead and alive ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 22:10 +0000
          "The cat is both dead and alive" is PhD (high and Deep) bullshit. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-11-24 14:30 -0800
            Re: "The cat is both dead and alive" is PhD (high and Deep) bullshit. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-24 23:40 +0000
              We're not AllSeeing, AllKnowing gods. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2018-11-24 18:02 -0800

#714459 — Scientists could improve their game ( qBism [cubism] ).

Scientists could improve their game ( qBism [cubism] );
quantum behavior isn't fully modeled/detected; see:
YouTube.COM/watch?v=LQvCTZgNRNw

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#714460

<Jeff-Relf.Me  @.> wrote:
> Scientists could improve their game ( qBism [cubism] );
> quantum behavior isn't fully modeled/detected; see:
> YouTube.COM/watch?v=LQvCTZgNRNw
> 

Of course scientists could do better. Otherwise it’d be a dead activity. 


-- 
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#714463 — The cat is both dead and alive ?

Odd_Bodkin replied:
> > Scientists could improve their game ( qBism [cubism] );
> > quantum behavior isn't fully modeled/detected; see:
> > YouTube.COM/watch?v=LQvCTZgNRNw
> 
> Of course scientists could do better.
> Otherwise it’d be a dead activity. 

So why do I keep hearing that "Quantum SuperPosition" is real,
not imaginary ( the cat is both dead and alive ) ?

wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_superposition#Physical_interpretation

" Shut up and calculate " makes no such assumptions, right ?

What interpretation of quantum mechanics says it's real ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#714503 — Re: The cat is both dead and alive ?

<Jeff-Relf.Me  @.> wrote:
> Odd_Bodkin replied:
>>> Scientists could improve their game ( qBism [cubism] );
>>> quantum behavior isn't fully modeled/detected; see:
>>> YouTube.COM/watch?v=LQvCTZgNRNw
>> 
>> Of course scientists could do better.
>> Otherwise it’d be a dead activity. 
> 
> So why do I keep hearing that "Quantum SuperPosition" is real,
> not imaginary ( the cat is both dead and alive ) ?
> 
> wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_superposition#Physical_interpretation
> 
> " Shut up and calculate " makes no such assumptions, right ?
> 
> What interpretation of quantum mechanics says it's real ?
> 

Measurements say it’s real. 

This isn’t about interpretation. 

But there are open questions. 

Of course. There’ll always be. 

-- 
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#714510 — "The cat is both dead and alive" is PhD (high and Deep) bullshit.

Odd_Bodkin replied:
> > What interpretation of quantum mechanics says
> > the cat is both dead and alive ?
> > " Shut up and calculate " makes no such assumptions, right ?
> 
> Measurements say it’s real. 
> This isn’t about interpretation. 

"The lack of measurement" is real, you mean;
it is not known if the cat is dead or alive because 
it's in a "box" ( the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle ).

"The cat is both dead and alive" is PhD (high and Deep) bullshit.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#714520 — Re: "The cat is both dead and alive" is PhD (high and Deep) bullshit.

<Jeff-Relf.Me  @.> wrote:
> Odd_Bodkin replied:
>>> What interpretation of quantum mechanics says
>>> the cat is both dead and alive ?
>>> " Shut up and calculate " makes no such assumptions, right ?
>> 
>> Measurements say it’s real. 
>> This isn’t about interpretation. 
> 
> "The lack of measurement" is real, you mean;
> it is not known if the cat is dead or alive because 
> it's in a "box" ( the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle ).

The measurement is there. Note that you are PRESUMING the “hidden
variables” that are not in fact measured. How is it that you claim those
conditions are in fact there to be measured though they resist measurement?

> 
> "The cat is both dead and alive" is PhD (high and Deep) bullshit.
> 

And you know this how, exactly? 
Don’t tell me what you belief without basis. Tell me the basis for your
belief in these hidden variables.  



-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#714574 — We're not AllSeeing, AllKnowing gods.

Odd_Bodkin replied:
> > "The cat is both dead and alive" is PhD (high and Deep) bullshit.
> 
> Tell me the basis for your belief in hidden variables.  

What does your "question" ( unfounded accusation ) 
have to do with your (erroneous) claim that we know that 
" The cat is both dead and alive " ? !

What interpretation of QM are you using ?
It ain't " Shut up and calculate ", that's for sure.

All we have are our local observations, nothing more.
Could they tell us what a distant observer is seeing ?

I've no idea.  qBism suggests there's room for improvement,
( see: YouTube.COM/watch?v=LQvCTZgNRNw );
after all, we're not AllSeeing, AllKnowing gods.

   Sure, our ignorance ( not its "randomness" ) is real, 
   -- we don't know if Schrodinger's cat is dead or alive;
   but "Local Realism" (causality) doesn't need our recognition.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web