Quantum Physics

[Francesco_from_Rome]

Yes.

I'd say: perhaps.

 

[Sirius Glass]

So is the cat alive or dead?

Yes.

Both at the same time at once together repetitively and redundantly.

 

[ME Super]

So is the cat alive or dead?

Yes.

Theo, you may more right than you know. In Boolean Algebra, there are three operators from which all other Boolean operators can be derived. They are AND, OR, and NOT.

AND works this way: If ANY value of the AND operation is false, the result is false. It can be true only if ALL inputs are true.

OR works this way: If ANY value of the OR operation is true, the result is true. It can be false only if ALL inputs are true.

NOT works this way: If the input is true, the output is false. If the input is false, the output is true.

So if "the cat is alive or dead" were a Boolean operation, and since alive and dead are opposites, at least one of the statements "The cat is alive" or "The cat is dead" will be true. And since "true OR false" always evaluates to "true", your answer of "Yes" is techncially correct.

 

[Arklatexian]

I dunno, Where do all the flies go in Winter ?

When I was in Northern Bavaria one Christmas, they all went to the ceiling of the room where we were sleeping. I don't know where they go here in the U.S. South. It doesn't get as cold here as it did in Germany. Is this what Quantum Physics is all about. I'm disappointed.......Regards!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Theo, you may more right than you know. In Boolean Algebra, there are three operators from which all other Boolean operators can be derived. They are AND, OR, and NOT.

AND works this way: If ANY value of the AND operation is false, the result is false. It can be true only if ALL inputs are true.

OR works this way: If ANY value of the OR operation is true, the result is true. It can be false only if ALL inputs are true.

NOT works this way: If the input is true, the output is false. If the input is false, the output is true.

So if "the cat is alive or dead" were a Boolean operation, and since alive and dead are opposites, at least one of the statements "The cat is alive" or "The cat is dead" will be true. And since "true OR false" always evaluates to "true", your answer of "Yes" is techncially correct.

In quantum physics Schrodinger's cat is both dead and alive at the same time until the true state of the cat's health is known.

 

[snapguy]

The cat is dead and the flies all went to Tucson Arizona for the winter.

 

[Vaughn]

"When it comes to atoms, language can be used only as in poetry. The poet, too, is not nearly so concerned with describing facts as with creating images." Niels Bohr

There was another quote: "Atoms are not things." but I could not track it down, but it might have been Bohr again, as he also said:

"Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real."

So put away those models of atoms and molecules we played with in school! I did my best to get through the Tao of Physics many years ago. I will leave that higher air for those who can breathe there. Those two quotes above sure set me back...they are old, so perhaps atoms are real again. But I am always amazed at that way we can feel so secure just by applying terminology to concepts that we do not understand...yet, anyway.

 

[pdeeh]

A nice counterpoint to Bohr is Wittgenstein's proposition "The world is the totality of facts, not of things.

A counterpoint, of course, is not the same as a refutation, or even a disagreement ...

 

[Francesco_from_Rome]

"When it comes to atoms, language can be used only as in poetry. The poet, too, is not nearly so concerned with describing facts as with creating images." Niels Bohr

There was another quote: "Atoms are not things." but I could not track it down, but it might have been Bohr again, as he also said:

"Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real."

So put away those models of atoms and molecules we played with in school! I did my best to get through the Tao of Physics many years ago. I will leave that higher air for those who can breathe there. Those two quotes above sure set me back...they are old, so perhaps atoms are real again. But I am always amazed at that way we can feel so secure just by applying terminology to concepts that we do not understand...yet, anyway.

None the less, they are quite real:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120703172543.htm

Keep in mind that atoms are quite big by high energy physics standards. Compare with electrons which are as close to the idealized geometric point as we know...


Francesco

 

[henpe]

In quantum physics Schrodinger's cat is both dead and alive at the same time until the true state of the cat's health is known.

When I insert a fresh roll in my camera, the roll is full of potentially wonderful shots, but also with real crappy ones. It is not until I press the shutter release button that I force the current frame to realise a state (wonderful/crappy). Unfortunatley Schrodinger is seldom kind to me and when I develop my film I am always amazed how unlycky I must have been to have all my frames in the same state, crappy that is...

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Theo, you may more right than you know. In Boolean Algebra...

I'm an old engineer and have a degree in Mathematics and Computer Science. But way back then we had only 256 numbers, so things were easier.

In quantum physics Schrodinger's cat is both dead and alive at the same time until the true state of the cat's health is known.

The Wikipedia article for this topic is decent:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrödinger's_cat

and also includes a photo with the description: "Real-size cat figure in the garden of Huttenstrasse 30, Zurich, where Erwin Schrödinger lived 1921 – 1926. Depending on the light conditions, the cat appears either alive or not."

 

[blansky]

When I insert a fresh roll in my camera, the roll is full of potentially wonderful shots, but also with real crappy ones. It is not until I press the shutter release button that I force the current frame to realise a state (wonderful/crappy). Unfortunatley Schrodinger is seldom kind to me and when I develop my film I am always amazed how unlycky I must have been to have all my frames in the same state, crappy that is...

In reality, all the great shots are already on the film when you load it.

When you go out to shoot if you shoot the right thing and it overlays perfectly across the image already on the film, you get a great shot.

If however you shoot the wrong thing, then the underlying image is destroyed forever and you are left with the terrible shot you made.

You see, everything in life is an illusion except the things you cannot see.

 

[semi-ambivalent]

I am able to understand physics up the the point Newton died.

