J
Jon Senior
Guest
Keith Willoughby [email protected] opined the following...
> And did it?
I wont know until I open the box.
Jon
> And did it?
I wont know until I open the box.
Jon
T
Tony Raven
Guest
Jon Senior wrote:
> Tony Raven [email protected] opined the following...
>
>>As has been pointed out, all the logic in the world will not help with
>>intrinisically indeterminate situations. That's the basis of both chaos
>>theory and quantum theory.
>
>
> Really? What is an "intrinsically indeterminate situation"?
>
There is not the space here for a primer on quantum theory and the
uncertainty principle or the fundamentals of chaos theory. I suggest you
read up some standard texts on the subject
Tony
> Tony Raven [email protected] opined the following...
>
>>As has been pointed out, all the logic in the world will not help with
>>intrinisically indeterminate situations. That's the basis of both chaos
>>theory and quantum theory.
>
>
> Really? What is an "intrinsically indeterminate situation"?
>
There is not the space here for a primer on quantum theory and the
uncertainty principle or the fundamentals of chaos theory. I suggest you
read up some standard texts on the subject
Tony
T
Tony Raven
Guest
Keith Willoughby wrote:
>
> So is the cat dead, or not?
>
Of course it is - from old age or starvation if nothing else. So is
Schrödinger. The concept is not though -
http://physicsweb.org/article/news/4/7/2
Tony
>
> So is the cat dead, or not?
>
Of course it is - from old age or starvation if nothing else. So is
Schrödinger. The concept is not though -
http://physicsweb.org/article/news/4/7/2
Tony
J
Jon Senior
Guest
Tony Raven [email protected] opined the following...
> There is not the space here for a primer on quantum theory and the
> uncertainty principle or the fundamentals of chaos theory. I suggest you
> read up some standard texts on the subject
From memory, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle stated that you could
only observe one aspect of a particle. Doing so would have an effect on
the other aspect (Aspects = position / momentum). He simply showed that
observation involved interaction. While you may not be able to know the
everything about a given particle, you can predict the behaviour of a
theoretical known particle.
Chaos theory does not actually consitute "chaos". The high-order chaos
is a result of low-order logic.
The above is the simple understandings that I remember from my interests
in the subject a few years back.
Given full knowledge of a system, you can predict the behaviour of that
system. The problem is obtaining full knowledge. "Intrinsically
indeterminate" would suggest to me "unpredictable".
Jon
> There is not the space here for a primer on quantum theory and the
> uncertainty principle or the fundamentals of chaos theory. I suggest you
> read up some standard texts on the subject
From memory, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle stated that you could
only observe one aspect of a particle. Doing so would have an effect on
the other aspect (Aspects = position / momentum). He simply showed that
observation involved interaction. While you may not be able to know the
everything about a given particle, you can predict the behaviour of a
theoretical known particle.
Chaos theory does not actually consitute "chaos". The high-order chaos
is a result of low-order logic.
The above is the simple understandings that I remember from my interests
in the subject a few years back.
Given full knowledge of a system, you can predict the behaviour of that
system. The problem is obtaining full knowledge. "Intrinsically
indeterminate" would suggest to me "unpredictable".
Jon
J
Just zis Guy, you know?
Guest
On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 23:17:35 +0100, Jon Senior
<jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:
>Keith Willoughby [email protected] opined the following...
Not in my newsreader he didn't, and I haven't got a filter for him
either. I wonder why?
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
<jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:
>Keith Willoughby [email protected] opined the following...
Not in my newsreader he didn't, and I haven't got a filter for him
either. I wonder why?
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
J
Just zis Guy, you know?
Guest
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 08:40:17 +0100, Jon Senior
<jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:
>From memory, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle stated that you could
>only observe one aspect of a particle.
Heisenberg is stopped for speeding. The Friendly Policeman asks:
"excuse me, sir, do you know how fast you were going?" "No, says
Heisenberg, but I know where I was."
Physics students think this is terribly funny.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
<jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:
>From memory, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle stated that you could
>only observe one aspect of a particle.
Heisenberg is stopped for speeding. The Friendly Policeman asks:
"excuse me, sir, do you know how fast you were going?" "No, says
Heisenberg, but I know where I was."
Physics students think this is terribly funny.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
T
Tony Raven
Guest
Jon Senior wrote:
>
> From memory, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle stated that you could
> only observe one aspect of a particle. Doing so would have an effect on
> the other aspect (Aspects = position / momentum). He simply showed that
> observation involved interaction. While you may not be able to know the
> everything about a given particle, you can predict the behaviour of a
> theoretical known particle.
