Leaderboard

It was his wife's cat

Buckyballs. (C60, i.e. a kind of soccer ball with 60 C atoms). And even more: But the experiments are difficult, because even the tiniest disturbance would destroy the superposition.

Disgusting. You’re dead to me now /throwing up in my own mouth

Isn't systems collapsing by themselves a big problem in quantum computing? It doesn't depend only on an observer right? It collapses by itself all the time. Awesome that they were able to maintain superposition of a 2000 atom system for 7 ms.

thank you for this post. I really appreciate if the content is cared at any school. here in turkey the program is generally too much theoretic.

Can one become tolerant to one's own neurotransmitters? I know this can happen with a drug like dexedrine. Dexedrine increases the supply of dopamine in the synaptic gap, and based on my own experience, one can develop a dopamine tolerance at these sites. But what if you were in an environment in which you were being constantly stimulated by things which resulted in dopamine releases in the brain. For example, what if you were a video game addict. I'm told that the joy of playing video games comes from all the little dopamine releases that the game provides. Would you develop a dopamine tolerance even then?

IMHO Schroedinger was trying to point out that quantum theory is probabilistic. There is nothing unintuitive and strange in randomness. Lack of randomness would mean absolute determinism i.e. events would always go one way at precisely defined moments. That would be damn boring Universe. Like playing chess always one fixed way.

It makes a difference if we see them as physical things, or as processes. That's all.

First google result: https://www.nature.com/articles/news.2010.130

Of course. Just pointing out the obvious; cats aren't quantum parrticles.

! Moderator Note We'd prefer if responses were well above the "Goop line" of credibility and rigor.

None of this can be detected or measured. (Rather like your your god.) So the existence of this "absolute velocity" is a purely religious belief. [I apologise for abusing my privileges to respond to a closed thread, but I don't think I can allow a blatantly false claim like that to go unanswered.]

! Moderator Note We can test the parts of consciousness that are scientifically recognized. The parts you claim can't be tested are all the woo and made up garbage people claim as beliefs. You've had four pages of this speculation, and you've consistently moved more and more towards unsupported claims and preachy hand-waving. It's not science, it's not interesting, and it's a waste of discussion resources on a site like this. Do NOT bring this up again in any way, shape, or form. since you've shown you can't support the arguments without soapboxing.

What is also interesting is that there is more than one way to viw these relationships, which is why we have several (slightly) different terms. The condition I meant may be illustrated in the standard equation of an ellipse This is the locus of a point which moves under the one condition [math]\frac{{{x^2}}}{{{a^2}}} + \frac{{{y^2}}}{{{b^2}}} = 1[/math] Alternatively we can introduce what is known as a parameter often denoted t, though sometimes a Greek letter is used. [math]x = a\cos t[/math] [math]y = b\sin t[/math] Note the first form has two independent variables and one condition or equation, between them. The second has one independent variable (the parameter) and two conditions or equations. Both refer to the same ellipse. The parameter is often (but not always) time and corresponds to what I called the running variable. You can see how deeply time is embedded in our psyche. But in fact this parameter t is an angle!

! Moderator Note As you are clearly unable to define, or even explain, what you mean, this thread is closed. Do not start another thread on this unless you can provide the required mathematical rigour in place of the waffle.

I suspect you are supposed to see that G is abelian. That certainly helps for showing normality.

Duh, do you want cars banned because idiots get drunk and crash? If there were no cars there would be no drunk drivers Are you an alcoholic or just a fed doing a stress test on yourself

I did state my position clearly, your total inability to comprehend is not my problem. Might be due to the alcohol I love shrinking shrinks

Run current through a fruit it makes sodium. Serious. Okay so I haven’t tested it out, but it’s a damn good guess