It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
When something is learned there is then resonance between the parts. In true associationism (including stimulus-response) new wholes are formed. The greater the whole---containing more inherent parts---the higher the frequencies and dimensions (for example, 3D to 4D).
Thus our 3rd dimension is a manifestation of different fractal levels of wholeness and frequency along the gradient 3D to 4D impinging into 3D. Interaction of one frequency with another, say, higher-frequency wholeness (a fractal level and wave function) will quantum reduce the greater whole to the lesser whole. There is a break down (Fourier analysis) of the greater whole and its frequencies to lesser frequencies. This is now at an acceptable informational level.
originally posted by: JBurns
According to an article at phys.org, researchers were able to measure the 4D states of photons. This test, they say, ruled out the theory that the thought experiments conclusion resulted from a local limited knowledge of wavefunction.
A bit of background, Schrodingers cat was a thought experiment in quantum physics conducted by Erwin (I believe!) Schrodinger. I won't write up the full theory, but the result was that the cat was both alive and dead.
I haven't ruled out any idea in QM because it sounds "silly", but can you honestly say the idea of near infinite or infinite number of universes existing, for which you have no real evidence is less silly? It seems at least as silly, if not more silly, though that doesn't necessarily make the idea wrong. I try to keep an open mind and let the evidence lead to which interpretation of QM is correct.
originally posted by: tridentblue
That's too silly for me.
Nobody is really advocating killing cats in experiments, but your substitution of "shock" doesn't seem to work. When you open the box you can't tell if the cat was shocked or not. I'd suggest sticking to Schrodinger's thought experiment, or else Einstein's variation where the decay triggered a bomb which exploded the cat, so in that case you don't even have to check its pulse to see if it's really dead.
Decoherence shows how a macroscopic system interacting with a lot of microscopic systems (e.g. collisions with air molecules or photons) moves from being in a pure quantum state—which in general will be a coherent superposition (see Schrödinger's cat)—to being in an incoherent mixture of these states. The weighting of each outcome in the mixture in case of measurement is exactly that which gives the probabilities of the different results of such a measurement.
However, decoherence by itself may not give a complete solution of the measurement problem, since all components of the wave function still exist in a global superposition, which is explicitly acknowledged in the many-worlds interpretation. All decoherence explains, in this view, is why these coherences are no longer available for inspection by local observers. To present a solution to the measurement problem in most interpretations of quantum mechanics, decoherence must be supplied with some nontrivial interpretational considerations (as for example Wojciech Zurek tends to do in his Existential interpretation). However, according to Everett and DeWitt the many-worlds interpretation can be derived from the formalism alone, in which case no extra interpretational layer is required.