Its gone beyond that. The particle is in a superposition of all
possible states. The act of observation forces it to assume one state
but left to its own devices you cannot know which state it is in, just
the statistical distribution between the states
>
> Chaos theory does not actually consitute "chaos". The high-order chaos
> is a result of low-order logic.
>
The chaos is because the logically predicted outcome is very sensitive
to the starting conditions so that your inability to measure those
starting conditions e.g. Heisenberg and your inability to calculate the
sequence of events with the accuracy of an infinite number of decimal
places at each point in an infinitely sub divided time means that you
cannot predict the outcome which changes every time you run your
calculation.
Tony
>
> From memory, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle stated that you could
> only observe one aspect of a particle. Doing so would have an effect on
> the other aspect (Aspects = position / momentum). He simply showed that
> observation involved interaction. While you may not be able to know the
> everything about a given particle, you can predict the behaviour of a
> theoretical known particle.
Its gone beyond that. The particle is in a superposition of all
possible states. The act of observation forces it to assume one state
but left to its own devices you cannot know which state it is in, just
the statistical distribution between the states
>
> Chaos theory does not actually consitute "chaos". The high-order chaos
> is a result of low-order logic.
>
The chaos is because the logically predicted outcome is very sensitive
to the starting conditions so that your inability to measure those
starting conditions e.g. Heisenberg and your inability to calculate the
sequence of events with the accuracy of an infinite number of decimal
places at each point in an infinitely sub divided time means that you
cannot predict the outcome which changes every time you run your
calculation.
Tony
J
Jon Senior
Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 23:17:35 +0100, Jon Senior
> <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >Keith Willoughby [email protected] opined the following...
>
> Not in my newsreader he didn't, and I haven't got a filter for him
> either. I wonder why?
I've had a few cases recently of "lag", where I've recieved responses to
messages that my server hasn't seen yet. You may find that it'll appear
later!
Jon
[email protected] says...
> On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 23:17:35 +0100, Jon Senior
> <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >Keith Willoughby [email protected] opined the following...
>
> Not in my newsreader he didn't, and I haven't got a filter for him
> either. I wonder why?
I've had a few cases recently of "lag", where I've recieved responses to
messages that my server hasn't seen yet. You may find that it'll appear
later!
Jon
J
Jon Senior
Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 08:40:17 +0100, Jon Senior
> <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >From memory, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle stated that you could
> >only observe one aspect of a particle.
>
> Heisenberg is stopped for speeding. The Friendly Policeman asks:
> "excuse me, sir, do you know how fast you were going?" "No, says
> Heisenberg, but I know where I was."
<fx: giggles>
> Physics students think this is terribly funny.
Not a physics student, but so do I!
Jon
[email protected] says...
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 08:40:17 +0100, Jon Senior
> <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >From memory, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle stated that you could
> >only observe one aspect of a particle.
>
> Heisenberg is stopped for speeding. The Friendly Policeman asks:
> "excuse me, sir, do you know how fast you were going?" "No, says
> Heisenberg, but I know where I was."
<fx: giggles>
> Physics students think this is terribly funny.
Not a physics student, but so do I!
Jon
R
Roos Eisma
Guest
Tony Raven <[email protected]> writes:
>The chaos is because the logically predicted outcome is very sensitive
>to the starting conditions so that your inability to measure those
>starting conditions e.g. Heisenberg and your inability to calculate the
>sequence of events with the accuracy of an infinite number of decimal
>places at each point in an infinitely sub divided time means that you
>cannot predict the outcome which changes every time you run your
>calculation.
This is where the fun of non-lineair systems starts. In a lineair system,
a small change of the initial parameters give a small change in the end
result. In a non-lineair system this is not the case, and a small change
in the starting values can for example cause the system to flip in a
completely different state. Or a small effects that scale with the square
of the disturbance become much larger than other factors and start to
dominate the answer.
To make it cycling related:
A small error in my watch means I leave home a minute later than expected.
In a lineair system I arrive at work a minute later. If I leave 2 minutes
later I arrive 2 minutes later.
In a non-lineair system I arrive 20 minutes later in both cases because I
just missed the ferry I need to catch halfway through my commute.
