Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Discussions on the nature of being, existence, reality and knowledge. What is? How do we know?

Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Gravitational objective collapse
1
14%
Many Worlds.
0
No votes
Thermodynamics.
3
43%
Consciousness.
0
No votes
QBism. Quantum Bayesianism.
0
No votes
Pilot Wave
0
No votes
Other
3
43%
 
Total votes : 7

Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby hyksos on January 14th, 2018, 4:32 pm 

Which of the following aspects of the physical world makes it so that macroscopic objects, like basketballs, do not exhibit quantum behaviors such as (superposition,entanglement, etc) ??

  • Gravitational objective collapse. The basketball is too massive, and its self-gravity collapses the wave function to a particular position.

  • Many Worlds. The wave function never collapses. There are several real basketballs in several different "realities". We see the basketball in a particular place because we rode that 'branch' of the multiverse.

  • Thermodynamics. The basketball transmits too much information into the "heat bath" of the surrounding environment, so that time symmetry is spontaneously broken. (due to entropy, etc)

  • Consciousness. The act of observing the basketball by human participants causes the matter in the basketball to snap into an objective position.

  • QBism. Quantum Bayesianism. The observer fallaciously 'believes' the basketball occupies a position in space, but it really never does. The human mind has discrete knowledge, but the world outside of us evolves continuously. And that's why it seems to us that the wave function "collapsed", even when it never did.

  • Pilot Wave. DeBroglie-Bohm pilot wave theory. All particles are always in a particular position and momentum at all times. Quantum probabilities are illusions caused by a "pilot wave" that pushes mechanical particles around.

  • Other
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1480
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby mitchellmckain on January 14th, 2018, 6:05 pm 

hyksos » January 14th, 2018, 3:32 pm wrote:Which of the following aspects of the physical world makes it so that macroscopic objects, like basketballs, do not exhibit quantum behaviors such as (superposition,entanglement, etc) ??

Instead of choosing one I will simply divide these into two lists of reasonable/possible and not reasonable (definitely incorrect). In physics, quite often there is more than one correct explanation for the why of things. QBism is in both lists because which depends on the explanation (the particular explanation above makes me put it in the "not reasonable" list). I have not yet found an explanations which sound more reasonable to me but I am still open to finding one.

Not reasonable. These are just wrong.
  • Gravitational objective collapse. The basketball is too massive, and its self-gravity collapses the wave function to a particular position.

  • Consciousness. The act of observing the basketball by human participants causes the matter in the basketball to snap into an objective position.

  • Pilot Wave. DeBroglie-Bohm pilot wave theory. All particles are always in a particular position and momentum at all times. Quantum probabilities are illusions caused by a "pilot wave" that pushes mechanical particles around.

  • QBism. Quantum Bayesianism. The observer fallaciously 'believes' the basketball occupies a position in space, but it really never does. The human mind has discrete knowledge, but the world outside of us evolves continuously. And that's why it seems to us that the wave function "collapsed", even when it never did.

These are quite possible and not necessarily mutually exclusive.
  • Many Worlds. The wave function never collapses. There are several real basketballs in several different "realities". We see the basketball in a particular place because we rode that 'branch' of the multiverse.

  • Thermodynamics. The basketball transmits too much information into the "heat bath" of the surrounding environment, so that time symmetry is spontaneously broken. (due to entropy, etc)

  • QBism. Quantum Bayesianism. ?

  • Other

Here is two more of my own to add to the second list or to put in the "Other" category. In both cases decoherence is explained in the transition to the macroscopic scale thus simultaneously explaining why we do not see quantum effects on the macroscopic scale.
  • Decoherence is simply large scale entanglement. When more and more particles are entangled with each other the difference between superimposed states become relatively smaller and smaller.

  • Decoherence is an effect of non-linear amplification. Large scale systems are governed by nonlinear differential equations which amplify one component of a superposition and dampen not only the other components but the effects of all the other quantum sized objects also.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: 27 Oct 2016
wolfhnd liked this post


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby someguy1 on January 14th, 2018, 7:43 pm 

My understanding is that everything has quantum properties, from electrons to planets to people walking around. We all have a wave, the de Broglie wave I think it's called. We are the same duality as everything else. It's just that the effect for macroscopic objects is extremely small and of no practical consequence. That's my understanding anyway.
someguy1
Member
 
Posts: 733
Joined: 08 Nov 2013


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby mitchellmckain on January 14th, 2018, 9:16 pm 

someguy1 » January 14th, 2018, 6:43 pm wrote:My understanding is that everything has quantum properties, from electrons to planets to people walking around. We all have a wave, the de Broglie wave I think it's called. We are the same duality as everything else. It's just that the effect for macroscopic objects is extremely small and of no practical consequence. That's my understanding anyway.


