On 1/12/2017 1:51 PM, clipka wrote:
> Am 12.01.2017 um 13:49 schrieb Stephen:
>> On 1/12/2017 12:10 PM, clipka wrote:

>>>
>>> You /can/ look at the spoon so closely that you force it to coalesce
>>> into a state -- but then you spoil any chance of predicting /anything/
>>> about the spoon's future. In other words, it will evaporate. Instantly.
>>> (Or not. Because even evaporation won't be guaranteed then.)
>>>
>>> If the universe ever /has/ a particular state, "it will instantly
>>> disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and
>>> inexplicable", as an ingenious mind once put it.
>>>
>>
>>
>> How does one follow on from the other?
>
> Kopenhagen interpretation plus Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.
>
> According to the Kopenhagen interpretation, particles don't assume any
> particular state or location until they are measured.
>
> According to the uncertainty principle, the more precisely you measure a
> particle's /current/ state or location, the more likely it will /change/
> its state or location.
>

But the state is resolved. Why should it be un-resolved?
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message