Roos
>The chaos is because the logically predicted outcome is very sensitive
>to the starting conditions so that your inability to measure those
>starting conditions e.g. Heisenberg and your inability to calculate the
>sequence of events with the accuracy of an infinite number of decimal
>places at each point in an infinitely sub divided time means that you
>cannot predict the outcome which changes every time you run your
>calculation.
This is where the fun of non-lineair systems starts. In a lineair system,
a small change of the initial parameters give a small change in the end
result. In a non-lineair system this is not the case, and a small change
in the starting values can for example cause the system to flip in a
completely different state. Or a small effects that scale with the square
of the disturbance become much larger than other factors and start to
dominate the answer.
To make it cycling related:
A small error in my watch means I leave home a minute later than expected.
In a lineair system I arrive at work a minute later. If I leave 2 minutes
later I arrive 2 minutes later.
In a non-lineair system I arrive 20 minutes later in both cases because I
just missed the ferry I need to catch halfway through my commute.
Roos
G
Graeme
Guest
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> Physics students think this is terribly funny.
>
And the other one that has them in fits is -
Two hydrogen atoms are sitting in a bar. One of them says, "I've lost an
electron!" The other says, "Are you positive?".
Proof positive that physics students need help. Mind you, I like that last
joke too, but I know I need help 8-P
Graeme
news:[email protected]:
> Physics students think this is terribly funny.
>
And the other one that has them in fits is -
Two hydrogen atoms are sitting in a bar. One of them says, "I've lost an
electron!" The other says, "Are you positive?".
Proof positive that physics students need help. Mind you, I like that last
joke too, but I know I need help 8-P
Graeme
J
Just zis Guy, you know?
Guest
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:23:39 +0100, Jon Senior
<jon@restlesslemon_DOT_co_DOT_uk.remove> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:
>> Not in my newsreader he didn't, and I haven't got a filter for him
>> either. I wonder why?
>I've had a few cases recently of "lag", where I've recieved responses to
>messages that my server hasn't seen yet. You may find that it'll appear
>later!
Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
newsreader. Strange.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
<jon@restlesslemon_DOT_co_DOT_uk.remove> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:
>> Not in my newsreader he didn't, and I haven't got a filter for him
>> either. I wonder why?
>I've had a few cases recently of "lag", where I've recieved responses to
>messages that my server hasn't seen yet. You may find that it'll appear
>later!
Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
newsreader. Strange.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
T
Tony Raven
Guest
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
>
> Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
> newsreader. Strange.
>
Maybe not seeing Keith is your Forte ;-)
Tony
>
>
> Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
> newsreader. Strange.
>
Maybe not seeing Keith is your Forte ;-)
Tony
W
Whingin' Pom
Guest
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 10:11:48 +0100, Tony Raven <[email protected]>
() wrote:
>Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>>
>>
>> Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
>> newsreader. Strange.
>>
>
>Maybe not seeing Keith is your Forte ;-)
I think you under-estimate the Gravity of the problem.
--
Matt K
Waikikamukau,NZ
() wrote:
>Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>>
>>
>> Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
>> newsreader. Strange.
>>
>
>Maybe not seeing Keith is your Forte ;-)
I think you under-estimate the Gravity of the problem.
--
Matt K
Waikikamukau,NZ
T
Tony Raven
Guest
Whingin' Pom wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 10:11:48 +0100, Tony Raven <[email protected]>
> () wrote:
>
>
>>Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
>>>newsreader. Strange.
>>>
>>
>>Maybe not seeing Keith is your Forte ;-)
>
>
> I think you under-estimate the Gravity of the problem.
>
Whatever, it would appear that Keith's posts are XNews (or is that
ex-Gnus) as far as Guy's concerned.
Tony
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 10:11:48 +0100, Tony Raven <[email protected]>
> () wrote:
>
>
>>Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
>>>newsreader. Strange.
>>>
>>
>>Maybe not seeing Keith is your Forte ;-)
>
>
> I think you under-estimate the Gravity of the problem.
>
Whatever, it would appear that Keith's posts are XNews (or is that
ex-Gnus) as far as Guy's concerned.
Tony
K
Keith Willoughby
Guest
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:23:39 +0100, Jon Senior
> <jon@restlesslemon_DOT_co_DOT_uk.remove> wrote in message
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>> Not in my newsreader he didn't, and I haven't got a filter for him
>>> either. I wonder why?
>
>>I've had a few cases recently of "lag", where I've recieved responses to
>>messages that my server hasn't seen yet. You may find that it'll appear
>>later!
>
> Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
> newsreader. Strange.
Very strange. We're both using the uni of Berlin server, so that can't
be it. Do my posts appear in rec.bicycle.* ?