According to one source the largest object for which interference effects have been observed is a molecule with 810 atoms C284H190F320N4S12.

Most physicists do not suggest that the difference between quantum and macroscopic realms is defined by an uncrossable line. That is in fact one element of some of the explanations above -- showing a difference which is quantitative (i.e gradual) in nature.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby hyksos on January 14th, 2018, 11:33 pm 

mitchellmckain » January 15th, 2018, 5:16 am wrote:According to one source the largest object for which interference effects have been observed is a molecule with 810 atoms C284H190F320N4S12.


Treutlein proposes a chip with a cantilever arm – a tiny diving board 0.0007 centimeters (7 microns) long, made from a billion silicon atoms.

https://www.wired.com/2007/04/quantum-3/

However, experiment has yet to be performed.
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1480
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby hyksos on January 15th, 2018, 12:05 am 

mitchellmckain » January 15th, 2018, 2:05 am wrote: Here is two more of my own to add to the second list or to put in the "Other" category. In both cases decoherence is explained in the transition to the macroscopic scale thus simultaneously explaining why we do not see quantum effects on the macroscopic scale.
  • Decoherence is simply large scale entanglement. When more and more particles are entangled with each other the difference between superimposed states become relatively smaller and smaller.

  • Decoherence is an effect of non-linear amplification. Large scale systems are governed by nonlinear differential equations which amplify one component of a superposition and dampen not only the other components but the effects of all the other quantum sized objects also.

..
The resulting complementarity explains why, in a quantum Universe, we perceive objective classical reality while flagrantly quantum superpositions are out of reach.

(*) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_discord
(*) https://www.nature.com/articles/srep01729
(*) https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0105072
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1480
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby BadgerJelly on January 15th, 2018, 1:59 am 

Can anyone tell me how the Casimir effect relates to idea of quantum phenomena and entropy?
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5367
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby mitchellmckain on January 15th, 2018, 3:28 am 

BadgerJelly » January 15th, 2018, 12:59 am wrote:Can anyone tell me how the Casimir effect relates to idea of quantum phenomena and entropy?


The Casimir effect comes not from quantum mechanics but from quantum field theory and is due to the way the materials impose boundary conditions on the fields (the EM field is usually dominant). It can probably be connected up with entropy via thermodynamics (as can many things), but since this had nothing to do with the discovery and derivation, I think it would be inappropriate to make too much of this. Furthermore, entropy is a mathematical quantity that is often interpreted in the wrong way by the non-physicist. Ultimately it simply a matter of counting possible states and observing that the more numerous states give a higher probability. Explanations in terms of the zero point energy of the vacuum is much more relevant -- in which case, you would say that the force is due to the fact that changes in the distance alters the zero point energy of the vacuum.

P.S. Even for those who have studied QFT, this is a difficult topic, so if you are looking for some simple non-mathematical explanation, I think such a search will likely only lead to a misunderstanding.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby mitchellmckain on January 15th, 2018, 6:34 pm 

deleted
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby hyksos on January 18th, 2018, 1:43 am 

There must be at least one person around here who adheres to Many Worlds. Maybe this thread isn't getting enough attention.
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1480
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby mitchellmckain on January 18th, 2018, 3:15 am 

hyksos » January 18th, 2018, 12:43 am wrote:There must be at least one person around here who adheres to Many Worlds. Maybe this thread isn't getting enough attention.


Here is my personal view on this interpretation.

The Everett interpretation isn't just philosophy it is backed up by mathematics which works. This is one of the reasons so many physicists, myself included, take this interpretation very seriously.

But that doesn't mean we have to believe in the proliferation of worlds because they are entirely not measurable (and that means non-physical as far as I am concerned). Personally, I think there is a wholly physical (i.e. measurable) explanation for why the mathematics of the Everett interpretation works. And that is that these "many worlds" are nothing more than the different possible futures that could happen but don't.

Regardless, it represents a useful way of looking at things comparable to looking at the universe as a 4 dimensional continuum. In neither case do these perspectives resolve the philosophical issues. For example, looking at the universe as a 4 dimensional continuum might be construed as endorsing a deterministic universe. But the truth is that we can consider the future portion of this view as being a superposition of possibilities and thus rejecting determinism. In the same way, the many worlds perspective doesn't resolve the question of whether all these possible worlds actually exist -- a necessarily philosophical question because no evidence of them can actually exist.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby hyksos on January 20th, 2018, 3:56 am 

the many worlds perspective doesn't resolve the question of whether all these possible worlds actually exist -- a necessarily philosophical question because no evidence of them can actually exist.

