**** well I never new that ****

[is that my watch]

well I love useless facts and love to read new ones and theory's and quantum mechanics and all that stuff I won't say I always full understand them. because I don't always. but I like to learn something new and I like thinking out side the box I have always been the sort who find problem solving fun maybe as my parent were of the age of make do and mend coming out of the end of the second world war.. that if something don't work so you try to fix it or utilize the parts to make something else that does work.


so I love reading thing that you go well that's cool say for example have you read about schrodinger's cat I knew nothing of it till a episode of the big bang theory and thought well now that makes sense here is the theory


Schrödinger's cat..


is a thought experiment about quantum physics. Erwin Schrödinger suggested it in 1935, in reaction to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics.


Schrödinger wrote:


One can even set up quite ridiculous cases. A cat is locked up in a steel chamber, along with the following device (which must be secured against direct interference by the cat): in a Geiger counter, there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small, that perhaps in the course of the hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges and through a relay releases a hammer that shatters a small flask of hydrocyanic acid. If one has left this entire system to itself for an hour, one would say that the cat still lives if meanwhile no atom has decayed. The psi-function of the entire system would express this by having in it the living and dead cat (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts.


It is typical of these cases that an indeterminacy originally restricted to the atomic domain becomes transformed into macroscopic indeterminacy, which can then be resolved by direct observation. That prevents us from so naively accepting as valid a "blurred model" for representing reality. In itself, it would not embody anything unclear or contradictory. There is a difference between a shaky or out-of-focus photograph and a snapshot of clouds and fog banks.


In simple terms, Schrödinger stated that if you place a cat and a vial of poison in a box and sealed it, you would not know if the cat was dead or alive until you opened the box, so that until the box was opened, the cat was (in a sense) both "dead and alive". And the point being that that is how scientific theory works. You don't know if the theory is right or wrong until it is tested and proved.[3]




also there are the


Occam's (or Ockham's) razor which has been reinvented many times.




Probability theory I just find fascinating.




I was reading about quantum entanglement just by shear chance the other day and found it interesting.






Quantum entanglement.






Quantum entanglement is a physical phenomenon that occurs when pairs or groups of particles are generated or interact in ways such that the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently—instead, a quantum state may be given for the system as a whole.


Measurements of physical properties such as position, momentum, spin, polarization, etc. performed on entangled particles are found to be appropriately correlated. For example, if a pair of particles is generated in such a way that their total spin is known to be zero, and one particle is found to have clockwise spin on a certain axis, then the spin of the other particle, measured on the same axis, will be found to be counter-clockwise. Because of the nature of quantum measurement, however, this behaviour gives rise to effects that can appear paradoxical: any measurement of a property of a particle can be seen as acting on that particle (e.g. by collapsing a number of superposed states); and in the case of entangled particles, such action must be on the entangled system as a whole. It thus appears that one particle of an entangled pair "knows" what measurement has been performed on the other, and with what outcome, even though there is no known means for such information to be communicated between the particles, which at the time of measurement may be separated by arbitrarily large distances.


Such phenomena were the subject of a 1935 paper by Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen,[1] and several papers by Erwin Schrödinger shortly thereafter,[2][3] describing what came to be known as the EPR paradox. Einstein and others considered such behaviour to be impossible, as it violated the local realist view of causality (Einstein referred to it as "spooky action at a distance"),[4] and argued that the accepted formulation of quantum mechanics must therefore be incomplete. Later, however, the counter-intuitive predictions of quantum mechanics were verified experimentally.[5] Experiments have been performed involving measuring the polarization or spin of entangled particles in different directions, which—by producing violations of Bell's inequality—demonstrate statistically that the local realist view cannot be correct. This has been shown to occur even when the measurements are performed more quickly than light could travel between the sites of measurement: there is no light-speed or slower influence that can pass between the entangled particles.[6] Recent experiments have measured entangled particles within less than one part in 10,000 of the light travel time between them.[7] According to the formalism of quantum theory, the effect of measurement happens instantly.[8][9] It is not possible, however, to use this effect to transmit classical information at faster-than-light speeds[10] (see Faster-than-light ? Quantum mechanics).