Dunno why I'm asking this, mind. He won't see it.
--
Keith Willoughby http://flat222.org/keith/
"Did you threaten to overrule him?"
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:23:39 +0100, Jon Senior
> <jon@restlesslemon_DOT_co_DOT_uk.remove> wrote in message
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>> Not in my newsreader he didn't, and I haven't got a filter for him
>>> either. I wonder why?
>
>>I've had a few cases recently of "lag", where I've recieved responses to
>>messages that my server hasn't seen yet. You may find that it'll appear
>>later!
>
> Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
> newsreader. Strange.
Very strange. We're both using the uni of Berlin server, so that can't
be it. Do my posts appear in rec.bicycle.* ?
Dunno why I'm asking this, mind. He won't see it.
--
Keith Willoughby http://flat222.org/keith/
"Did you threaten to overrule him?"
T
Tony Raven
Guest
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
>Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
>newsreader. Strange.
Guy, Keith says:
Very strange. We're both using the uni of Berlin server, so that can't
be it. Do my posts appear in rec.bicycle.* ?
Dunno why I'm asking this, mind. He won't see it.
Tony ;-)
>
>Keith, alone among posters, does not seem to appear at all in my
>newsreader. Strange.
Guy, Keith says:
Very strange. We're both using the uni of Berlin server, so that can't
be it. Do my posts appear in rec.bicycle.* ?
Dunno why I'm asking this, mind. He won't see it.
Tony ;-)
J
Just zis Guy, you know?
Guest
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 11:07:03 +0100, Keith Willoughby
<[email protected]> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:
>Dunno why I'm asking this, mind. He won't see it.
I did this time
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
<[email protected]> wrote in message
<[email protected]>:
>Dunno why I'm asking this, mind. He won't see it.
I did this time
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
D
Dave Larrington
Guest
Keith Willoughby wrote:
> So is the cat dead, or not?
There /is/ no cat. Or spoon.
(dies)
--
Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
> So is the cat dead, or not?
There /is/ no cat. Or spoon.
(dies)
--
Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
C
Chris Malcolm
Guest
Jon Senior <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> writes:
>Tony Raven [email protected] opined the following...
>> There is not the space here for a primer on quantum theory and the
>> uncertainty principle or the fundamentals of chaos theory. I suggest you
>> read up some standard texts on the subject
>From memory, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle stated that you could
>only observe one aspect of a particle. Doing so would have an effect on
>the other aspect (Aspects = position / momentum). He simply showed that
>observation involved interaction. While you may not be able to know the
>everything about a given particle, you can predict the behaviour of a
>theoretical known particle.
>Chaos theory does not actually consitute "chaos". The high-order chaos
>is a result of low-order logic.
>The above is the simple understandings that I remember from my interests
>in the subject a few years back.
>Given full knowledge of a system, you can predict the behaviour of that
>system. The problem is obtaining full knowledge. "Intrinsically
>indeterminate" would suggest to me "unpredictable".
A simple example is an iron pendulum swinging between two magnets,
available in shops as an aid to executive decision making (one magnet
is labelled YES, the other NO). Completely deterministic, but
unpredictable because you can't measure the starting position of the
pendulum accurately enough, no matter how sophisticate your equipment.
--
Chris Malcolm [email protected] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
>Tony Raven [email protected] opined the following...
>> There is not the space here for a primer on quantum theory and the
>> uncertainty principle or the fundamentals of chaos theory. I suggest you
>> read up some standard texts on the subject
>From memory, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle stated that you could
>only observe one aspect of a particle. Doing so would have an effect on
>the other aspect (Aspects = position / momentum). He simply showed that
>observation involved interaction. While you may not be able to know the
>everything about a given particle, you can predict the behaviour of a
>theoretical known particle.
>Chaos theory does not actually consitute "chaos". The high-order chaos
>is a result of low-order logic.
>The above is the simple understandings that I remember from my interests
>in the subject a few years back.
>Given full knowledge of a system, you can predict the behaviour of that
>system. The problem is obtaining full knowledge. "Intrinsically
>indeterminate" would suggest to me "unpredictable".
A simple example is an iron pendulum swinging between two magnets,
available in shops as an aid to executive decision making (one magnet
is labelled YES, the other NO). Completely deterministic, but
unpredictable because you can't measure the starting position of the
pendulum accurately enough, no matter how sophisticate your equipment.
--
Chris Malcolm [email protected] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
Similar threads