I was under the impression that a working quantum computer would be "tapping in to" the results of the calculations performed in all those other universes. So while they 'exist independently' their results, in some way, "interfere' with our reality.

My current understanding of the quantum computer is that you set up a situation in which the result of a calculation is more probable than its alternative, and then physics 'does the rest'. My visualization is that you look at the set of probabilities given by all possible Feynman Diagrams. Most diagrams are "more probable" than others, and that probability "maps onto" the space of reality branches.

(More formally -- those other branches "contribute" to the path integral)

In the branching multiverse, the positions of a coffee cup on a table are everywhere, but there are "more" branches that are clustered around the position we actually measure. There are universes in which the coffee cup is a whole meter to the the left of where I find it, but those "reality branches" are extremely rare.
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1480
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby mitchellmckain on January 20th, 2018, 5:11 am 

hyksos » January 20th, 2018, 2:56 am wrote:
the many worlds perspective doesn't resolve the question of whether all these possible worlds actually exist -- a necessarily philosophical question because no evidence of them can actually exist.

I was under the impression that a working quantum computer would be "tapping in to" the results of the calculations performed in all those other universes. So while they 'exist independently' their results, in some way, "interfere' with our reality.

Yes superpositions are real and all the components have an affect, but ONLY BEFORE decoherence, not afterwards. In the copenhagen interpretation this is because superposition has collapsed. In the Everett interpretation it is because you now have a superposition of these effects themselves -- in other words the superposition has expanded to the macroscopic level to include the observer himself and thus he becomes only the observer who is only affected by one particular component of the superposition.

hyksos » January 20th, 2018, 2:56 am wrote:My current understanding of the quantum computer is that you set up a situation in which the result of a calculation is more probable than its alternative, and then physics 'does the rest'. My visualization is that you look at the set of probabilities given by all possible Feynman Diagrams. Most diagrams are "more probable" than others, and that probability "maps onto" the space of reality branches.

That is because you maintain the superposition on the quantum level without decoherence.

The thing about these interpretations is that they don't change the quantum physics itself. So decoherence is still there in the Everett interpretation -- you just reinterpret what it means. In effect, it means that as far as the physics is concerned the different interpretations are equivalent. If this were not so then the one which doesn't match the physics observed would be disproven.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: 27 Oct 2016
wolfhnd liked this post


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby hyksos on January 20th, 2018, 5:02 pm 

Yes superpositions are real and all the components have an affect, but ONLY BEFORE decoherence, not afterwards.

This is an unfortunate situation where you would have two explanations, one which you and I would discuss, and another one which would be fit for passersby to the forum. For us, we have already come-to-terms with the fact that these interpretations cannot be experimentally tested. Our thinking 'graduated' from that likely years ago. For the lay reader, the distinction might be subtle enough to be confusing.

(Normal english will likely break down here.) The various realities of the Everettian multiverse are in constant perpetual contact with each other in every second of every day -- due solely to the fact that they are parts of the same wave function. The danger is the literal reader, who would take what I just said as a license for a human ability to 'tap into' the other realities using some futuristic tech. Absolutely not the intended meaning.

The quantum computer is not opening a portal to another 'plane' of existence -- copying the data there -- and 'bringing it back home' through a transdimensional wormhole. Unfortunately, that sounds like what I was suggesting. (To twist english a little more here) rather, the quantum computer is setting up interference with parts of the wave function which we normally have no access to, but which are 'always there' all the time. The qubits in the computer are prepared in such a way that the calculated results we want will be more probable to appear at the time in which measurement happens.

Your thoughts?
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1480
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby mitchellmckain on January 20th, 2018, 7:40 pm 

hyksos » January 20th, 2018, 4:02 pm wrote:
Yes superpositions are real and all the components have an affect, but ONLY BEFORE decoherence, not afterwards.

This is an unfortunate situation where you would have two explanations, one which you and I would discuss, and another one which would be fit for passersby to the forum. For us, we have already come-to-terms with the fact that these interpretations cannot be experimentally tested. Our thinking 'graduated' from that likely years ago. For the lay reader, the distinction might be subtle enough to be confusing.

