Discussion:
another slow post day so OT for pedants
(too old to reply)
Vicky
2018-03-08 10:45:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Gransnet had a thread on things that annoy
https://www.gransnet.com/forums/pedants_corner/1245899-Slovenly-speech-incorrect-grammar-etc?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Thurs%208%20March%20-%20Gransnet%20Daily%20Newsletter&utm_content=Thurs%208%20March%20-%20Gransnet%20Daily%20Newsletter+CID_0216264f8b126cea50a40ac8531ab38d&utm_source=newsletters&utm_term=To%20me%20it%20smacks%20of%20poor%20parenting

Farming Today talked about GM and GE foods and is there a difference.
a professor who does research with GE foods, genetically engineered
said those are apparently fine. They do things like cut out the bit of
the gene that allows certain diseases. GE doens't b ring anything new
in, just cuts out. I am less sure than the prof, who does lots of
talks to various groups to explain it all, which might be why she
sounded a bit too slick.
--
Vicky
Penny
2018-03-08 13:23:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 08 Mar 2018 10:45:09 +0000, Vicky <***@gmail.com> scrawled
in the dust...
Post by Vicky
Gransnet had a thread on things that annoy
https://www.gransnet.com/forums/pedants_corner/1245899-Slovenly-speech-incorrect-grammar-etc?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Thurs%208%20March%20-%20Gransnet%20Daily%20Newsletter&utm_content=Thurs%208%20March%20-%20Gransnet%20Daily%20Newsletter+CID_0216264f8b126cea50a40ac8531ab38d&utm_source=newsletters&utm_term=To%20me%20it%20smacks%20of%20poor%20parenting
Vicky, when pasting in the link, would you remove the ? and everything
after it please?
https://www.gransnet.com/forums/pedants_corner/1245899-Slovenly-speech-incorrect-grammar-etc
is clickable for me - the long link crashes Agent.
Post by Vicky
Farming Today talked about GM and GE foods and is there a difference.
a professor who does research with GE foods, genetically engineered
said those are apparently fine. They do things like cut out the bit of
the gene that allows certain diseases. GE doens't b ring anything new
in, just cuts out. I am less sure than the prof, who does lots of
talks to various groups to explain it all, which might be why she
sounded a bit too slick.
A bio-engineering friend spent much of his working life modifying eucalypts
to increase their lignum content and make them weed-killer resistant*. I'll
ask him if he thinks this is GE or GM and if there is a difference.

*In spite of having nothing to do with food, all his work was scrapped when
GM started getting a bad press and he was made redundant.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-08 13:57:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Vicky
Gransnet had a thread on things that annoy
https://www.gransnet.com/forums/pedants_corner/1245899-Slovenly-speech-
incorrect-grammar-etc?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Thurs%208%20March%2
0-%20Gransnet%20Daily%20Newsletter&utm_content=Thurs%208%20March%20-%20
Gransnet%20Daily%20Newsletter+CID_0216264f8b126cea50a40ac8531ab38d&utm_
source=newsletters&utm_term=To%20me%20it%20smacks%20of%20poor%20parenting
Vicky, when pasting in the link, would you remove the ? and everything
after it please?
https://www.gransnet.com/forums/pedants_corner/1245899-Slovenly-speech-i
ncorrect-grammar-etc
is clickable for me - the long link crashes Agent.
Thanks both. Some lovely ones there - I've added "I don't have an agree
that our language torture is a quality add" to my quotes file.
Post by Penny
Post by Vicky
Farming Today talked about GM and GE foods and is there a difference.
a professor who does research with GE foods, genetically engineered
said those are apparently fine. They do things like cut out the bit of
the gene that allows certain diseases. GE doens't b ring anything new
in, just cuts out. I am less sure than the prof, who does lots of
talks to various groups to explain it all, which might be why she
sounded a bit too slick.
I'd not heard of the distinction. Interesting one; probably difficult to
draw the line though: are you removing some susceptibility (to a disease
say), or adding some immunity?
Post by Penny
A bio-engineering friend spent much of his working life modifying eucalypts
to increase their lignum content and make them weed-killer resistant*. I'll
ask him if he thinks this is GE or GM and if there is a difference.
*In spite of having nothing to do with food, all his work was scrapped when
GM started getting a bad press and he was made redundant.
Presumably he _was_ doing it by modifying genes in the modern
technological manner? If he'd just been doing it by selective
_breeding_, that sort of GM has been going on for centuries.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The average US shareholding lasts 22 seconds. Nobody knows who invented the
fire hydrant: the patent records were destroyed in a fire. Sandcastles kill
more people than sharks. Your brain uses less power than the light in your
fridge. The Statue of Liberty wears size 879 shoes.
- John Lloyd, QI supremo (RT, 2014/9/27-10/3)
Mike
2018-03-08 14:16:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
J. P. Gilliver (John) <G6JPG-***@255soft.uk> wrote:
In his footer:

Your brain uses less power than the light in your
fridge.

Jpeg, I understood from somewhere that the human brain uses some hundreds
of watts - if this is so.... what capacity of ‘fridge might we be talking
of?
--
Toodle Pip
Mike
2018-03-08 14:35:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Your brain uses less power than the light in your
fridge.
Jpeg, I understood from somewhere that the human brain uses some hundreds
of watts - if this is so.... what capacity of ‘fridge might we be talking
of?
Ah, i have now looked it up...

Despite this, even at rest, the brain consumes 20% of the body's energy.
The brain consumes energy at 10 times the rate of the rest of the body per
gram of tissue. The average power consumption of a typical adult is 100
Watts and the brain consumes 20% of this making the power of the brain 20
W.

Oops Sorry Jpeg!
--
Toodle Pip
Nick Odell
2018-03-08 14:35:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Your brain uses less power than the light in your
fridge.
Jpeg, I understood from somewhere that the human brain uses some hundreds
of watts - if this is so.... what capacity of ‘fridge might we be talking
of?
Well, according to this, the whole body uses 100w (though without a
multiplying factor in there somewhere that could put it on a par with a
digital watch or a nuclear power station)

First result from Google:

...Despite this, even at rest, the brain consumes 20% of the body's
energy. The brain consumes energy at 10 times the rate of the rest of
the body per gram of tissue. The average power consumption of a typical
adult is 100 Watts and the brain consumes 20% of this making the power
of the brain 20 W.
Power of a Human Brain - The Physics Factbook - Hypertextbook
https://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/JacquelineLing.shtml


Nick
Clive Arthur
2018-03-09 09:15:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Your brain uses less power than the light in your
fridge.
Jpeg, I understood from somewhere that the human brain uses some hundreds
of watts - if this is so.... what capacity of ‘fridge might we be talking
of?
Say 2000 Calories per day. That's 8268000 Joules per day which is 96
Joules per second, or 96 Watts. You hothead.

Cheers
--
Clive
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-09 10:01:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Your brain uses less power than the light in your
fridge.
Jpeg, I understood from somewhere that the human brain uses some hundreds
of watts - if this is so.... what capacity of ‘fridge might we be talking
of?
Say 2000 Calories per day.  That's 8268000 Joules per day which is 96
Joules per second, or 96 Watts.  You hothead.
But isn't that an estimate of the total daily energy conversion of the
body? My understanding is that the brain uses about 20% of resting
metabolism, which is normally around 1500 Calories.