Quantum entanglement is an area of extremely active research by the physics community, and its effects have been demonstrated experimentally with photons, electrons, molecules the size of buckyballs,[11][12] and even small diamonds.[13][14] Research is also focused on the utilization of entanglement effects in communication and computation.








as I said some of it starts to go over my head but it don't stop me reading it and for matter enjoying it so I thought other's might too and could add any of there favourite


theory's / quantum / mad ball ideas to the mix.






itmy.

[OhDark30]

Ockham VOR is a navaid that defines the southwesterly hold (or 'stack') for airliners going into Heathrow


from http://www.trevord.com/navaids/ock.htm

[is that my watch]

Ockham VOR is a navaid that defines the southwesterly hold (or 'stack') for airliners going into Heathrow


from http://www.trevord.com/navaids/ock.htm

cool I bet you got lot's of cool info loved reading some of your threads across the road as they was always jam pack full of interesting info

[OhDark30]

cool I bet you got lot's of cool info loved reading some of your threads across the road as they was always jam pack full of interesting info

Cheers, is!
When I've updated my IT setup I'll do some stuff here on IWL about some of my Russians and pilot watches
At the mo I can do pictures & short text from my phone. It becomes painful if actual paragraphs are required
Look forward to seeing what quirky stuff this thread turns up

[is that my watch]

Cheers, is!
When I've updated my IT setup I'll do some stuff here on IWL about some of my Russians and pilot watches
At the mo I can do pictures & short text from my phone. It becomes painful if actual paragraphs are required
Look forward to seeing what quirky stuff this thread turns up

hope so your Russian one's was great and the Russian sub could do with some more input

yes I bought it up here as when I was reading about the quantum entanglement theories it sound very similar to I.W.L as it is the members that make it whole and vice versa and thought others might see the similarities too

[Jeannie]

Here's a cat related theory for you. My ability to type a reply is directly related to the position of the cat in my lap during the activity.


Jeannie

[Der Amf]

The rules of harmony and counterpoint in classical music (how you make one instrument's line relate to the others) that basically ruled from 1400 to 1900 where invented by the English. The French were suitably impressed and developed the style and from there it spread everywhere

How music sounded before:

http://<a href="http://youtu.be/AKpe...KpexxzR4Ak</a>

How it sounded with these rules

http://<a href="http://youtu.be/VSMu...SMuFpIRg_0</a>

Music historians label the first Mediaeval and the second Renaissance, though I doubt there was much neugeboren in England circa 1400

[Jeannie]

I used to belong to a writers' group called Schrodinger's Pet Shop.

Jeannie

[Nokie]

Kitty has some serious "attitude" eyes in trying to stare you down.....

[is that my watch]

The Copenhagen interpretation.

The Copenhagen interpretation is a loosely-knit informal collection of axioms or doctrines that attempt to express in everyday language the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics. The interpretation was largely devised in the years 1925–1927 by Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg. It is fundamental to the Copenhagen interpretation that the results of experiments must be reported in ordinary language, not relying on arcane terminology or words that refer only to clusters of mathematical symbols.


The fundamental axiom of the Copenhagen interpretation is the "postulate of the quantum", that subatomic events are only perceptible as indeterministic physically discontinuous transitions between discrete stationary states. Various consequences are inferred from this postulate of unpredictable physical discontinuity.


Another axiom is that incompatible conjugate properties cannot be measured with arbitrary precision at the same time. This is expressed in detail as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.


A major reason why interpretation of the quantum mechanical formalism is needed is that such interpretation provides an account in general not separable in time and space, because the domain of the wave function (the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics) is configuration space (a schematic description), not the "real" physical space–time familiar to the human mind.[1]


The Copenhagen interpretation also attempts to reconcile the apparent dualism of "wave" and "particle" in a fashion suitable to human understanding.


The presence in daily language of the term 'quantum leap' bears witness to the extent to which the concept of the quantum has penetrated the popular mind.


Among objections some have offered to the Copenhagen Interpretation are the following;


It consists of unverified speculation which may be overly dogmatic as to the unpredictability of nature, or overly emphatic as to the discontinuity of change.
There is little consensus as to the physical meaning of wave–particle duality.
Some research has called into question whether incompatible conjugate properties can indeed never be defined for the same time.