(Normal english will likely break down here.) The various realities of the Everettian multiverse are in constant perpetual contact with each other in every second of every day -- due solely to the fact that they are parts of the same wave function. The danger is the literal reader, who would take what I just said as a license for a human ability to 'tap into' the other realities using some futuristic tech. Absolutely not the intended meaning.

The quantum computer is not opening a portal to another 'plane' of existence -- copying the data there -- and 'bringing it back home' through a transdimensional wormhole. Unfortunately, that sounds like what I was suggesting. (To twist english a little more here) rather, the quantum computer is setting up interference with parts of the wave function which we normally have no access to, but which are 'always there' all the time. The qubits in the computer are prepared in such a way that the calculated results we want will be more probable to appear at the time in which measurement happens.

Your thoughts?

Yes, I jumped to what you actually meant rather than following what it would probably sound like to many other people. That the other did not occur to me is a good thing since it led to successful communication. Thus, I am glad of this since I did not go off on an unfortunate tangent with me trying to "correct" you, which would not have been helpful.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1323
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby mm04926412 on February 6th, 2018, 6:22 pm 

Large objects DO experience quantum phenomenas, but due to the size of the wave functions involved and the way that statistics even out on the large scale this creates the "classical world". A bowling ball CAN "quantum tunnel" off a table it would just take several trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion etc. years for it to happen which is why you never see it.

- Source: Own degree
mm04926412
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 4
Joined: 06 Feb 2018


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby Brent696 on July 29th, 2018, 10:57 pm 

hyksos » January 14th, 2018, 4:32 pm wrote:Which of the following aspects of the physical world makes it so that macroscopic objects, like basketballs, do not exhibit quantum behaviors such as (superposition,entanglement, etc) ??


I have a question, if you take the basketball, add to its' existence all the time which has passed in the universe since the big, bang, whatever, and then mirror all that time in front of it as the universe will collapse back into the nothingness from which it it sprang. Your watching the energy, spreading expanding, atoms coming together to form the ball, disintegrating, atom flying apart, everything spinning back down as all waves collapse.

If you add the entirety of the universe, of "TIME" to the basketball, can you see your quantum functions played out?
User avatar
Brent696
Member
 
Posts: 226
Joined: 12 Jul 2018


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby A_Seagull on August 19th, 2018, 12:43 am 

It is all described by the de Broglie equation.
λ = h/mv, where λ is wavelength, h is Planck's constant, m is the mass of a particle, moving at a velocity v.

If the wavelength so calculated is smaller than the size of the object then quantum behaviour can be observed.

If the object itself is larger then the wavelength then no quantum effects are observed.
User avatar
A_Seagull
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 31
Joined: 29 Apr 2017
socrat44 liked this post


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby BadgerJelly on August 19th, 2018, 2:37 am 

Maybe they do and we simply haven’t figured out a way to observe on a large enough scale? Given that we’re merely a blip in the universe I would reckon that would allow us to view “smaller” more readily than “larger.”
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5367
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby socrat44 on September 15th, 2018, 2:41 am 

A_Seagull » August 19th, 2018, 12:43 am wrote:It is all described by the de Broglie equation.
λ = h/mv, where λ is wavelength, h is Planck's constant, m is the mass of a particle, moving at a velocity v.

If the wavelength so calculated is smaller than the size
of the object then quantum behaviour can be observed.

If the object itself is larger then the wavelength
then no quantum effects are observed.



Agree,
λ = h/mv and  E=h*f  have small but important quantum radius of action
===
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby hyksos on September 16th, 2018, 2:45 am 

Not reasonable. These are just wrong.

Gravitational objective collapse. The basketball is too massive, and its self-gravity collapses the wave function to a particular position.

Consciousness. The act of observing the basketball by human participants causes the matter in the basketball to snap into an objective position.

Pilot Wave. DeBroglie-Bohm pilot wave theory. All particles are always in a particular position and momentum at all times. Quantum probabilities are illusions caused by a "pilot wave" that pushes mechanical particles around.


Gravitational objective collapse. I made a whole thread about GOC. It is clearly not wrong. It is promoted by Roger Penrose, and even Richard Feynman said quote, "it is not inconsistent with what we know."

Consciousness. In most contexts, I would drop Consciousness-causes-collapse into the pseudo-science bin. Another thread on this forum, a moderator seemed to adopt the position that CCC is a viable interpretation. He quoted Wigner's Friend. (hint : it was BiV) You could jump in and stake a position.


