Dubstepforum.com

anyone?

Maybe

who's first?

and is the cat dead or alive?

in theory i could

8 wrote:and is the cat dead or alive?

Both untill you find evidence of one outcome or another, but I'm drunk as fuck and shouldn't be thinking about quantum physics.

Mohan wrote:

8 wrote:and is the cat dead or alive?

Both untill you find evidence of one outcome or another, but I'm drunk as fuck and shouldn't be thinking about quantum physics.

so the cat is both dead and alive until you open the box and find out?

8 wrote:

Mohan wrote:

8 wrote:and is the cat dead or alive?

Both untill you find evidence of one outcome or another, but I'm drunk as fuck and shouldn't be thinking about quantum physics.

so the cat is both dead and alive until you open the box and find out?

depends on how closely you examine the packets in and outside of the box and if the box or cat actually exist in the dimensions of time and space or if they actually exist as well.

packets?


note : i'm gonna go to sleep now and hope that when i wake up tommorrow, dubstep forum will have explained it all to me. who needs books.

Any easily digestible books about on schroedingers cat etc?

8 wrote:packets?


note : i'm gonna go to sleep now and hope that when i wake up tommorrow, dubstep forum will have explained it all to me. who needs books.

The word “quantum” (Latin, “how much”) in quantum mechanics refers to a discrete unit that quantum theory assigns to certain physical quantities, such as the energy of an atom at rest (see Figure 1, at right). The discovery that waves have discrete energy packets (called quanta) that behave in a manner similar to particles led to the branch of physics that deals with atomic and subatomic systems which we today call quantum mechanics. It is the underlying mathematical framework of many fields of physics and chemistry, including condensed matter physics, solid-state physics, atomic physics, molecular physics, computational chemistry, quantum chemistry, particle physics, and nuclear physics. The foundations of quantum mechanics were established during the first half of the twentieth century by Werner Heisenberg, Max Planck, Louis de Broglie, Niels Bohr, Erwin Schrödinger, Max Born, John von Neumann, Paul Dirac, Wolfgang Pauli, Richard Feynman and others. Some fundamental aspects of the theory are still actively studied.
Source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics

Don't know but I always thought it was like this:

The cat is both dead and alive (in a "quantum state"/indeterminable) until you open the box it is in because there is, say, a 50/50 chance of whether or not an atom of the radioactive material in there with it has decayed (killing the cat).

Schrodingers cat experiment is used to question the actuality of superposition (double state's) since intuitively we do not experience anything being in two states at once. In my little understanding of quantum mechanics the main problem it throws up is how does the randomness of quantum activity result in the classical physics we use to predict stuff i.e. ball A hits ball B, ball B moves.

Lets play dice, someone needs to explain how the Planck constant fits in to all this.

i always thought that quantum mechanics were dudes who repaired light when people broke it.

Chu wrote:Don't know but I always thought it was like this:

The cat is both dead and alive (in a "quantum state"/indeterminable) until you open the box it is in because there is, say, a 50/50 chance of whether or not an atom of the radioactive material in there with it has decayed (killing the cat).

Schrodingers cat experiment is used to question the actuality of superposition (double state's) since intuitively we do not experience anything being in two states at once. In my little understanding of quantum mechanics the main problem it throws up is how does the randomness of quantum activity result in the classical physics we use to predict stuff i.e. ball A hits ball B, ball B moves.

Lets play dice, someone needs to explain how the Planck constant fits in to all this.

selector.dub.u wrote:

Chu wrote:Don't know but I always thought it was like this:

The cat is both dead and alive (in a "quantum state"/indeterminable) until you open the box it is in because there is, say, a 50/50 chance of whether or not an atom of the radioactive material in there with it has decayed (killing the cat).

Schrodingers cat experiment is used to question the actuality of superposition (double state's) since intuitively we do not experience anything being in two states at once. In my little understanding of quantum mechanics the main problem it throws up is how does the randomness of quantum activity result in the classical physics we use to predict stuff i.e. ball A hits ball B, ball B moves.

Lets play dice, someone needs to explain how the Planck constant fits in to all this.

are you trying to see if the cat is dead?

Chu wrote:

selector.dub.u wrote:

Chu wrote:Don't know but I always thought it was like this:

The cat is both dead and alive (in a "quantum state"/indeterminable) until you open the box it is in because there is, say, a 50/50 chance of whether or not an atom of the radioactive material in there with it has decayed (killing the cat).

Schrodingers cat experiment is used to question the actuality of superposition (double state's) since intuitively we do not experience anything being in two states at once. In my little understanding of quantum mechanics the main problem it throws up is how does the randomness of quantum activity result in the classical physics we use to predict stuff i.e. ball A hits ball B, ball B moves.

Lets play dice, someone needs to explain how the Planck constant fits in to all this.

are you trying to see if the cat is dead?

i was was trying to determine if there are any quantum mechanics around to change my light bulb in my other home on the planet xanthu which circles Sirius B and whether or not i can use the planck constant to measure whether Shroedinger's dubstep kitty will be alive when or if I achieve this goal.

no, actually i was just contemplating your dice suggestion and whether or not i am intelligent enough to comprehend what you just wrote

selector.dub.u wrote: no, actually i was just contemplating your dice suggestion and whether or not i am intelligent enough to comprehend what you just wrote

small stuff act weird, big stuff seem normal. why?

I didn't write it very well first time, this better?

Chu wrote:

selector.dub.u wrote: no, actually i was just contemplating your dice suggestion and whether or not i am intelligent enough to comprehend what you just wrote

small stuff act weird, big stuff seem normal. why?

I didn't write it very well first time, this better?

I was impressed with your intelligence and your understanding of physics is all
sorry if i did not convey that very well. I know very little about physics just learning a little more about it now actually--- thanks to you and 8.

selector.dub.u wrote:I know very little about physics just learning a little more about it now actually

Get on it, it's literally as epic as it gets.

break it up nerds