By my calculation[1], that gives the brain a power rating of about 14.5W
which is similar to a 15W fridge light bulb[2] - and possibly
sufficiently low to keep a cool head in a crisis?[3]

[1] (1500kcalx4184J/kcal/(24x60x60s))x0.2 = 14.53W
[2] That's the filament bulb in my roughly 20-year-old fridge. An LED
bulb would presumably be significantly lower powered.
[3]But I might have this completely wrong, of course.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Clive Arthur
2018-03-09 10:23:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Your brain uses less power than the light in your
fridge.
Jpeg, I understood from somewhere that the human brain uses some hundreds
of watts - if this is so.... what capacity of ‘fridge might we be talking
of?
Say 2000 Calories per day.  That's 8268000 Joules per day which is 96
Joules per second, or 96 Watts.  You hothead.
But isn't that an estimate of the total daily energy conversion of the
body?
Yes.
Post by Sid Nuncius
My understanding is that the brain uses about 20% of resting
metabolism, which is normally around 1500 Calories.
By my calculation[1], that gives the brain a power rating of about 14.5W
which is similar to a 15W fridge light bulb[2] - and possibly
sufficiently low to keep a cool head in a crisis?[3]
[1] (1500kcalx4184J/kcal/(24x60x60s))x0.2 = 14.53W
[2] That's the filament bulb in my roughly 20-year-old fridge.  An LED
bulb would presumably be significantly lower powered.
[3]But I might have this completely wrong, of course.
Yes, those 'lightbulb moments' are in fact rather dim.

(Of course, the fridge bulb uses a lot less energy than the brain as
it's only on for a short time. Or is it? How would we know?)

Cheers
--
Clive
Btms
2018-03-09 11:08:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Your brain uses less power than the light in your
fridge.
Jpeg, I understood from somewhere that the human brain uses some hundreds
of watts - if this is so.... what capacity of ‘fridge might we be talking
of?
Say 2000 Calories per day.  That's 8268000 Joules per day which is 96
Joules per second, or 96 Watts.  You hothead.
But isn't that an estimate of the total daily energy conversion of the
body?
Yes.
Post by Sid Nuncius
My understanding is that the brain uses about 20% of resting
metabolism, which is normally around 1500 Calories.
By my calculation[1], that gives the brain a power rating of about 14.5W
which is similar to a 15W fridge light bulb[2] - and possibly
sufficiently low to keep a cool head in a crisis?[3]
[1] (1500kcalx4184J/kcal/(24x60x60s))x0.2 = 14.53W
[2] That's the filament bulb in my roughly 20-year-old fridge.  An LED
bulb would presumably be significantly lower powered.
[3]But I might have this completely wrong, of course.
Yes, those 'lightbulb moments' are in fact rather dim.
(Of course, the fridge bulb uses a lot less energy than the brain as
it's only on for a short time. Or is it? How would we know?)
Cheers
Meowwww.
--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
Mike
2018-03-09 14:23:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Your brain uses less power than the light in your
fridge.
Jpeg, I understood from somewhere that the human brain uses some hundreds
of watts - if this is so.... what capacity of ‘fridge might we be talking
of?
Say 2000 Calories per day.  That's 8268000 Joules per day which is 96
Joules per second, or 96 Watts.  You hothead.
But isn't that an estimate of the total daily energy conversion of the
body?
Yes.
Post by Sid Nuncius
My understanding is that the brain uses about 20% of resting
metabolism, which is normally around 1500 Calories.
By my calculation[1], that gives the brain a power rating of about 14.5W
which is similar to a 15W fridge light bulb[2] - and possibly
sufficiently low to keep a cool head in a crisis?[3]
[1] (1500kcalx4184J/kcal/(24x60x60s))x0.2 = 14.53W
[2] That's the filament bulb in my roughly 20-year-old fridge.  An LED
bulb would presumably be significantly lower powered.
[3]But I might have this completely wrong, of course.
Yes, those 'lightbulb moments' are in fact rather dim.
(Of course, the fridge bulb uses a lot less energy than the brain as
it's only on for a short time. Or is it? How would we know?)
Cheers
Ask the cat!
--
Toodle Pip
Kosmo
2018-03-10 03:32:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
--
Kosmo
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-10 07:17:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please? Thank you.

Schrodinger was making a point about the weirdness of quantum behaviour,
in that an electron, a particle with mass and position in space, can
apparently pass through two separate holes at the same time, but if you
set up a device to see which hole it goes through, it changes its
behaviour and only goes through one or the other. His point was that,
by these laws, the notional cat in the box is *both* alive *and* dead at
the same time (i.e. in a state of quantum indeterminacy). Only when
someone looks into the box does the cat adopt the state of either a
living or a dead cat. The idea is intended to illustrate some deep and
counter-intuitive properties of the universe.

The Schrodinger's Cat paradox is *not* about wondering what has gone on
where we can't see or hear it. We didn't need one of the 20th Century's
greatest physicists to tell us that we may not know what's inside a box
until we've looked. Anyone can tell you that, and its scarcely a
profound philosophical observation about the structure of the universe.

Similarly, that business about a tree falling in a forest where no-one
can hear it is nothing to do with Schrodinger's Cat. It's just an
almost content-free matter of semantics: obviously the tree and its
surroundings will obey the laws of physics, so there will be
compressions and rarefactions (i.e sound waves) created in the air.
Whether or not you want to call that a "noise" if the waves do not reach
a human ear doesn't strike me as a very interesting question, and it
certainly doesn't tell us anything about the wider universe. (It is
left as an exercise for the reader to conclude whether there might
possibly be some means of determining whether a fridge light goes off
when you close the door or whether it is another deep philosophical
mystery.)

Sorry - I just needed to get that off my chest. Please feel free to
carry on making amusing Schrodinger references without worrying about
their philosophical accuracy.

I'll get me coat - provided it hasn't vanished because I'm not looking
at it right now.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Btms
2018-03-10 07:36:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please? Thank you.
Snipped for brevity.
Post by Sid Nuncius
Sorry - I just needed to get that off my chest. Please feel free to
carry on making amusing Schrodinger references without worrying about
their philosophical accuracy.
I'll get me coat - provided it hasn't vanished because I'm not looking
at it right now.
I take your point. So accepting all that is snipped, for me, the cat in
the box is a useful way of illustrating that the act of observing the cat
may affect the cat. We can’t be sure of the extent to which our
observations and action might skew the results. Of course this can only be
some sort of metaphorical way of illustrating the point and is way off the
original argument. But for a non scientist, like me, serves a purpose.
Good to read the original basis for that puss.

Does any of this explain why Matt called FAL pusscat? Itwsbt
--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
BrritSki
2018-03-10 08:09:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please? Thank you.
Snipped for brevity >
I take your point. So accepting all that is snipped, for me, the cat in
the box is a useful way of illustrating that the act of observing the cat
may affect the cat. We can’t be sure of the extent to which our
observations and action might skew the results. Of course this can only be
some sort of metaphorical way of illustrating the point and is way off the
original argument. But for a non scientist, like me, serves a purpose.
Good to read the original basis for that puss.
Does any of this explain why Matt called FAL pusscat? Itwsbt
He liked her b... IGMC
SODAM
2018-03-10 17:47:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please? Thank you.
Snipped for brevity >
Does any of this explain why Matt called FAL pusscat? Itwsbt
He liked her b... IGMC
For the same reason she called him Tiger.
--
SODAM
The thinking umrat’s choice for editor
Clive Arthur
2018-03-10 19:29:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by SODAM
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please? Thank you.
Snipped for brevity >
Does any of this explain why Matt called FAL pusscat? Itwsbt
He liked her b... IGMC
For the same reason she called him Tiger.
She really loved his tiger feet?

