jack: (Default)
[personal profile] jack
No-one enjoyed Aunt Vera? I loved writing that.

I had a further thought about some of the things I've tried to read. That quantum "things" ie. probability waves only exhibit recognisably non-classical probabilities when they line up perfectly, in order to have the bits with otherwise-non-detectable opposite signs cancel out. Which only really happens if they were generated together in the first place.

And if some of that state is elsewhere, because one of the particles/waves has interacted with something else, it doesn't do quantum things (you don't get interference bands). But if it interacts with something else, but you're able to re-interact those particles so they both go back to what they were before then it would work. But if it interacts with LOTS of particles, that state is spread across all of them and basically never recoverable.

That means, a deterministic "what happens is based on the physical state of the particles/waves that are there" view coincides with a weird philosophical "you get interference if you 'could' know in principle"... But I'm really not sure. That seems to make *some* of the dodgy-sounding explanations fit, but not all of them. Anyone able to explain better than that?

Date: 2017-05-13 11:42 pm (UTC)
vyvyanx: (Default)
From: [personal profile] vyvyanx
I enjoyed Aunt Vera!

Date: 2017-05-14 02:07 pm (UTC)
wildeabandon: photo of me with wavy hair and gold lipstick (Default)
From: [personal profile] wildeabandon
I enjoyed it. It reminded me of Russell Stannard's Uncle Albert trilogy.