The double solution theory, a new interpretation of Wave Mechanics

Undefined said:
Will you be a silly ass troll again, paddo and do that again? :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm a silly arse troll along with Grumpy, AqueousId Only Me, PhysBang, Declan Dunny, brucep, and Russ waters.
The rest of your post is the usual personal crap you dig from your cesspool abode.
You are welcome to it.
 
Let's just be clear, we don't measure time. If we did, there would be a Hermitian matrix associated to it, which there are none.
 
arfa brane said:
I was aware when I posted it that it only shifts the posts to what measurement is.
"The collapse of the wavefunction", just doesn't do it for me.

But I think I aimed it also at this concept of certainty, what are we certain about, and why. Evolution says a species is fit for the purpose, so this "sense" of intervals of time and space must be something we "need" in order to be fit for this evolutionary purpose (supposedly to survive, reproduce and continue to evolve).

Hence, our sense of being able to measure both space and time is an advantage to our survival, but that's all. So we are "certain" about it in a necessary way.

What then, are we doing when we observe a simple pendulum "in motion"? We see it moving in one, then the opposite direction. We see it has two mutually exclusive limits of motion. What we don't see is the continuous path (the swinging weight doesn't "leave anything behind it" in space).

Dumb question #1: why don't we see the continuous path?
Click to expand...

Would the Focault Pendulum setup with the patterned floor design which one can 'read off' the path/distance information as 'observables' across space, do at all?

Especially if we upgrade it using a led light/laser pointer at the pendulum weight tip and a 'virtual reality' representation of the space/path in mid-air which the led/light/laser light traces in a fluorescing gaseous atmosphere in the room?
 
paddoboy said:
Yeah, I'm a silly arse troll along with Grumpy, AqueousId Only Me, PhysBang, Declan Dunny, brucep, and Russ waters.
Click to expand...
You said it there in black and white. But I suspect The others are starting to realize the reality being pointed out to them based on emoirically supportable facts and observations.

You on the other hand seem immune to actual learning/understanding either ;side' of the discussion. Good luck with that 'me too' way of "having an handle on things", silly troll. :)


paddoboy said:
The rest of your post is the usual personal crap you dig from your cesspool abode.
You are welcome to it.
Click to expand...
You talk about others posts being personal crap and cesspool material? Gasp! How far gone to self-insensibility and hypocrisy are you, mate? Would be hilarious if it wasn't tragic. :(

Do/learn better, paddo, ffs.
 
Undefined said:
You said it there in black and white. But I suspect The others are starting to realize the reality being pointed out to them based on emoirically supportable facts and observations.
.
Click to expand...

I don't see that at all, but they are able to speak for themselves.

I won't comment on the rest of your diatribe as it has me totally mortified!!! :bawl:
 
BlackHoley said:
Let's just be clear, we don't measure time. If we did, there would be a Hermitian matrix associated to it, which there are none.
Click to expand...
Maybe we could label that as being true in the quantum domain.

"We know there is a particle regardless of measuring it", sounds like something that's "almost true".
Likewise, we know the pendulum has a continuous path "in the abstract", if say, we ignore time altogether so the positions are all equivalent suddenly and the pendulum is now "continuous" in three dimensions, or in a superposition of all possible states.

We just "proved" mathematically that time doesn't exist, in this abstract sense, but "in reality" the swinging weight and some kind of string are "in motion" and always discrete objects, their "stuff" isn't spread out in space.
 
paddoboy said:
I don't see that at all, but they are able to speak for themselves.

I won't comment on the rest of your diatribe as it has me totally mortified!!! :bawl:
Click to expand...

Poor paddo. Don't understand either 'side' of discussion, and your 'me-too' buddies are leaving your sycophantic act and leaving you to sink on your own in continuing ignorance. Silly internet troll, your wifey would feel shame if she knew your internet silliness which will someday come back and bite insensible childish trolls like you on your bum. It's all there in the search engines, silly. It never goes away. Think of her if not yourself, ffs.
 
paddoboy said:
All of the quantum realm is a paradox or non understandable.
Click to expand...

No... Paradoxes are not met in physics unless you have misunderstood something physical about the system. I think what you mean, is that the quantum world is bizarre... no one denies that statement. But as soon as paradoxes show up, you know you are doing or thinking something wrong.
 
Undefined said:
Is some of the latest lab equipment capable of directly sensing and/or imaging and/or trapping and/or moving/placing individual atoms?
Click to expand...

We do have equipment which can ''take pictures'' of atoms... of course, not directly. You have to bounce photons off them and then the computer can generate an image of the atom. Of course, atoms would have to exist in the first place before the measurement has occurred, or you run into problems.
 
BlackHoley said:
You do have a concept of large and small yes?
Click to expand...

Apart from the clock on the wall which is an invention to measure itself a notion of change, is nothing but a machine.
Click to expand...
You seem to have some objection to the use of a machine to measure time. So show me an atom without using a machine.
Of course, atoms time would have to exist in the first place before the measurement has occurred, or you run into problems.
Click to expand...
 
AlexG said:
You seem to have some objection to the use of a machine to measure time. So show me an atom without using a machine.
Click to expand...

You're proposing this based on faulty prepositions. You are assuming that an atom doesn't exist because we need a machine to measure it? Whereas I am telling you time cannot be measured, because it isn't physical. What can be measured in physics, are position, momentum... energy, mass. Time isn't one of them.

So until you genius mavericks can work out how to describe time as something which can be measured in physics, you don't really have anything to add.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top