Cheers
--
Clive
Min
2018-03-10 23:41:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by SODAM
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please? Thank you.
Snipped for brevity >
Does any of this explain why Matt called FAL pusscat? Itwsbt
He liked her b... IGMC
For the same reason she called him Tiger.
She really loved his tiger feet?
Cheers
--
Clive
That's right, that's right, that's right!
--
Min
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-11 06:42:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by SODAM
Does any of this explain why Matt called FAL pusscat?  Itwsbt
He liked her b...   IGMC
For the same reason she called him Tiger.
She really loved his tiger feet?
That's right.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
vk
2018-03-11 07:58:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by SODAM
Does any of this explain why Matt called FAL pusscat?  Itwsbt
He liked her b...   IGMC
For the same reason she called him Tiger.
She really loved his tiger feet?
That's right.
That's neat.
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-11 08:53:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by vk
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by SODAM
Does any of this explain why Matt called FAL pusscat?  Itwsbt
He liked her b...   IGMC
For the same reason she called him Tiger.
She really loved his tiger feet?
That's right.
That's neat.
Of course, Matt's name is mud in the village now.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Btms
2018-03-10 19:39:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by SODAM
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please? Thank you.
Snipped for brevity >
Does any of this explain why Matt called FAL pusscat? Itwsbt
He liked her b... IGMC
For the same reason she called him Tiger.
So that’ll be a “no” then. 🤨
--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
Mike
2018-03-10 08:01:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please? Thank you.
Similarly, that business about a tree falling in a forest where no-one
can hear it is nothing to do with Schrodinger's Cat. It's just an
almost content-free matter of semantics: obviously the tree and its
surroundings will obey the laws of physics, so there will be
compressions and rarefactions (i.e sound waves) created in the air.
Whether or not you want to call that a "noise" if the waves do not reach
a human ear doesn't strike me as a very interesting question, and it
certainly doesn't tell us anything about the wider universe.
Now, are we speaking about noise or sound? Generally speaking, a noise is a
sound but a sound is not necesscelery a noise. Think of listening to your
preferred music - this may be sound to you but equally well, it may be
music someone else does not like and regards it as a noise.
--
Toodle Pip
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-10 08:10:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please? Thank you.
Similarly, that business about a tree falling in a forest where no-one
can hear it is nothing to do with Schrodinger's Cat. It's just an
almost content-free matter of semantics: obviously the tree and its
surroundings will obey the laws of physics, so there will be
compressions and rarefactions (i.e sound waves) created in the air.
Whether or not you want to call that a "noise" if the waves do not reach
a human ear doesn't strike me as a very interesting question, and it
certainly doesn't tell us anything about the wider universe.
Now, are we speaking about noise or sound? Generally speaking, a noise is a
sound but a sound is not necesscelery a noise. Think of listening to your
preferred music - this may be sound to you but equally well, it may be
music someone else does not like and regards it as a noise.
True, but not relevant to the non-conundrum of whether an event which is
unheard actually makes a noise/sound. I used the word "noise" because
that's the word I've usually heard in that context. "Sound" would do
equally well. Like I said, in this context it's just a matter of
uninteresting semantics, dressed up as profundity.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Mike
2018-03-10 11:01:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Mike
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please? Thank you.
Similarly, that business about a tree falling in a forest where no-one
can hear it is nothing to do with Schrodinger's Cat. It's just an
almost content-free matter of semantics: obviously the tree and its
surroundings will obey the laws of physics, so there will be
compressions and rarefactions (i.e sound waves) created in the air.
Whether or not you want to call that a "noise" if the waves do not reach
a human ear doesn't strike me as a very interesting question, and it
certainly doesn't tell us anything about the wider universe.
Now, are we speaking about noise or sound? Generally speaking, a noise is a
sound but a sound is not necesscelery a noise. Think of listening to your
preferred music - this may be sound to you but equally well, it may be
music someone else does not like and regards it as a noise.
True, but not relevant to the non-conundrum of whether an event which is
unheard actually makes a noise/sound. I used the word "noise" because
that's the word I've usually heard in that context. "Sound" would do
equally well. Like I said, in this context it's just a matter of
uninteresting semantics, dressed up as profundity.
Ooh Matron!

Sid’s using words like ‘profundity’ and ‘non-conundrum’ and even ‘semantic’
... I thought you aught to know about this. Is’t he a naughty boy?!
--
Toodle Pip
Jenny M Benson
2018-03-10 12:18:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike
Ooh Matron!
Sid’s using words like ‘profundity’ and ‘non-conundrum’ and even ‘semantic’
... I thought you aught to know about this. Is’t he a naughty boy?!
Ooh, you are a tell-tale sneak, McMillan!
--
Jenny M Benson
LFS
2018-03-10 08:07:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
Schrodinger was making a point about the weirdness of quantum behaviour,
in that an electron, a particle with mass and position in space, can
apparently pass through two separate holes at the same time, but if you
set up a device to see which hole it goes through, it changes its
behaviour and only goes through one or the other.  His point was that,
by these laws, the notional cat in the box is *both* alive *and* dead at
the same time (i.e. in a state of quantum indeterminacy).  Only when
someone looks into the box does the cat adopt the state of either a
living or a dead cat.  The idea is intended to illustrate some deep and
counter-intuitive properties of the universe.
The Schrodinger's Cat paradox is *not* about wondering what has gone on
where we can't see or hear it.  We didn't need one of the 20th Century's
greatest physicists to tell us that we may not know what's inside a box
until we've looked.  Anyone can tell you that, and its scarcely a
profound philosophical observation about the structure of the universe.
Beautifully put.
Post by Sid Nuncius
Similarly, that business about a tree falling in a forest where no-one
can hear it is nothing to do with Schrodinger's Cat.  It's just an
almost content-free matter of semantics: obviously the tree and its
surroundings will obey the laws of physics, so there will be
compressions and rarefactions (i.e sound waves) created in the air.
Whether or not you want to call that a "noise" if the waves do not reach
a human ear doesn't strike me as a very interesting question, and it
certainly doesn't tell us anything about the wider universe.  (It is
left as an exercise for the reader to conclude whether there might
possibly be some means of determining whether a fridge light goes off
when you close the door or whether it is another deep philosophical
mystery.)
Sorry - I just needed to get that off my chest.  Please feel free to
carry on making amusing Schrodinger references without worrying about
their philosophical accuracy.
I'll get me coat - provided it hasn't vanished because I'm not looking
at it right now.
<applause> I really appreciate it when someone tries to put these things
right although I think it's often a losing battle. Similar things happen
with the changing meaning of words.
--
Laura (emulate St George for email)
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-10 09:23:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by LFS
<applause> I really appreciate it when someone tries to put these things
right although I think it's often a losing battle. Similar things happen
with the changing meaning of words.
Thank you, Laura. I endeavour to give satisfaction.

And you're right about it being a losing battle - don't get me started
on "black holes." Frankly, I can't understand why the people at CERN
are bothering with all this brainy high-energy particle stuff, when all
they need to do is produce some dodgy financial calculations and one of
the most potent and mysterious objects in the universe will appear
instantly.

