Advice for Stupid People

Discussion in 'Games and Contests' started by PriceCheck, Nov 28, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. snake_grass

    snake_grass Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,862
    Likes Received:
    1
    put one leg in front of the other to walk
     
  2. PsyGrunge

    PsyGrunge Full Fractal Force

    Messages:
    8,619
    Likes Received:
    30
    if you're walking in circles, turn around.
     
  3. HushBull

    HushBull Insuperior

    Messages:
    2,928
    Likes Received:
    3
    Always remain a bit cynical.
     
  4. SpacemanSpiff

    SpacemanSpiff Visitor

    we were given two ears and only one mouth for a reason
     
  5. OlderWaterBrother

    OlderWaterBrother May you drink deeply Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    138
    If you're over 30 don't run in circles till you get dizzy and fall down, in public places.
     
  6. farmout

    farmout All who wander arent lost Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    8,814
    Likes Received:
    63
    Don't wade into fast moving water, or drive your car into the same....:)
     
  7. SpacemanSpiff

    SpacemanSpiff Visitor

    money isnt everything....but it sure helps
     
  8. Oneness

    Oneness Dead

    Messages:
    2,501
    Likes Received:
    4
    Currency technology used for have food.
     
  9. SpacemanSpiff

    SpacemanSpiff Visitor

    Dont listen to Oneness...he is confuzzling
     
  10. snake_grass

    snake_grass Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,862
    Likes Received:
    1
    fire is hot
     
  11. farmout

    farmout All who wander arent lost Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    8,814
    Likes Received:
    63
    water is wet....:)
     
  12. HushBull

    HushBull Insuperior

    Messages:
    2,928
    Likes Received:
    3
    Clouds are not actually tasty.
     
  13. SpacemanSpiff

    SpacemanSpiff Visitor

    road apples are not really apples
     
  14. Oneness

    Oneness Dead

    Messages:
    2,501
    Likes Received:
    4
    Quantum mechanics is the study of mechanical systems whose dimensions are close to the atomic scale, such as molecules, atoms, electrons, protons and other subatomic particles. Quantum mechanics is a fundamental branch of physics with wide applications. Quantum theory generalizes classical mechanics to provide accurate descriptions for many previously unexplained phenomena such as black body radiation and stable electron orbits. The effects of quantum mechanics become evident at the atomic and subatomic level, and they are typically not observable on macroscopic scales. Superfluidity is one of the known exceptions to this rule

    Inconsistencies arise when one tries to join the quantum laws with general relativity, a more elaborate description of spacetime which incorporates gravitation. Resolving these inconsistencies has been a major goal of twentieth- and twenty-first-century physics. Many prominent physicists, including Stephen Hawking, have labored in the attempt to discover a "Grand Unification Theory" that combines not only different models of subatomic physics, but also derives the universe's four forces—the strong force, electromagnetism, weak force, and gravity— from a single force or phenomenon.