Yes. Newton and Euclid are all you need. That and a good pocket knife.

s-a

 

[wy2l]

I just remember the words of my freshman physics teacher, who when asked why we didn't study relativistic physics, answered:

"Look, Sunny - most of you will be civil engineers, and we don't accelerate too many bridges to the speed of light!"

 

[benjiboy]

I've managed to be a photographer fairly successfully for more than sixty years without knowing a damned thing about quantum physics, my eldest son however is government physicist who I just asked on the phone if he thought studying the subject would improve my photography, and he laughed and told me for practical purposes not to worry about it.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Yes, I think it does. Light jumps from one quantum level of response to another without hitting some of the levels in between. If we had eyes like cats do we could see these levels, but, alas we do not have those response activators so we miss those levels but some of us fill in those shades of gray we are missing and I think our brains do fill them in for us after a while. The zone system jumps from one level to another, missing the levels in between which most surely are there and we mostly miss them. some do; some don't and I suspect that accounts for those who truly prefer B&W over color, like me. Its a hard thing to prove and harder to see and is not easily explained to anyone and I was afraid that one day it would come up. The mathematics would frighten most PhD candidates.but there they are anyhow. Have fun with this one!

Logan

In general the transactions between energy levels occurs to quickly to be seen. However sometimes a transition to a lower level involve a "forbidden" transition. This is what happens with luminescent substances like zinc sulfide. Visible light kicks electrons into higher levels. When the light is removed most of the electrons rapidly return to the ground state. But a few involve a forbidden transition. Electrons in such a level become trapped and the only return to the ground state is by quantum "tunneling" through the barrier. This requires time and the light released is emitted slowly. So in the case of zinc we see the solid glow after the light is removed. The output diminishes exponentially during this time.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I've managed to be a photographer fairly successfully for more than sixty years without knowing a damned thing about quantum physics, my eldest son however is government physicist who I just asked on the phone if he thought studying the subject would improve my photography, and he laughed and told me for practical purposes not to worry about it.

Yep. One does not need to have a broken leg to understand that a broken leg hurts. Even a cat's leg.

 

[blockend]

Quantum physics is fascinating. The double slit experiment shows the observer changes the way light behaves. It suggests that consciousness, not matter, is primary. If true, the universe and everything in it exists entirely in our own minds.

 

[cliveh]

So does anyone have an example of how quantum mathematics can be applied to a chemical photographic capture or process to show an informative result (advancement of capture or process)?

 

[Francesco_from_Rome]

So does anyone have an example of how quantum mathematics can be applied to a chemical photographic capture or process to show an informative result (advancement of capture or process)?

You mean, apart from explaining the "chemical photographic capture"?

Francesco

 

[Vaughn]

A nice counterpoint to Bohr is Wittgenstein's proposition "The world is the totality of facts, not of things.

A counterpoint, of course, is not the same as a refutation, or even a disagreement ...

Counterpoint? It sounds like it might be the same thing to me, just said slightly different.

 

[Vaughn]

So does anyone have an example of how quantum mathematics can be applied to a chemical photographic capture or process to show an informative result (advancement of capture or process)?

Can't think of the name of the process, but it creates color by the interference or something like that of waves of light.

Francesco: is it actually the atom that is casting the shadow, or is it a field of probabilities? No need to answer -- above my head anyhow!

Edited to add: The process is the Lippmann Process:

In Lippmann's method a glass plate was coated with a "grainless" (ultra fine grain[4]) colour-sensitive film using the Albumen Process containing potassium bromide, dried, sensitized in the silver bath, washed, flowed with cyanine solution, dried and then brought into optical contact with a reflection surface; the back of the plate is then flowed in a plate holder of special form with pure mercury and exposed in the camera through the glass side of the plate, so that the light rays which strike the transparent light-sensitive film, are reflected in themselves and create interference phenomena of stationary waves.[1] The standing waves cause exposure of the emulsion in diffraction patterns. The developed and fixated diffraction patterns constitute a Bragg condition in which diffuse, white light is scattered in a specular fashion and undergo constructive interference in accordance to Bragg's law.[5] The result is an image having very similar colours as the original using a black & white photographic process.

(Wikipedia)

So I do not know if Lippman used quantum mathematics to figure out this process, but it was enough to win him the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1908.

 

[RobC]

Since we're into Nobel prize winners, my favourite quote of all time is from Konrad Lorentz...

Every man gets a narrower and narrower field of knowledge in which he must be an expert in order to compete with other people. The specialist knows more and more about less and less and finally knows everything about nothing.
Konrad Lorenz

 

[Bill Burk]

So does anyone have an example of how quantum mathematics can be applied to a chemical photographic capture or process to show an informative result (advancement of capture or process)?

No. I could help you find videos explaining how to measure the speed of light using a microwave oven and a bar of chocolate.

But I am also curious and would pose the question: "Do the currently accepted theories about latent image formation and development use quantum mechanics to explain how it all works?"

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Leica uses quantum mechanics heavily , the anomalous partial dispersion glass only designed with electron clouds resonance. It gives abnormal dispersion and finally the nonlinear transition of grades , shadows - less the light , higher the nonlinearity - and grains.
That gives the three dimensional effect at the portraits. Well that is discovered by Leonardo and been called sfumato. You cant buy Mona Lisa for couple of hundreds of billion dollars but you can buy a Leica for 500 dollars. I can understand the people lives in rural places gives dime to it. I explained that with 10 pdf articles and in 70000 members , 3 of them looked. Come on forget that , lets altogether thank to Ilford for their commitment or lets pray to Jesuis for ferrania , come on people , you have no idea about art .