And...er...

Hello, Matron.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
BrritSki
2018-03-10 09:36:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by LFS
<applause> I really appreciate it when someone tries to put these
things right although I think it's often a losing battle. Similar
things happen with the changing meaning of words.
Thank you, Laura.  I endeavour to give satisfaction.
And you're right about it being a losing battle - don't get me started
on "black holes."  Frankly, I can't understand why the people at CERN
are bothering with all this brainy high-energy particle stuff, when all
they need to do is produce some dodgy financial calculations and one of
the most potent and mysterious objects in the universe will appear
instantly.
A perfect description of Bitcoin.
LFS
2018-03-10 09:55:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by LFS
<applause> I really appreciate it when someone tries to put these
things right although I think it's often a losing battle. Similar
things happen with the changing meaning of words.
Thank you, Laura.  I endeavour to give satisfaction.
And you're right about it being a losing battle - don't get me started
on "black holes."  Frankly, I can't understand why the people at CERN
are bothering with all this brainy high-energy particle stuff, when
all they need to do is produce some dodgy financial calculations and
one of the most potent and mysterious objects in the universe will
appear instantly.
A perfect description of Bitcoin.
<applause> On form today, you chaps.
--
Laura (emulate St George for email)
Mike
2018-03-10 11:03:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by LFS
<applause> I really appreciate it when someone tries to put these things
right although I think it's often a losing battle. Similar things happen
with the changing meaning of words.
Thank you, Laura. I endeavour to give satisfaction.
And you're right about it being a losing battle - don't get me started
on "black holes." Frankly, I can't understand why the people at CERN
are bothering with all this brainy high-energy particle stuff, when all
they need to do is produce some dodgy financial calculations and one of
the most potent and mysterious objects in the universe will appear
instantly.
And...er...
Hello, Matron.
Isn’t ‘a black hole’ just another term for one’s bank account?
--
Toodle Pip
BrritSki
2018-03-10 08:07:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?
<snippage>

Back in your box ! ;)
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-10 09:16:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?
<snippage>
Back in your box !   ;)
I *am* back in my box. You just haven't looked. :o)
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
BrritSki
2018-03-10 09:36:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be
po-faced about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?
<snippage>
Back in your box !   ;)
I *am* back in my box.  You just haven't looked.  :o)
I could, but I might kill you.

And your cat.
Mike
2018-03-10 11:02:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by BrritSki
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?
<snippage>
Back in your box !   ;)
I *am* back in my box. You just haven't looked. :o)
Purrrrrrr....
--
Toodle Pip
Clive Arthur
2018-03-10 12:11:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
<snip>

Yes, but if the cat is in the fridge observing the interior light, it's
just a matter of time before it dies, shirley?

Cheers
--
Clive
Jenny M Benson
2018-03-10 12:20:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
<snip>
Yes, but if the cat is in the fridge observing the interior light, it's
just a matter of time before it dies, shirley?
Cheers
Please, Sir, I don't understand any of this because my fridge hasn't got
a light.
--
Jenny M Benson
Mike
2018-03-10 12:49:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jenny M Benson
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
<snip>
Yes, but if the cat is in the fridge observing the interior light, it's
just a matter of time before it dies, shirley?
Cheers
Please, Sir, I don't understand any of this because my fridge hasn't got
a light.
You require some en-lightenment?
--
Toodle Pip
Clive Arthur
2018-03-10 15:44:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jenny M Benson
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be
po-faced about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
<snip>
Yes, but if the cat is in the fridge observing the interior light,
it's just a matter of time before it dies, shirley?
Cheers
Please, Sir, I don't understand any of this because my fridge hasn't got
a light.
How do you know a light doesn't come on when you close the door? What
if the cat has a torch?

Cheers
--
Clive
Mike
2018-03-10 15:52:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Jenny M Benson
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be
po-faced about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
<snip>
Yes, but if the cat is in the fridge observing the interior light,
it's just a matter of time before it dies, shirley?
Cheers
Please, Sir, I don't understand any of this because my fridge hasn't got
a light.
How do you know a light doesn't come on when you close the door? What
if the cat has a torch?
Cheers
Some pets eat lights....
--
Toodle Pip
DavidK
2018-03-11 09:05:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Jenny M Benson
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be
po-faced about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
<snip>
Yes, but if the cat is in the fridge observing the interior light,
it's just a matter of time before it dies, shirley?
Cheers
Please, Sir, I don't understand any of this because my fridge hasn't got
a light.
How do you know a light doesn't come on when you close the door? What
if the cat has a torch?
Cheers
Some pets eat lights....
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago.
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-11 09:14:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by DavidK
Post by Mike
Some pets eat lights....
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago.
Ooh - so did ours, but only about 50 years ago. We had two cats; one
absolutely loved lights and refused to eat anything else, the other
wouldn't touch them.

The reason? They were cats.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Vicky
2018-03-11 10:13:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 09:14:19 +0000, Sid Nuncius
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by DavidK
Post by Mike
Some pets eat lights....
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago.
Ooh - so did ours, but only about 50 years ago. We had two cats; one
absolutely loved lights and refused to eat anything else, the other
wouldn't touch them.
The reason? They were cats.
We had this conversation here last night when Fang again voted with
her feet, not eating that rubbish, rubbish she loved last week. B
wonderd how cats survived through the ages if so picky, but I think
that is only spoiled domestic ones. I've seen feral cats, chez a
friend who helped the local cat rescue people. They stole and ate the
loaf of bread from the kitchen counter and I had to push them off my
dish of spag bol during supper. They would eat anything.
--
Vicky
Penny
2018-03-11 10:19:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 10:13:03 +0000, Vicky <***@gmail.com> scrawled
in the dust...
Post by Vicky
We had this conversation here last night when Fang again voted with
her feet, not eating that rubbish, rubbish she loved last week. B
wonderd how cats survived through the ages if so picky, but I think
that is only spoiled domestic ones. I've seen feral cats, chez a
friend who helped the local cat rescue people. They stole and ate the
loaf of bread from the kitchen counter and I had to push them off my
dish of spag bol during supper. They would eat anything.
My cat loved my spag bog even in his dotage when he was getting
increasingly picky about food.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Mike
2018-03-11 11:24:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Vicky
We had this conversation here last night when Fang again voted with
her feet, not eating that rubbish, rubbish she loved last week. B
wonderd how cats survived through the ages if so picky, but I think
that is only spoiled domestic ones. I've seen feral cats, chez a
friend who helped the local cat rescue people. They stole and ate the
loaf of bread from the kitchen counter and I had to push them off my
dish of spag bol during supper. They would eat anything.
My cat loved my spag bog even in his dotage when he was getting
increasingly picky about food.
Did he have his own toilet roll?
--
Toodle Pip
Jenny M Benson
2018-03-11 10:26:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by DavidK
Post by Mike
Some pets eat lights....
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago.
Ooh - so did ours, but only about 50 years ago.  We had two cats; one
absolutely loved lights and refused to eat anything else, the other
wouldn't touch them.
The phrase "A shilling's-worth of frozen cod, please" is indelibly
stamped in my memory because I was sent to the fishmonger in the village
to say that so often 60-odd years ago. Said cat (he of the
unmentionable name) was also very partial to Kit-e-Kat, but I don't
think there was much choice available in those days.