Pilot Wave. DeBroglie-Bohm pilot wave theory. There is nothing about this that I like. There is a whirling swirl of confusion surrounding PWT. Some irresponsible youtubers (looking at you, veritasium) have promoted PWT as if it were an opening to interpret QM in totally classical terms --- complete with little hard bullet particles being "pushed" by waves. This is bewitching a generation of young people into a false hope that pure classical reality can be recovered in the future.

I had a terrible experience with a guy on reddit, who claimed to have be a physics professor at a university. He immediately adopted the (heinous) position that Hidden Variable THeories had not been ruled out. And after some pushing and pulling, started to bring up PWT later in our "debate".

I did the usual song-and-dance with him. First I told him PWT has not been formulated to account for Special Relativity. Secondly, I told him that PWT has absolutely no mechanism for particle creation and annihilation. The "professor" agreed to both first and second, as they are hard facts. He began to try to post some off-the-beltway links to publications where PWT could possibly produce particle annihilation/creation. I sifted through some of his links, and immediately what hit me in the face was that PWT is far more subtle than anyone had imagined. The public reception of PWT is totally out-of-synch with its mathematical formulation, which is far "spookier" than young impressionable minds would assume.

Anyways, the responsible thing to do here is to tell the young and the adolescents that we will never, ever recover classical reality. Quantum Pandora will never be put back into her box.
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1480
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby socrat44 on September 16th, 2018, 6:51 am 

[quote="hyksos » September 16th, 2018, 2:45 am]
Quantum Pandora will never be put back into her box.


Why are you so pessimistic ?
If quantum physics has real technological progress,
then it has a true theoretical basis which sooner or later
would be explained in a simple common logic.
Quantum Pandora of misunderstanding will be put back
and closed into her box.
====
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby dandelion on September 18th, 2018, 4:40 pm 

I'd read this at some stage and as recent and generally about the topic, thought to share. It might offer some thoughts to discuss, perhaps-
https://www.quantamagazine.org/real-lif ... -20180625/
dandelion
Member
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 02 May 2014


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby hyksos on September 18th, 2018, 4:51 pm 

dandelion » September 19th, 2018, 12:40 am wrote:I'd read this at some stage and as recent and generally about the topic, thought to share. It might offer some thoughts to discuss, perhaps-
https://www.quantamagazine.org/real-lif ... -20180625/

Schroedinger's kittens!
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1480
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby socrat44 on September 19th, 2018, 1:49 am 

hyksos » September 18th, 2018, 4:51 pm wrote:
dandelion » September 19th, 2018, 12:40 am wrote:I'd read this at some stage and as recent and generally about the topic, thought to share. It might offer some thoughts to discuss, perhaps-
https://www.quantamagazine.org/real-lif ... -20180625/

Schroedinger's kittens!


Schrodinger's cat is macroscopic object.
If we put macroscopic cat in quantum-micro physical world / process
we have all paradoxes because we mixed two different worlds.
====
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby dandelion on September 19th, 2018, 11:29 am 

hyksos » September 18th, 2018, 9:51 pm wrote:[quote="[url=http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=340455#p340455]
Schroedinger's kittens!

Pity they aren't very cute
=^..^=
dandelion
Member
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 02 May 2014


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby dandelion on September 19th, 2018, 11:31 am 

socrat44 » September 19th, 2018, 6:49 am wrote:
hyksos » September 18th, 2018, 4:51 pm wrote:
dandelion » September 19th, 2018, 12:40 am wrote:I'd read this at some stage and as recent and generally about the topic, thought to share. It might offer some thoughts to discuss, perhaps-
https://www.quantamagazine.org/real-lif ... -20180625/

Schroedinger's kittens!


Schrodinger's cat is macroscopic object.
If we put macroscopic cat in quantum-micro physical world / process
we have all paradoxes because we mixed two different worlds.
====


A lack of certainty about it seems a little apt.
dandelion
Member
 
Posts: 377
Joined: 02 May 2014


Re: Why do large objects not exhibit quantum behaviors?

Postby socrat44 on September 19th, 2018, 11:51 am 

dandelion » September 19th, 2018, 11:31 am wrote:
socrat44 » September 19th, 2018, 6:49 am wrote:
Schrodinger's cat is macroscopic object.
If we put macroscopic cat in quantum-micro physical world / process
we have all paradoxes because we mixed two different worlds.
====


A lack of certainty about it seems a little apt.


Take yourself in place of cat and you will see the result certainly
Sorry, the experiment is dangerous, don't try.
====
socrat44
Member
 
Posts: 239
Joined: 12 Dec 2015



Return to Metaphysics & Epistemology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests