Logo

Liona Clio · 11-07-2007, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cindy Claveau

Exact... hey, wait, I'm a manager!!

Whew! For a moment there I thought you were aware of of your corporeal state.

That would've been a more dangerous paradox than turning on the Hardon- er Hadron Collider!

Craig Pye · 11-07-2007, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psyke Phaeton

Does this mean the Copenhagen Interpretation has been refuted by evidence and that the Many-Worlds Interpretation is an explanation for the confusion exhibited by managers which was previously interpreted as cluelessness?

I have a thought experiment of my own... like Schrödinger it is only a thought experiment. What if we do the double-slit experiment with an observer. Then before we check the results or get any indication of results from the observer we then kill the observer. Has the observer caused the probability wave function to collapse or has the death of the observer "restored" the wave function??

/blink...../blink/blink...More tea, anyone?

**Psyke Phaeton** · 11-07-2007, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craig Pye

/blink...../blink/blink...More tea, anyone?

YouTube - Dr Quantum - Double Slit Experiment

and, yes, green tea. Thanks

Craig Pye · 11-07-2007, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psyke Phaeton

[YouTube - Dr Quantum - Double Slit Experiment[/url]

and, yes, green tea. Thanks

Thanks...I need cartoons and big stick-figure crayon drawings to even get basic concepts of this stuff.

Here's your tea, sir...green tea, tips only

Redhead · 11-08-2007, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psyke Phaeton

Does this mean the Copenhagen Interpretation has been refuted by evidence and that the Many-Worlds Interpretation is an explanation for the confusion exhibited by managers which was previously interpreted as cluelessness?

I have a thought experiment of my own... like Schrödinger it is only a thought experiment. What if we do the double-slit experiment with an observer. Then before we check the results or get any indication of results from the observer we then kill the observer. Has the observer caused the probability wave function to collapse or has the death of the observer "restored" the wave function??

LOL, I wonder where you are going to get a volunteer for that one!

Ok, serious answer: My guess is the later. Killing the observer before checking the results will restore the wave function. On the quantum level, "past" and "future", "cause" and "effect" are meaningless terms.

Changing something in the "future" will effect the "past".

**Psyke Phaeton** · 11-08-2007, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redhead

LOL, I wonder where you are going to get a volunteer for that one!

Ok, serious answer: My guess is the later. Killing the observer before checking the results will restore the wave function. On the quantum level, "past" and "future", "cause" and "effect" are meaningless terms.

Changing something in the "future" will effect the "past".

Can we then use this to prove life (consciousness) after death if the wave function does collapse still? Would the wave function collapse for the observer and his isolated universe but fail to collapse for ours? Does this make multiple Universes?

Aaron Kukulcan · 11-09-2007, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psyke Phaeton

Here, Schrödinger, here puss puss...

Tyche Shepherd · 06-23-2008, 10:06 AM

Necropost - but valid

...more like a birth at 9 months

*

A new paper has been published showing that there are no risks from blackholes created usingthe LHC - The original is here [0806.3381] Astrophysical implications of hypothetical stable TeV-scale black holes

The Slashdot summary of the paper is as follows

Quote:

Everything that will be created at the LHC is already being created by cosmic rays. If a black hole created by the LHC is interactive enough to destroy the world within the lifetime of the sun, similar black holes are already being created by cosmic rays. Such black holes would be stopped by dense cosmic objects (neutron stars and white dwarfs). A black hole stopped in one of these objects would eventually absorb it. We see sufficiently old neutron stars in the sky, thus any black hole that could be created at the LHC, even if it is stable, would have no effect on the earth on any meaningful timescale.

source: Slashdot | Why the LHC Won't Destroy the World

Anyway - we'll know if the authors are correct in just over 14 days time when the LHC gets turned on .

If you want to follow the countdown to the switch on - you can here

LHCountdown.com

*but I can't count as its only 7 months ... but I couldn't wait the next two months - the world may not be there anymore to post

Markubis · 06-23-2008, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Everything that will be created at the LHC is already being created by cosmic rays. If a black hole created by the LHC is interactive enough to destroy the world within the lifetime of the sun, similar black holes are already being created by cosmic rays. Such black holes would be stopped by a using White-Out before they get too big.

fixed

Eirik · 06-23-2008, 01:07 PM

No risk? Crap.

I was hoping to witness the destruction of the earth and upload it to youtube

Quantum Destiny · 06-23-2008, 01:54 PM

Collisions of much higher energies than those that the LHC will create occur every single day in nature. The only way that LHC differs from nature is that it creates the laboratory conditions needed for scientific analysis.

Tyche: Sadly the 'turning on' of the LHC will be quite a long dragged our affair - it will not be switched on straight away with full power, but will instead be powered up slowly over several months. We'll be unlikely to see any returns from the LHC, at least from the main experiment, until next year.

Jessica Robertson · 06-23-2008, 05:05 PM

Quote:

The only problem is that there is a teeny weeny, itsy bitsy, tiny little chance that it will destroy the Earth. I don't mean long term destruction like with global warming, but more like *POOF* before you have time to type the F in WTF.

I like it, throw the switch.

View Poll Results: Large Hadron Collider: Turn it on?
Yes, for SCIENCE!	47	62.67%
Wait, did you say it could destroy the planet??	19	25.33%
Large Hadron Pie	9	12.00%
Voters: 75. You may not vote on this poll

06-23-2008, 01:07 PM	#210 (permalink)
Eirik Anarch I hate you Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Occupied People's Republic of Flanders Posts: 2,991 My Mood: SL Join Date: May 2007 XBOX Leaderboard: 19^th	No risk? Crap. I was hoping to witness the destruction of the earth and upload it to youtube __________________ Visca Catalunya! - Gora Euskal Herria! - Viva Galiza! - Visca Occitània! - Bevet Breizh! - Alba gu brath! - Erin go bragh! - Cymru am byth! - Leve Vlaanderen!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

06-23-2008, 01:54 PM	#211 (permalink)
Quantum Destiny Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: England Posts: 2,150 My Mood: SLShopper Ads: 3 SL Join Date: 25 July 2004	Collisions of much higher energies than those that the LHC will create occur every single day in nature. The only way that LHC differs from nature is that it creates the laboratory conditions needed for scientific analysis. Tyche: Sadly the 'turning on' of the LHC will be quite a long dragged our affair - it will not be switched on straight away with full power, but will instead be powered up slowly over several months. We'll be unlikely to see any returns from the LHC, at least from the main experiment, until next year.

Logo

Site Navigation