My cats' usual diet is Royal Canin - the older on has the Senior variety
and MUCH prefers the Adult version if he can steal it. Recently I had
to buy something else and got Go-Cat with Turkey and added Vegetables
(how they got the turkey in there if they didn't add it, I don't know)
and neither was best pleased, but senior cat is determined to starve
himself to death if I don't give in and restore his "proper" food. He
can usually be persuaded to eat about 5 pieces of Go-Cat if I mix 3
Dreamies into a small handful!

But cats aren't just fussy about food. My daughter recently had to buy
wood pelleted cat litter instead of the usual granules. Her 19-year-old
spoiled brat cat said very firmly "I'm not going to go in THAT!" and
found about 3 granules that had been dropped on the floor, scraped them
up and performed over them.
--
Jenny M Benson
Mike
2018-03-11 11:19:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by DavidK
Post by Mike
Some pets eat lights....
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago.
Ooh - so did ours, but only about 50 years ago. We had two cats; one
absolutely loved lights and refused to eat anything else, the other
wouldn't touch them.
The reason? They were cats.
Our lights-eating cats were in the very early to mid-fifties, so some 65
years back.
--
Toodle Pip
Vicky
2018-03-11 10:08:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by DavidK
Post by Mike
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Jenny M Benson
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be
po-faced about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
<snip>
Yes, but if the cat is in the fridge observing the interior light,
it's just a matter of time before it dies, shirley?
Cheers
Please, Sir, I don't understand any of this because my fridge hasn't got
a light.
How do you know a light doesn't come on when you close the door? What
if the cat has a torch?
Cheers
Some pets eat lights....
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago.
I think we have had this conversation. My grandmother and motehr made
sweet and sour as if with liver out of lights, but I only ate the dish
is made out of liver as the lights have nasty tubes in them.
#pickyeater
--
Vicky
Rosemary Miskin
2018-03-11 11:14:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago. 
+1

Rosemary
SODAM
2018-03-11 11:46:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Rosemary Miskin
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago. 
+1
Rosemary
Our dog was fed on lights occasionally as a treat. They made a terrible
smell in the kitchen as they boiled and an even worse smell when emitted
gaseously from the dog later in the evening. :-(
--
SODAM
The thinking umrat’s choice for editor
Mike
2018-03-11 12:07:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by SODAM
Post by Rosemary Miskin
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago. 
+1
Rosemary
Our dog was fed on lights occasionally as a treat. They made a terrible
smell in the kitchen as they boiled and an even worse smell when emitted
gaseously from the dog later in the evening. :-(
Yes indeed, not something to make light of in fact.
--
Toodle Pip
Btms
2018-03-11 16:43:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by SODAM
Post by Rosemary Miskin
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago. 
+1
Rosemary
Our dog was fed on lights occasionally as a treat. They made a terrible
smell in the kitchen as they boiled and an even worse smell when emitted
gaseously from the dog later in the evening. :-(
Indeed. A truly disgusting odour indeed. Mother would boil them for hours
ob the rayburn, so the smell really took off. We had two Welsh Corgis
then. Mother and daughter. Sherry and Tracey.*

*I read Schoolfriend girl’s comic.
--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
Nick Odell
2018-03-11 23:30:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by DavidK
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago.
+1
My dog had melts[1]
Or at least, my mother's dog did. From the butcher. Every week.
But I never quite worked out what they were.

