wave functions

[zoldos]

I'm a big believer in wave functions which ties into the famous Schrodinger thought experiment. Basically, a cat is in a box with a piece of radiation that decays at random, so the animal might die, or it might live. But it's both, until someone opens the box to observe the outcome. So before being observed, the cat is in a "superposition" of states, both alive and dead simultaneously. This is also related to "wave functions", which mainly applies to atomic particles like photons, which, when NOT being observed, act as waves, but when we look, they become solid particles! This has actually been proven! Look up the "Double Slit Experiment" which I mentioned in another thread.

 

[zoldos]

@SpookyZalost

 

[SpookyZalost]

I'm a big believer in wave functions which ties into the famous Schrodinger thought experiment. Basically, a cat is in a box with a piece of radiation that decays at random, so the animal might die, or it might live. But it's both, until someone opens the box to observe the outcome. So before being observed, the cat is in a "superposition" of states, both alive and dead simultaneously. This is also related to "wave functions", which mainly applies to atomic particles like photons, which, when NOT being observed, act as waves, but when we look, they become solid particles! This has actually been proven! Look up the "Double Slit Experiment" which I mentioned in another thread.

zoldosSadly Schrodinger didn't take one thing into account. The cat itself is an observer. Therefore superposition is impossible for it. As for the double slit experiment. It was reading about it that made me start looking into variable speed of light theories.

 

[zoldos]

Sadly Schrodinger didn't take one thing into account. The cat itself is an observer. Therefore superposition is impossible for it. As for the double slit experiment. It was reading about it that made me start looking into variable speed of light theories.

SpookyZalostBut what constitutes an "observer"? Is a computer an observer? Or an insect?

Also, doesn't light "slow down" when traveling through a medium, like water?

 

[SpookyZalost]

But what constitutes an "observer"? Is a computer an observer? Or an insect?

Also, doesn't light "slow down" when traveling through a medium, like water?

zoldosThe first is a question that has yet to be determined. Personally though I'd say a cat definitely counts just as much as a person does.

The second is the reason I personally think that space/time is causing a kind of drag on sub light speed particles. Because much like sound. The speed of light in water is lower than in air. To the point that submersed nuclear reactors give off Cherenkov radiation as a visible blue glow.

 

[zoldos]

But I thought the speed of light must be constant or Relativity breaks?

So if a cat observed the double slit experiment, the single photon(s) or whatever particle (I hear they are now using particles other than photons) would collapse from the wave function into an actual particle just as if a human was observing?

 

[SpookyZalost]

But I thought the speed of light must be constant or Relativity breaks?

So if a cat observed the double slit experiment, the single photon(s) or whatever particle (I hear they are now using particles other than photons) would collapse from the wave function into an actual particle just as if a human was observing?

zoldos
Relativity works regardless interestingly enough. but that's a whole long thing that I'm not qualified to go into detail about. To simply it. The observed speed of light is relative to the density and curvature of space time. The actual speed of light is relative to that while being a constant. It's variable because it's dependent on the nature of a region of space/time. This helps explain how the universe can expand faster than the speed of light to the point that photons can be traversing more space between two objects than there was when the photons were first emitted. effectively space/time is stretching and objects moving along that space/time are traveling faster than the observed space/time in our local region of space/time.

for the second statement. Yes, the photons should collapse from the wave function into actual particles just as if a human was observing them. this should be true for anything capable of observing them, a cat, a dog, a fish, etc. I'd be curious if they collapse into particles in the presence of plants which can observe and consume the energy of those photons.

 

[zoldos]

Relativity works regardless interestingly enough. but that's a whole long thing that I'm not qualified to go into detail about. To simply it. The observed speed of light is relative to the density and curvature of space time. The actual speed of light is relative to that while being a constant. It's variable because it's dependent on the nature of a region of space/time. This helps explain how the universe can expand faster than the speed of light to the point that photons can be traversing more space between two objects than there was when the photons were first emitted. effectively space/time is stretching and objects moving along that space/time are traveling faster than the observed space/time in our local region of space/time.

SpookyZalostI love Relativity. I need to delve into it more. I've been studying Quantum theory instead!

for the second statement. Yes, the photons should collapse from the wave function into actual particles just as if a human was observing them. this should be true for anything capable of observing them, a cat, a dog, a fish, etc. I'd be curious if they collapse into particles in the presence of plants which can observe and consume the energy of those photons.

What about an A.I.?