    There are numerous mathematically equivalent formulations of quantum mechanics. One of the oldest and most commonly used formulations is the transformation theory proposed by Cambridge theoretical physicist Paul Dirac, which unifies and generalizes the two earliest formulations of quantum mechanics, matrix mechanics (invented by Werner Heisenberg)[2] and wave mechanics (invented by Erwin Schrödinger).
    In this formulation, the instantaneous state of a quantum system encodes the probabilities of its measurable properties, or "observables". Examples of observables include energy, position, momentum, and angular momentum. Observables can be either continuous (e.g., the position of a particle) or discrete (e.g., the energy of an electron bound to a hydrogen atom).
    Generally, quantum mechanics does not assign definite values to observables. Instead, it makes predictions about probability distributions; that is, the probability of obtaining each of the possible outcomes from measuring an observable. Naturally, these probabilities will depend on the quantum state at the instant of the measurement. There are, however, certain states that are associated with a definite value of a particular observable. These are known as "eigenstates" of the observable ("eigen" can be roughly translated from German as inherent or as a characteristic). In the everyday world, it is natural and intuitive to think of everything being in an eigenstate of every observable. Everything appears to have a definite position, a definite momentum, and a definite time of occurrence. However, quantum mechanics does not pinpoint the exact values for the position or momentum of a certain particle in a given space in a finite time; rather, it only provides a range of probabilities of where that particle might be. Therefore, it became necessary to use different words for (a) the state of something having an uncertainty relation and (b) a state that has a definite value. The latter is called the "eigenstate" of the property being measured.
    For example, consider a free particle. In quantum mechanics, there is wave-particle duality so the properties of the particle can be described as a wave. Therefore, its quantum state can be represented as a wave, of arbitrary shape and extending over all of space, called a wave function. The position and momentum of the particle are observables. The Uncertainty Principle of quantum mechanics states that both the position and the momentum cannot simultaneously be known with infinite precision at the same time. However, one can measure just the position alone of a moving free particle creating an eigenstate of position with a wavefunction that is very large at a particular position x, and almost zero everywhere else. If one performs a position measurement on such a wavefunction, the result x will be obtained with almost 100% probability. In other words, the position of the free particle will almost be known. This is called an eigenstate of position (mathematically more precise: a generalized eigenstate (eigendistribution) ). If the particle is in an eigenstate of position then its momentum is completely unknown. An eigenstate of momentum, on the other hand, has the form of a plane wave. It can be shown that the wavelength is equal to h/p, where h is Planck's constant and p is the momentum of the eigenstate. If the particle is in an eigenstate of momentum then its position is completely blurred out.
    Usually, a system will not be in an eigenstate of whatever observable we are interested in. However, if one measures the observable, the wavefunction will instantaneously be an eigenstate (or generalized eigenstate) of that observable. This process is known as wavefunction collapse. It involves expanding the system under study to include the measurement device, so that a detailed quantum calculation would no longer be feasible and a classical description must be used. If one knows the corresponding wave function at the instant before the measurement, one will be able to compute the probability of collapsing into each of the possible eigenstates. For example, the free particle in the previous example will usually have a wavefunction that is a wave packet centered around some mean position x0, neither an eigenstate of position nor of momentum. When one measures the position of the particle, it is impossible to predict with certainty the result that we will obtain. It is probable, but not certain, that it will be near x0, where the amplitude of the wave function is large. After the measurement is performed, having obtained some result x, the wave function collapses into a position eigenstate centered at x.
    Wave functions can change as time progresses. An equation known as the Schrödinger equation describes how wave functions change in time, a role similar to Newton's second law in classical mechanics. The Schrödinger equation, applied to the aforementioned example of the free particle, predicts that the center of a wave packet will move through space at a constant velocity, like a classical particle with no forces acting on it. However, the wave packet will also spread out as time progresses, which means that the position becomes more uncertain. This also has the effect of turning position eigenstates (which can be thought of as infinitely sharp wave packets) into broadened wave packets that are no longer position eigenstates.
    Some wave functions produce probability distributions that are constant in time. Many systems that are treated dynamically in classical mechanics are described by such "static" wave functions. For example, a single electron in an unexcited atom is pictured classically as a particle moving in a circular trajectory around the atomic nucleus, whereas in quantum mechanics it is described by a static, spherically symmetric wavefunction surrounding the nucleus (Fig. 1). (Note that only the lowest angular momentum states, labeled s, are spherically symmetric).
    The time evolution of wave functions is deterministic in the sense that, given a wavefunction at an initial time, it makes a definite prediction of what the wavefunction will be at any later time. During a measurement, the change of the wavefunction into another one is not deterministic, but rather unpredictable, i.e., random.
    The probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics thus stems from the act of measurement. This is one of the most difficult aspects of quantum systems to understand. It was the central topic in the famous Bohr-Einstein debates, in which the two scientists attempted to clarify these fundamental principles by way of thought experiments. In the decades after the formulation of quantum mechanics, the question of what constitutes a "measurement" has been extensively studied. Interpretations of quantum mechanics have been formulated to do away with the concept of "wavefunction collapse"; see, for example, the relative state interpretation. The basic idea is that when a quantum system interacts with a measuring apparatus, their respective wavefunctions become entangled, so that the original quantum system ceases to exist as an independent entity. For details, see the article on measurement in quantum mechanics.