Nick
[1]Sounds like an alternative way of tuning a ukulele
SODAM
2018-03-11 23:43:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nick Odell
My dog had melts[1]
Or at least, my mother's dog did. From the butcher. Every week.
But I never quite worked out what they were.
Nick
[1]Sounds like an alternative way of tuning a ukulele
My mother told me that lights were the lungs but this information comes
with a trust warning. (Not everything she told me was accurate.)I suppose
this is where “I’ll punch his lights out” comes from yet you’d have to be
punching with some force to knock the lungs out of someone.
--
SODAM
The thinking umrat’s choice for editor
Btms
2018-03-12 08:26:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by SODAM
Post by Nick Odell
My dog had melts[1]
Or at least, my mother's dog did. From the butcher. Every week.
But I never quite worked out what they were.
Nick
[1]Sounds like an alternative way of tuning a ukulele
My mother told me that lights were the lungs but this information comes
with a trust warning. (Not everything she told me was accurate.)I suppose
this is where “I’ll punch his lights out” comes from yet you’d have to be
punching with some force to knock the lungs out of someone.
My mother said the same. They had tubes in them which I found queasy
making.
--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
Jenny M Benson
2018-03-11 23:54:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nick Odell
My dog had melts[1]
Or at least, my mother's dog did. From the butcher. Every week.
But I never quite worked out what they were.
Cow's (or bull's) pancreas, apparently.
--
Jenny M Benson
Mike
2018-03-12 08:25:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nick Odell
Post by DavidK
My cat used to be fed on lights from the butcher 60 years ago.
+1
My dog had melts[1]
Or at least, my mother's dog did. From the butcher. Every week.
But I never quite worked out what they were.
Nick
[1]Sounds like an alternative way of tuning a ukulele
My Dog Has Fleas.
--
Toodle Pip
Mike
2018-03-10 12:47:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
<snip>
Yes, but if the cat is in the fridge observing the interior light, it's
just a matter of time before it dies, shirley?
Cheers
I don’t think the cat would be at all de-lighted!
--
Toodle Pip
krw
2018-03-10 22:52:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
Schrodinger was making a point about the weirdness of quantum behaviour,
in that an electron, a particle with mass and position in space, can
apparently pass through two separate holes at the same time, but if you
set up a device to see which hole it goes through, it changes its
behaviour and only goes through one or the other.  His point was that,
by these laws, the notional cat in the box is *both* alive *and* dead at
the same time (i.e. in a state of quantum indeterminacy).  Only when
someone looks into the box does the cat adopt the state of either a
living or a dead cat.  The idea is intended to illustrate some deep and
counter-intuitive properties of the universe.
The Schrodinger's Cat paradox is *not* about wondering what has gone on
where we can't see or hear it.  We didn't need one of the 20th Century's
greatest physicists to tell us that we may not know what's inside a box
until we've looked.  Anyone can tell you that, and its scarcely a
profound philosophical observation about the structure of the universe.
Similarly, that business about a tree falling in a forest where no-one
can hear it is nothing to do with Schrodinger's Cat.  It's just an
almost content-free matter of semantics: obviously the tree and its
surroundings will obey the laws of physics, so there will be
compressions and rarefactions (i.e sound waves) created in the air.
Whether or not you want to call that a "noise" if the waves do not reach
a human ear doesn't strike me as a very interesting question, and it
certainly doesn't tell us anything about the wider universe.  (It is
left as an exercise for the reader to conclude whether there might
possibly be some means of determining whether a fridge light goes off
when you close the door or whether it is another deep philosophical
mystery.)
Sorry - I just needed to get that off my chest.  Please feel free to
carry on making amusing Schrodinger references without worrying about
their philosophical accuracy.
I'll get me coat - provided it hasn't vanished because I'm not looking
at it right now.
Wow that was some response to open on returning home!
--
Kosmo Richard W
www.travelswmw.whitnet.uk
https://tinyurl.com/KRWpics
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-11 06:44:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by krw
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
Schrodinger was making a point about the weirdness of quantum
behaviour, in that an electron, a particle with mass and position in
space, can apparently pass through two separate holes at the same
time, but if you set up a device to see which hole it goes through, it
changes its behaviour and only goes through one or the other.  His
point was that, by these laws, the notional cat in the box is *both*
alive *and* dead at the same time (i.e. in a state of quantum
indeterminacy).  Only when someone looks into the box does the cat
adopt the state of either a living or a dead cat.  The idea is
intended to illustrate some deep and counter-intuitive properties of
the universe.
The Schrodinger's Cat paradox is *not* about wondering what has gone
on where we can't see or hear it.  We didn't need one of the 20th
Century's greatest physicists to tell us that we may not know what's
inside a box until we've looked.  Anyone can tell you that, and its
scarcely a profound philosophical observation about the structure of
the universe.
Similarly, that business about a tree falling in a forest where no-one
can hear it is nothing to do with Schrodinger's Cat.  It's just an
almost content-free matter of semantics: obviously the tree and its
surroundings will obey the laws of physics, so there will be
compressions and rarefactions (i.e sound waves) created in the air.
Whether or not you want to call that a "noise" if the waves do not
reach a human ear doesn't strike me as a very interesting question,
and it certainly doesn't tell us anything about the wider universe.
(It is left as an exercise for the reader to conclude whether there
might possibly be some means of determining whether a fridge light
goes off when you close the door or whether it is another deep
philosophical mystery.)
Sorry - I just needed to get that off my chest.  Please feel free to
carry on making amusing Schrodinger references without worrying about
their philosophical accuracy.
I'll get me coat - provided it hasn't vanished because I'm not looking
at it right now.
Wow that was some response to open on returning home!
Sorry KRW. Matron has given me a green tablet, which should stop all
that now.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Mike Headon
2018-03-11 08:39:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by krw
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Kosmo
Post by Mike
Ask the cat!
Schrodinger 's?
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be
po-faced about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
Schrodinger was making a point about the weirdness of quantum
behaviour, in that an electron, a particle with mass and position in
space, can apparently pass through two separate holes at the same
time, but if you set up a device to see which hole it goes through,
it changes its behaviour and only goes through one or the other.  His
point was that, by these laws, the notional cat in the box is *both*
alive *and* dead at the same time (i.e. in a state of quantum
indeterminacy).  Only when someone looks into the box does the cat
adopt the state of either a living or a dead cat.  The idea is
intended to illustrate some deep and counter-intuitive properties of
the universe.
The Schrodinger's Cat paradox is *not* about wondering what has gone
on where we can't see or hear it.  We didn't need one of the 20th
Century's greatest physicists to tell us that we may not know what's
inside a box until we've looked.  Anyone can tell you that, and its
scarcely a profound philosophical observation about the structure of
the universe.
Similarly, that business about a tree falling in a forest where
no-one can hear it is nothing to do with Schrodinger's Cat.  It's
just an almost content-free matter of semantics: obviously the tree
and its surroundings will obey the laws of physics, so there will be
compressions and rarefactions (i.e sound waves) created in the air.
Whether or not you want to call that a "noise" if the waves do not
reach a human ear doesn't strike me as a very interesting question,
and it certainly doesn't tell us anything about the wider universe.
(It is left as an exercise for the reader to conclude whether there
might possibly be some means of determining whether a fridge light
goes off when you close the door or whether it is another deep
philosophical mystery.)
Sorry - I just needed to get that off my chest.  Please feel free to
carry on making amusing Schrodinger references without worrying about
their philosophical accuracy.
I'll get me coat - provided it hasn't vanished because I'm not
looking at it right now.
Wow that was some response to open on returning home!
Sorry KRW. Matron has given me a green tablet, which should stop all
that now.
I know this is going back a few years, but I seem to remember a story
that some "scientists" (fsvo "scientists") really believe that if you
can't see something, it really does not exist!
--
Mike Headon
R69S R850R
IIIc IIIg FT FTn FT2 EOS450D
e-mail: mike dot headon at enn tee ell world dot com

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Btms
2018-03-11 08:56:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Mike Headon <***@YCKMHWA.com> wrote:


Snipped to relevance.
Post by Mike Headon
I know this is going back a few years, but I seem to remember a story
that some "scientists" (fsvo "scientists") really believe that if you
can't see something, it really does not exist!
Yes. And what is often promoted by being described as: “scientifically
proven” is often flakey too.
--
BTMS - Equine Advisor Extraordinaire.
Mike
2018-03-11 09:03:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Headon
I know this is going back a few years, but I seem to remember a story
that some "scientists" (fsvo "scientists") really believe that if you
can't see something, it really does not exist!
Can’t see it m’self....
--
Toodle Pip
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-11 09:07:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Headon
I know this is going back a few years, but I seem to remember a story
that some "scientists" (fsvo "scientists") really believe that if you
can't see something, it really does not exist!
I think they must have been either ostriches or postmodernists. Or
boodly idiots (arguably a tautology after postmodernists).

I have kept these two stanzas by Spenser (from the prologue to the
Second Booke of the Faerie Queene, 1590) in mind ever since I first read
them about 35 years ago:

But let that man with better sence aduize,
That of the world least part to vs is red:
And dayly how through hardy enterprize,
Many great Regions are discouered,
Which to late age were neuer mentioned.
Who euer heard of th'Indian Peru?
Or who in venturous vessell measured
The Amazon huge riuer now found trew?
Or fruitfullest Virginia who did euer vew?

Yet all these were, when no man did them know;
Yet haue from wisest ages hidden beene:
And later times things more vnknowne shall show.
Why then should witlesse man so much misweene
That nothing is, but that which he hath seene?
What if within the Moones faire shining spheare?
What if in euery other starre vnseene
Of other worldes he happily should heare?
He wonder would much more: yet such to some appeare.[1]

It's good, that. Especially:
"Why then should witlesse man so much misweene
That nothing is, but that which he hath seene?"
So those "scientists" can stick their ridiculous notions in the fridge
and close the door.


[1] The Head of English where I was teaching at the time opined that
anyone who read Spenser for pleasure should be placed in a museum, but I
did enjoy the weird spellings and the odd stanza structure, plus some
genuinely perceptive and sometimes moving passages. I only stuck it for
the first three books, though.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
BrritSki
2018-03-11 10:02:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
"Why then should witlesse man so much misweene
That nothing is, but that which he hath seene?"
So those "scientists" can stick their ridiculous notions in the fridge
and close the door.
Blimey, I'm not going to ask for anything out of your "fridge"...
Vicky
2018-03-11 10:10:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 09:07:09 +0000, Sid Nuncius
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by Mike Headon
I know this is going back a few years, but I seem to remember a story
that some "scientists" (fsvo "scientists") really believe that if you
can't see something, it really does not exist!
I think they must have been either ostriches or postmodernists. Or
boodly idiots (arguably a tautology after postmodernists).
I have kept these two stanzas by Spenser (from the prologue to the
Second Booke of the Faerie Queene, 1590) in mind ever since I first read
But let that man with better sence aduize,
And dayly how through hardy enterprize,
Many great Regions are discouered,
Which to late age were neuer mentioned.
Who euer heard of th'Indian Peru?
Or who in venturous vessell measured
The Amazon huge riuer now found trew?
Or fruitfullest Virginia who did euer vew?
Yet all these were, when no man did them know;
And later times things more vnknowne shall show.
Why then should witlesse man so much misweene
That nothing is, but that which he hath seene?
What if within the Moones faire shining spheare?
What if in euery other starre vnseene
Of other worldes he happily should heare?
He wonder would much more: yet such to some appeare.[1]
"Why then should witlesse man so much misweene
That nothing is, but that which he hath seene?"
So those "scientists" can stick their ridiculous notions in the fridge
and close the door.
[1] The Head of English where I was teaching at the time opined that
anyone who read Spenser for pleasure should be placed in a museum, but I
did enjoy the weird spellings and the odd stanza structure, plus some
genuinely perceptive and sometimes moving passages. I only stuck it for
the first three books, though.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio...
--
Vicky
Penny
2018-03-11 10:15:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 08:39:18 +0000, Mike Headon <***@YCKMHWA.com>
scrawled in the dust...
Post by Mike Headon
I know this is going back a few years, but I seem to remember a story
that some "scientists" (fsvo "scientists") really believe that if you
can't see something, it really does not exist!
There once was a man who said: "God
Must think it exceedingly odd
If he finds that this tree
Continues to be
When there's no one about in the Quad."
[Langford Reed, The Complete Limerick Book (1924)]

