| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ian Atrus
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Location: Italy
|
 Posted: Wed May 05, 2010 1:45 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Zander wrote: | | As far as I can see, if you can tell that the electron has gone through both slits at once, then you've observed the experiment, which invalidates the principle. |
As far as I understand it (I'm not a physicist) the waveform collapses when you watch the thing it describes directly. So watching the electron or the slits directly will collapse the waveform (force it to pass through one or the other), but just observing the diffraction patterns on the target does not, because it's not part of what the waveform describes.
There are probably some very good explanations for this behaviour, but they're well beyond me.
And also, in theory, any macroscopic object could be described as an immensely complex waveform comprised of the entanglement of all individual ones. The complexity of this would be of course astronomical and, I suppose, the whole thing is rather academic.
_________________
Ian A. Pertwee in Cavern - KI# 374362
Ahnotahm - a Cavern blog
Il quartiere - Traduzioni, forum e dizionario |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pavitra
Joined: 14 Mar 2010
Location: Relto, usually.
|
| Posted: Thu May 06, 2010 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zander wrote: | If you don't observe the experiment, the electron goes through *both* slits at once, but if you observe it then the waveform will collapse and it will choose one or the other. So far, this is normal quantum mechanics.
So how do you know? As far as I can see, if you can tell that the electron has gone through both slits at once, then you've observed the experiment, which invalidates the principle. I could understand it if they said "oh well, as long as we don't observe the experiment, the electron could go through either slot, so we assume it's actually gone through both" but that isn't what they're saying, and I don't see how to escape the notion that if there are two traces, then there are actually two electrons. |
I'm not a physicist either, but I think it works like this:
You collapse the waveform by observing, specifically, which slit the electron goes through. If you make an observation that doesn't allow you to infer which slit it went through, the waveform remains uncollapsed.
You can tell whether there's a waveform by observing the diffraction patterns on the light-sensitive panel that you put on the far side of the card with the slits. If the waveform is uncollapsed, then the electron behaves as a wave and you'll see a diffraction pattern, lots of vertical light and dark bands. If it's collapsed, then the electron behaves as a particle and you'll get two spots of light, one behind each slit.
Wikipedia has a rather good article on the subject.
_________________
Sophia Luden -- "Pavitra"
KI #01018378 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FredNotBob
Joined: 07 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri May 07, 2010 12:38 pm Post subject: Re: Mechanics of Linking |
|
|
| Pavitra wrote: |
If that really happened, it very strongly implies that Ages are created, rather than selected, by Writing.
|
Actually, if you take the 'Many-Worlds Theory into account as it relates to the Art, there is still strong evidence to suggest that Ages are simply 'connected' by the Link.
We're talking about a multiverse in the truest sense: literally anything that can happen has happened in one universe or another -- it's just a matter of the Book finding a specific universe to Link to.
Many-Worlds Theory says that there will be some realities that are vastly different (one in which the another country made it to the Moon first, for example, or a universe where the Cold War never ended), and some that are nearly-indentical with the exception of one tiny, unnoticeable detal (for example, a universe where a single grain of sand in the Sahara blew an inch to the left instead of the right).
But, then, without further expermentation, we may never know -- and I, for one, am not willing to monkey with universes to that degree, just yet....  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zander
Joined: 23 Dec 2005
|
| Posted: Sat May 08, 2010 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
You monkey with universes every time you link. As my mother-in-law would say, you can't be off it.
My objection to the "many worlds all equally real" theory is based firmly on emotion and has no proof whatsoever. It's simply that if all those universes are as real as this one, then it doesn't matter what I do, because another me will do it differently. It doesn't matter, according to this theory, if the Catherine Atrus meets at the end of Riven is the Catherine he started out with; or if he is the Atrus she's been waiting for. I think it does matter, I think it should matter, and I prefer to opt for an interpretation in which there is one real Atrus and one real Catherine. And, less importantly, one real me. All the rest are possibilities.
_________________
Zander
the Heretic |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pavitra
Joined: 14 Mar 2010
Location: Relto, usually.
|
| Posted: Sat May 08, 2010 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
I guess I don't have that problem. There are billions of humans on Earth, but only one of them is me. Likewise, there are an unknown number of instances of Sophia in the Tree, but only one of them is me.
_________________
Sophia Luden -- "Pavitra"
KI #01018378 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