    Since its inception, the many counter-intuitive results of quantum mechanics have provoked strong philosophical debate and many interpretations. Even fundamental issues such as Max Born's basic rules concerning probability amplitudes and probability distributions took decades to be appreciated.
    The Copenhagen interpretation, due largely to the Danish theoretical physicist Niels Bohr, is the interpretation of quantum mechanics most widely accepted amongst physicists. According to it, the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics predictions cannot be explained in terms of some other deterministic theory, and does not simply reflect our limited knowledge. Quantum mechanics provides probabilistic results because the physical universe is itself probabilistic rather than deterministic.
    Albert Einstein, himself one of the founders of quantum theory, disliked this loss of determinism in measurement. (Hence his famous quote "God does not play dice with the universe.") He held that there should be a local hidden variable theory underlying quantum mechanics and consequently the present theory was incomplete. He produced a series of objections to the theory, the most famous of which has become known as the EPR paradox. John Bell showed that the EPR paradox led to experimentally testable differences between quantum mechanics and local realistic theories. Experiments have been performed confirming the accuracy of quantum mechanics, thus demonstrating that the physical world cannot be described by local realistic theories.
    The writer C. S. Lewis viewed quantum mechanics as incomplete. Lewis, a professor of English, was of the opinion that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle was more of an epistemic limitation than an indication of ontological indeterminacy, and in this respect believed similarly to many advocates of hidden variables theories.[citation needed] The Bohr-Einstein debates provide a vibrant critique of the Copenhagen Interpretation from an epistemological point of view.
    The Everett many-worlds interpretation, formulated in 1956, holds that all the possibilities described by quantum theory simultaneously occur in a "multiverse" composed of mostly independent parallel universes. This is not accomplished by introducing some new axiom to quantum mechanics, but on the contrary by removing the axiom of the collapse of the wave packet: All the possible consistent states of the measured system and the measuring apparatus (including the observer) are present in a real physical (not just formally mathematical, as in other interpretations) quantum superposition. (Such a superposition of consistent state combinations of different systems is called an entangled state.) While the multiverse is deterministic, we perceive non-deterministic behavior governed by probabilities, because we can observe only the universe, i.e. the consistent state contribution to the mentioned superposition, we inhabit. Everett's interpretation is perfectly consistent with John Bell's experiments and makes them intuitively understandable. However, according to the theory of quantum decoherence, the parallel universes will never be accessible to us. This inaccessibility can be understood as follows: once a measurement is done, the measured system becomes entangled with both the physicist who measured it and a huge number of other particles, some of which are photons flying away towards the other end of the universe; in order to prove that the wave function did not collapse one would have to bring all these particles back and measure them again, together with the system that was measured originally. This is completely impractical, but even if one can theoretically do this, it would destroy any evidence that the original measurement took place (including the physicist's memory).
     
  15. SpacemanSpiff

    SpacemanSpiff Visitor

    cut and paste can make an idiot look smart
     
  16. OlderWaterBrother

    OlderWaterBrother May you drink deeply Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    138
    Don't try breathing underwater.
     
  17. snake_grass

    snake_grass Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,862
    Likes Received:
    1
    a fact is more then a fact

    its a different way of thinking

    thats a fact
     
  18. SpacemanSpiff

    SpacemanSpiff Visitor

    dont try do drink food....and dont try to eat water
     
  19. OlderWaterBrother

    OlderWaterBrother May you drink deeply Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    138
    Don't jam your foot into the front spokes of your bicycle while you're riding it.
     
  20. SpacemanSpiff

    SpacemanSpiff Visitor

    Its true that saying about "the company you keep"
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice