From: nicolaas.vroom@pandora.be   
      
   On Sunday, 28 October 2018 18:32:15 UTC+1, Jos Bergervoet  wrote:   
   > On 10/20/2018 10:22 PM, Nicolaas Vroom wrote:   
   > > On Tuesday, 16 October 2018 20:28:44 UTC+2, Phillip Helbig wrote:   
   > >> In article <23a86ac4-341e-4c8f-94a4-6bd9c17902c4@googlegroups.com>,   
   > >> Nicolaas Vroom  writes:   
   > >>   
   > >>> In the book "In search of Schroedingers cat" at page 203, John Gribbin   
   > >>> writes: Thew apparatus in the box is arranged so that the detector is   
   > >>> switched on just long enough so that there is a fift-fifty chance that   
   > >>> one of the atoms in the radioactive material will decay and that the   
   > >>> detector will record a particle."   
   > >>>   
   > >>> That means you have to perform this experiment first 1000 times   
   > >>> in order to establish what the half-life is.   
   > >>   
   > >> No; you can just use something with a known half-life.   
   > >   
   > > Consider the most? simple experiment.   
   > > 1. We put a coin in the box. I shake the box.   
   >   
   > What side is up when you put it in?   
   IMO this has nothing to do with the experiment.   
      
   > Or is it in a superposition?   
   I can not answer this question because I do not understand the question.   
   (IMO no one can)   
      
   > > 2. Before we open the box is the state of the coin now "both head and   
   tail"?   
   > > 3. Is the coin in a superposition state?  (IMO both no)   
   >   
   > Assuming that it was *not* in a superposition to begin with (since you   
   > forgot to specify that) it will then depends on how exactly you move   
   > the box what the outcome will be.   
   SNIP   
   > so practically speaking it will not be in a   
   > superposition of heads and tails. (But most likely it's still in a   
   > superposition of different locations in the box!)   
      
   Sorry to say I do not understand anything.   
   The only thing that you can claim is how can I answer: IMO both no   
   when I do not know what superposition means.   
   That is correct.   
      
   > > 4. You open the box and you look inside.   
   > > 5. Does that mean that there is a collapse of the wave function?   
   >   
   > No, objective collapse of the wavefunction was a wrong idea of the past.   
   >   
   > > 6. You close the box.   
   > > 7. Is the coin (again) in a superposition state?  (IMO no)   
   >   
   > As explained, there is almost certainly a superposition involved for   
   > things that are not exactly fixed (position, orientation, internal   
   > position of crystal defects in the coin, etc.)   
      
   (*) The only thing that I know that before I look inside the box   
   that 'I' do not know what the actual state is of the cat.   
   That does not mean that the cat then is in a superposition state.   
   In fact you can also set up the experiment such that the cat has a   
   chance of 90% being dead or 10% being dead.   
   As a matter of fact looking by a human being inside the box has nothing   
   to do with what is inside the box. The only change is inside   
   the human brain. (new knowledge).   
      
   > > 8. I open the box and I look inside.   
   > > 9. Does that mean that there is (again) a collapse of the wave function?   
   >   
   > Same as before! forget it! Superpositions never will go away by   
   > themselves. That's what 'unitary time evolution' means.   
      
   I don't understand.   
      
   > Now it is clear that *in your opinion* all this cannot be true, but   
      
   See above after (*)   
   IMO that is true for everyone.   
      
   Nicolaas Vroom.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)