popped into my head. On looking it up (too many books, quicker on the
internet) I found the reply, which I'd forgotten about:

The topic of this limerick and the following one is George Berkeley's
philosophical principle, "To be is to be perceived".

Dear Sir,
Your astonishment's odd;
I am always about in the Quad;
And that's why the tree
Will continue to be,
Since observed by
Yours faithfully,
God.

As for 'scientists' who believe if you can't see something, it really does
not exist, they are still around, some of them in the medical profession.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
DavidK
2018-03-11 09:15:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
Schrodinger was making a point about the weirdness of quantum behaviour,
in that an electron, a particle with mass and position in space, can
apparently pass through two separate holes at the same time, but if you
set up a device to see which hole it goes through, it changes its
behaviour and only goes through one or the other.  His point was that,
by these laws, the notional cat in the box is *both* alive *and* dead at
the same time (i.e. in a state of quantum indeterminacy).  Only when
someone looks into the box does the cat adopt the state of either a
living or a dead cat.  The idea is intended to illustrate some deep and
counter-intuitive properties of the universe.
So, is the gender of Pip's baby determined when one sperm wins the race
or when the ultrasound scan is sufficiently clear? Presumably the
wave-form collapses at the second event?
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-11 10:53:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by DavidK
Post by Sid Nuncius
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
Schrodinger was making a point about the weirdness of quantum
behaviour, in that an electron, a particle with mass and position in
space, can apparently pass through two separate holes at the same
time, but if you set up a device to see which hole it goes through, it
changes its behaviour and only goes through one or the other.  His
point was that, by these laws, the notional cat in the box is *both*
alive *and* dead at the same time (i.e. in a state of quantum
indeterminacy).  Only when someone looks into the box does the cat
adopt the state of either a living or a dead cat.  The idea is
intended to illustrate some deep and counter-intuitive properties of
the universe.
So, is the gender of Pip's baby determined when one sperm wins the race
or when the ultrasound scan is sufficiently clear? Presumably the
wave-form collapses at the second event?
Presumably it's only indeterminate if the sperm passes through two slits
before...er...

Perhaps it's best if I don't pursue that any further.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
BrritSki
2018-03-11 11:34:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sid Nuncius
Post by DavidK
Post by Sid Nuncius
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be
po-faced about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
Schrodinger was making a point about the weirdness of quantum
behaviour, in that an electron, a particle with mass and position in
space, can apparently pass through two separate holes at the same
time, but if you set up a device to see which hole it goes through,
it changes its behaviour and only goes through one or the other.  His
point was that, by these laws, the notional cat in the box is *both*
alive *and* dead at the same time (i.e. in a state of quantum
indeterminacy).  Only when someone looks into the box does the cat
adopt the state of either a living or a dead cat.  The idea is
intended to illustrate some deep and counter-intuitive properties of
the universe.
So, is the gender of Pip's baby determined when one sperm wins the
race or when the ultrasound scan is sufficiently clear? Presumably the
wave-form collapses at the second event?
Presumably it's only indeterminate if the sperm passes through two slits
before...er...
Perhaps it's best if I don't pursue that any further.
So your lips are sealed then ?
Mike
2018-03-11 11:20:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by DavidK
Post by Sid Nuncius
Look, I know it's just a harmless joke and I don't want to be po-faced
about it, but can I just have a brief physicist's rant about
Schrodinger's cat, please?  Thank you.
Schrodinger was making a point about the weirdness of quantum behaviour,
in that an electron, a particle with mass and position in space, can
apparently pass through two separate holes at the same time, but if you
set up a device to see which hole it goes through, it changes its
behaviour and only goes through one or the other.  His point was that,
by these laws, the notional cat in the box is *both* alive *and* dead at
the same time (i.e. in a state of quantum indeterminacy).  Only when
someone looks into the box does the cat adopt the state of either a
living or a dead cat.  The idea is intended to illustrate some deep and
counter-intuitive properties of the universe.
So, is the gender of Pip's baby determined when one sperm wins the race
or when the ultrasound scan is sufficiently clear? Presumably the
wave-form collapses at the second event?
I can’t begin to conceive what you are talking about, but I will con seed
the point rather than egg you on....
--
Toodle Pip
Fred
2018-03-11 09:56:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
SNIP

(It is
Post by Sid Nuncius
left as an exercise for the reader to conclude whether there might
possibly be some means of determining whether a fridge light goes off
when you close the door or whether it is another deep philosophical
mystery.)
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
As a pragmatist, it is simple.
There is a small lever that is pressed when the door shuts.
Press this lever and if the light goes off, and it will, then you know the answer!
Fred
Jim Easterbrook
2018-03-10 09:15:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive Arthur
(Of course, the fridge bulb uses a lot less energy than the brain as
it's only on for a short time. Or is it? How would we know?)
I was impressed by the economy of design in a fridge-freezer I had some
time ago. Most fridge-freezers have one cooling system, controlled by a
thermostat in the fridge. If the fridge-freezer is kept in a cool place,
such as a garage, the fridge might not warm up enough to turn the cooling
system on, so the freezer could get too warm. To prevent this it had an
extra thermostat, on the outside, that turned on the interior light if
the ambient temperature got too low. This would raise the temperature
inside the fridge (the light is near the thermostat) and turn on the
cooling system.
--
Jim <http://www.jim-easterbrook.me.uk/>
1959/1985? M B+ G+ A L- I- S- P-- CH0(p) Ar++ T+ H0 Q--- Sh0
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-09 13:14:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Clive Arthur
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Your brain uses less power than the light in your
fridge.
Jpeg, I understood from somewhere that the human brain uses some hundreds
of watts - if this is so.... what capacity of ‘fridge might we be talking
of?
Say 2000 Calories per day. That's 8268000 Joules per day which is 96
Joules per second, or 96 Watts. You hothead.
Cheers
My original quote was from some time ago, and might not be accurate now
(though I think 'fridge lights do still tend to be incandescent bulbs).
But that 96 watts would be for the whole body; some earlier post has
said what percentage of that the brain uses, so it's not that far out.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

