|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Ok. Already gave and answer to why this is odd, but.. Just to let you
> clarify - How do you "measure" or "observe" what a particle as even
> done, without colliding it with something?
You don't. But you can make a measurement after it has done something, and
change what it "has done" already.
> definition, anything you can/do do, which looks at a particle, involves
> *other particles*,
Right. But it might involve *other* particles *after* the measurement of
interest has been completed.
> Again, we can't measure/observe a particle, without interacting with it,
Sure you can. Look up Bell's Inequality, or Quantum Erasers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser
> so claiming that "changing" it by observation differs from changing it
> by hitting it with another particle is just... not making any sense at all.
That's what makes the copenhagen interpretation problematic, yes.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
much longer being almost empty than almost full.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |