Quantum Meep but...
#1
Posted 10 October 2004 - 02:23 PM
#2
Posted 10 October 2004 - 02:33 PM
Remember Emu's face, people; one day it's going to be on the news alongside a headline about blowing some landmark to smithereens, and then we can all sigh and say, "She was such a normal person".....
....We'd be lying though.
-Laughlyn
If my doctor tells me to exercise, I am going to force him to do my homework.
-Mirithorn
- Do Not Use the Elevators - deviantART - Infinite Monkeys -
#6
Posted 11 October 2004 - 06:02 AM
...Sorry, to the matter in hand now.
That's quite disturbing, in that there's a good chance I've commited suicide over my crummy ex girlfriends several billion times now. What a waste of blood that would be.
And the fact is, I'm going to do it over several million more skanks as well! how depressing...
*rams a knife into his chest*
What do you mean, I missed my heart, lungs, and all things knife-prone-to? AARGH!
Less Is More v4
Now resigned to a readership of me, my cat and some fish
#7
Posted 11 October 2004 - 06:30 AM
#8
Posted 11 October 2004 - 07:31 AM
Or something like that.
#9
Posted 11 October 2004 - 08:35 AM
http://www.chefelf.c...s%20pants&st=60
Also have to add in that the infinte possiblities sound more like Entropy and Chaos Theory then Quantum Mechanics to me. Quantum Theory proposes the creation of seperate universes, but also says that they collapse upon observation. As a side note, the graph posted with the article shows the probability that a particle is at a give place. The verticle lines represent the physical boundries holding the particle(say, the particle is bouncing left and right inside a box, and they are the walls). The dotted line shows that classically speaking the particle is more likely at any given time to be found on the edges of the box, and less likely to be found in the middle. The Psi naugh squared is the interesting bit. That shows the probability of the particle being at a given displacement according to Schrodinger's Equation and the laws of QM. As you can see, in this system the particle is more likely to be found in the centre of the box, but more amazingly is that there's a chance that the particle has broken the boxs walls somehow and now exists outside its boundries.
JM's official press secretary, scientific advisor, diplomat and apparent antagonist?
#11
Posted 11 October 2004 - 10:29 AM
Remember Emu's face, people; one day it's going to be on the news alongside a headline about blowing some landmark to smithereens, and then we can all sigh and say, "She was such a normal person".....
....We'd be lying though.
-Laughlyn
If my doctor tells me to exercise, I am going to force him to do my homework.
-Mirithorn
- Do Not Use the Elevators - deviantART - Infinite Monkeys -
#12
Posted 11 October 2004 - 10:54 AM
JM's official press secretary, scientific advisor, diplomat and apparent antagonist?
#13
Posted 11 October 2004 - 11:08 AM
The simplest explanation for something is usually the best and all that.
#14
Posted 11 October 2004 - 11:55 AM
By the same token, we're getting abducted by aliens all the time and getting our memories erased after they've done whatever they wanted to do with us. Similar theory, but it doesn't prove the existance of aliens.
Still, I wanna believe in the alternate reality thing. It means that we're not restricted to simply one possible choice thats been pre-ordained, like Fate would have us believe. I really don't like the idea of fate. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I'll tell you what IS pretty much fated to happen - the human race dying out. Unless we evolve to survive the inevitable ice age/planetary cooking thats due in a few milennia, or ship out to colonise another planet, then we've pretty much had it as a species.
I personally think we've cocked up royally in regards to the whole caring-for-the-planet thing. I mean, what do human beings do? They move to a place, consume eveything, then move on when there's nothing left to take or do. Unless we find a new way to power all the supposed stuff we need to live, and rebuild our planet, we're totally screwed.
I apologise if I've gone off at a bit of a tangent. It's food for thought though.
#15
Posted 11 October 2004 - 12:50 PM
Also, if observation collapses quantum phenomena, how do we explain observable quantum phenomena, like single-photon diffraction (ie. throw a single quanta of light through two parallel slots, and observe a diffraction pattern when there are no other photons around to have interfered with one another)