tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5573426.post3874448509916010617..comments2024-02-20T15:17:48.594+11:00Comments on A.E.Brain: This Means SomethingZoe Brainhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13712045376060102538noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5573426.post-74449919523405749282008-08-23T06:32:00.000+10:002008-08-23T06:32:00.000+10:00I'm with Justme on this one: Weakly reporting a qu...I'm with Justme on this one: <BR/><BR/>Weakly reporting a quantum experiment partially collapsed my state of ignorance but after rereading the article I found I was as mystified as ever.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5573426.post-50172467938897794422008-08-22T15:07:00.000+10:002008-08-22T15:07:00.000+10:00I suspect that the way our minds perceive space is...I suspect that the way our minds perceive space is a caricature of the real thing. I think what we have to give up is locality of phenomena.<BR/><BR/>How we perceive space is an internal representation in our minds. Similarly perceived colour only exists in our minds. What is out there is electromagnetic radiation of various wavelengths, not colours. I expect that our perception of space bears a closer relationship to reality than our perception of colour. But I expect that it only covers some aspects of space not all and does not cover some of what we need to visualize quantum phenomena.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and speaking of colour perception, I wonder if your slightly shifted visual spectrum has anything to do with your metabolic oddities. I would guess that it is due to a slight difference in the cornea and which wavelengths it is transparent to.Lloyd Flackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00832519369660328832noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5573426.post-38376855625935529032008-08-22T12:30:00.000+10:002008-08-22T12:30:00.000+10:00"Is Schrödinger's cat only mostly dead?"No, it jus..."Is Schrödinger's cat only mostly dead?"<BR/><BR/>No, it just means it's got 8 partial collapses left! <BR/><BR/>^._.^ Meow!Battybattybatshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18030389503526882755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5573426.post-19773582467411660952008-08-22T07:34:00.000+10:002008-08-22T07:34:00.000+10:00Completely OT, but I thought you and your readers ...Completely OT, but I thought you and your readers might be interested in the <A HREF="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/2/story.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10528229" REL="nofollow">bigotted behavior that still reigns in some parts of norhtern Florida</A>.Jachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01622919505576895393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5573426.post-9989347088921415852008-08-22T07:09:00.000+10:002008-08-22T07:09:00.000+10:00"beyond my pay grade"An Obama quote or just a popu..."beyond my pay grade"<BR/><BR/>An Obama quote or just a popular phrase?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5573426.post-1440099285684682832008-08-22T07:03:00.000+10:002008-08-22T07:03:00.000+10:00I'm having trouble just deciphering what the repor...I'm having trouble just deciphering what the reporter is trying to tell us about the nature of the experiment. What does it even mean to "weakly measure the particle continuously"? What does it mean to "partially collaps[e] the quantum state"? Is Schrödinger's cat only mostly dead? And what does it mean to "und[o] the damage [they]'d done"--to "erase the effects of a measurement and start again"? How is that different from measuring a particle, then resetting the experiment to its same initial conditions and measuring it again?<BR/><BR/>I'm sure the result is somehow meaningful, possibly even profound, but even though I took undergraduate quantum physics, I don't have any idea what they're getting at here. I guess I'd need to dig up Jordan's original paper and read it to be able to appreciate this.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13550396719780602190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5573426.post-72143606502572523722008-08-21T23:52:00.000+10:002008-08-21T23:52:00.000+10:00It doesn't mean there's a redo switch, it just mea...It doesn't mean there's a redo switch, it just means that one particular quantum collapse isn't the definition of the time arrow. This seems so obvious that I must be either a genius or too clueless even to be bewildered. <BR/>(I know which way <I>I</I> would bet on that)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com