A biochemist walks into a student bar and says to the barman: "I'd like a pint
of adenosine triphosphate, please." "Certainly," says the barman, "that'll be
ATP." (Quoted in) The Independent, 2013-7-13
Kate B
2018-03-08 20:55:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Thanks both. Some lovely ones there - I've added "I don't have an agree
that our language torture is a quality add" to my quotes file.
Complete swerve. But some absolutely cracking quotes to be found here
(courtesy of the historical performance group on facebook)


http://classicalcompass.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/loudness-wars.html

Enjoy.
--
Kate B
London
Rosalind Mitchell
2018-03-08 21:46:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kate B
http://classicalcompass.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/loudness-wars.html
Timpanies! Aargh!
J. P. Gilliver (John)
2018-03-08 22:08:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kate B
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Thanks both. Some lovely ones there - I've added "I don't have an
agree that our language torture is a quality add" to my quotes file.
Complete swerve. But some absolutely cracking quotes to be found here
(courtesy of the historical performance group on facebook)
http://classicalcompass.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/loudness-wars.html
Enjoy.
Complete swerve indeed, but I read it with an increasing beam. Hungrish
is it?

"Harmonies the following eras fascinated us with the mundane
multi-filtered psychological status reports of the incursion of the
individual starting with the individual and based on emotions
(Romanticism) and the viced, counter-improvisation world of nerds
enforced into the shackles of structures (Classicism)."

And to cap it all, the translator is actually credited at the end!

(goes off muttering "counter-improvisation world of nerds ...", like the
Vogon guard in THHGTTG ...)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I long for the commercialised Christmas of the 1970s. It's got so religious
now, it's lost its true meaning. - Mike [{at}ostic.demon.co.uk], 2003-12-24
Sid Nuncius
2018-03-09 09:40:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kate B
Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Thanks both. Some lovely ones there - I've added "I don't have an
agree that our language torture is a quality add" to my quotes file.
Complete swerve. But some absolutely cracking quotes to be found here
(courtesy of the historical performance group on facebook)
http://classicalcompass.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/loudness-wars.html
Enjoy.
I did! Thank you, Kate.
--
Sid (Make sure Matron is away when you reply)
Nick Odell
2018-03-08 14:13:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
in the dust...
Post by Vicky
Gransnet had a thread on things that annoy
https://www.gransnet.com/forums/pedants_corner/1245899-Slovenly-speech-incorrect-grammar-etc?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Thurs%208%20March%20-%20Gransnet%20Daily%20Newsletter&utm_content=Thurs%208%20March%20-%20Gransnet%20Daily%20Newsletter+CID_0216264f8b126cea50a40ac8531ab38d&utm_source=newsletters&utm_term=To%20me%20it%20smacks%20of%20poor%20parenting
Vicky, when pasting in the link, would you remove the ? and everything
after it please?
https://www.gransnet.com/forums/pedants_corner/1245899-Slovenly-speech-incorrect-grammar-etc
is clickable for me - the long link crashes Agent.
Post by Vicky
Farming Today talked about GM and GE foods and is there a difference.
a professor who does research with GE foods, genetically engineered
said those are apparently fine. They do things like cut out the bit of
the gene that allows certain diseases. GE doens't b ring anything new
in, just cuts out. I am less sure than the prof, who does lots of
talks to various groups to explain it all, which might be why she
sounded a bit too slick.
A bio-engineering friend spent much of his working life modifying eucalypts
to increase their lignum content and make them weed-killer resistant*. I'll
ask him if he thinks this is GE or GM and if there is a difference.
*In spite of having nothing to do with food, all his work was scrapped when
GM started getting a bad press and he was made redundant.
Speaking with all the expertise in gene technology that a musical
instrument maker can bring to bear, I've never understood how removing
one little bit here or adding something there doesn't have other
consequences. The human instruction set is only about 20,000 items long
and I thought that it was the permutation and combination of them that
leads to the very complicated business of building and maintaining a
person. So I imagine taking away or adding genes, not as a jigsaw puzzle
with gaps and additions but as a game of Spillikins where pulling out
one stick may collapse the whole caboodle.

Nick
Penny
2018-03-08 15:07:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 14:13:52 +0000, Nick Odell
Post by Nick Odell
Speaking with all the expertise in gene technology that a musical
instrument maker can bring to bear, I've never understood how removing
one little bit here or adding something there doesn't have other
consequences.
Like rebuilding a violin then?
A(nother) friend's violin was run over by a car. Apparently it was of
sufficient worth to be rebuilt. How on earth can splintered wood be
reassembled without adversely affecting the tonal qualities of the
instrument?
Post by Nick Odell
The human instruction set is only about 20,000 items long
and I thought that it was the permutation and combination of them that
leads to the very complicated business of building and maintaining a
person. So I imagine taking away or adding genes, not as a jigsaw puzzle
with gaps and additions but as a game of Spillikins where pulling out
one stick may collapse the whole caboodle.
Sounds like a lovely metaphor - I hope you are right (but suspect you are
not).
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Nick Odell
2018-03-08 23:11:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 14:13:52 +0000, Nick Odell
Post by Nick Odell
Speaking with all the expertise in gene technology that a musical
instrument maker can bring to bear, I've never understood how removing
one little bit here or adding something there doesn't have other
consequences.
Like rebuilding a violin then?
A(nother) friend's violin was run over by a car. Apparently it was of
sufficient worth to be rebuilt. How on earth can splintered wood be
reassembled without adversely affecting the tonal qualities of the
instrument?
Sad to say, it can't.

But we are blurring the lines between one person's beautiful musical
instrument and another person's investment vehicle.

Nick
Penny
2018-03-09 00:19:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 23:11:18 +0000, Nick Odell
Post by Nick Odell
Post by Penny
On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 14:13:52 +0000, Nick Odell
Post by Nick Odell
Speaking with all the expertise in gene technology that a musical
instrument maker can bring to bear, I've never understood how removing
one little bit here or adding something there doesn't have other
consequences.
Like rebuilding a violin then?
A(nother) friend's violin was run over by a car. Apparently it was of
sufficient worth to be rebuilt. How on earth can splintered wood be
reassembled without adversely affecting the tonal qualities of the
instrument?
Sad to say, it can't.
But we are blurring the lines between one person's beautiful musical
instrument and another person's investment vehicle.
Oh he plays it - although that was many years ago and he may have replaced
it since or passed it on to a child/grandchild (or wife, I think he is on
#3).
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959
Mike
2018-03-09 08:18:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Penny
On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 23:11:18 +0000, Nick Odell
Post by Nick Odell
Post by Penny
On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 14:13:52 +0000, Nick Odell
Post by Nick Odell
Speaking with all the expertise in gene technology that a musical
instrument maker can bring to bear, I've never understood how removing
one little bit here or adding something there doesn't have other
consequences.
Like rebuilding a violin then?
A(nother) friend's violin was run over by a car. Apparently it was of
sufficient worth to be rebuilt. How on earth can splintered wood be
reassembled without adversely affecting the tonal qualities of the
instrument?
Sad to say, it can't.
But we are blurring the lines between one person's beautiful musical
instrument and another person's investment vehicle.
Oh he plays it - although that was many years ago and he may have replaced
it since or passed it on to a child/grandchild (or wife, I think he is on
#3).
So it is just a third string to his bow?;-)
--
Toodle Pip
Loading...