Schrodinger's Precious

Comments

• neatchee@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Nasty hobitses did not mention radioactive particle decay or poison vile! Cat is just dead dead dead!! Suffocated, starved, sensory deprived cat!

  source

  • MycelialMass@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    *vial

    source

    • neatchee@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      poison is vile, looking cats is vile, I see absolutely no problem here >.>

      source
  • Kolanaki@pawb.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Wait… So the radioactive material is keeping the cat alive? 🤔

    source

    • neatchee@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      no, the vile of poison and radioactive particle connected to a device that breaks the vile when it detects the particle’s decay is what makes the cat’s state probabilistic. Otherwise it’s just a cat in a box

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      it’s meant to keep schroedinger away

      source
• chaogomu@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  A box without a lid, no way to check on the cat, and no air holes. That cat is dead. It was always going to die.

  source

  • Saapas@piefed.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Going to, but there was no given time frame. So you don’t know if it is dead, yet

    source

    • Chakravanti@monero.town ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      By the time you ask the question, you are unquestionably sick, sadistic, & cruel because no one lives long enough to be otherwise.

      source
  • Goodeye8@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Are you also dead because you’re guaranteed to die eventually? It’s not an experiment of the eventual outcome but the observation of the outcome. While you’re observing the cat it has to be alive or dead, it can’t be both. But when you stop observing the certainty disappears and the cat is no longer dead or alive but both at the game time.

    source
  • panda_abyss@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Depends on the size of the box and how long it’s been

    source
• how_we_burned@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  What’s really in the box are the 12 year old girls Schroedinger used to rape

  source

  • SuspiciousCatThing@pawb.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    What

    source

    • pageflight@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      From Forbes:

      Quoting directly from Schrödinger’s diaries, Moore revealed that the physicist justified his attraction to girls by considering that, being a genius (which he believed no woman ever could be), he was naturally entitled. “It seems to be the usual thing that men of strong, genuine intellectuality are immensely attracted only by women who, forming the very beginning of the intellectual series, are as nearly connected to the preferred springs of nature as they themselves. Nothing intermediate will do, since no woman will ever approach nearer to genius by intellectual education than some unintellectuals do by birth so to speak.”

      TIL. Ugh.

      source
  • SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    He in the Trump-Einstein-Files?

    source

    • white_nrdy@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Yes and no

      source
  • csolisr@hub.azkware.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Schrödinger's Discord Kitties, as it were

    source
• ThatGuy46475@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Shouldn’t they both be right

  source

  • PugJesus@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Luckily, Bilbo remembered to add “Answer fully”

    source
  • WanderingThoughts@europe.pub ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Alive and death at the same time. It’s more like asking if the coin is heads or tails when the coin is still spinning.

    source
  • remotelove@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Not if they are both wrong.

    source
  • Bunitonito@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    No, the cat is one or the other. Radioactive half-life is the point at which there is a 50/50 chance that any single isotope had decayed, and we usually work around that in classical systems by using large sample sizes (a pile of isotopes, it’s easy to see that half of it would have decayed). But for one single isotope we aren’t observing (or the cat), we need to look at it in terms of probabilities until we observe it

    source
• HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  is the cat a qualifed observer>

  source

  • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    No, it’s a conscientious objector

    source

    • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      am i a qualified observer?

      source
• Slovene85@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  The correct answer is yes.

  source

  • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    wrong again!

    source

    • Slovene85@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      (⁠╯⁠°⁠□⁠°⁠）⁠╯⁠︵⁠ ⁠┻⁠━⁠┻

      source
• davidgro@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Eventually dead, from multiple potential causes. Especially with no lid.

  source
• jafffacakelemmy@mander.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  just shake the box up a bit. you’ll soon know if the cat inside is alive or dead!?

  source
• Bunitonito@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  … It’d be a lot easier to explain this is Schroedinger had a whole pile of boxes with cats in them

  source

  • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    oh god you just made me write the stupidest nerdiest song about schroedinger in about half a second and the chorus goes “and he’s got boxes and boxes and boxes of cats/ yeah he’s got boxes and boxes and boxes of cats” i feel so ashamed

    source

    • Bunitonito@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      ‘and half of them are dead / but what about THIS ONE? / nobody knows, nobody knowwwws’

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• sepi@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Bro the cat is dying

  source

  • flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Aren’t we all?

    source
• Xerxos@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  The cat was Schrödingers example how super positions make no sense in complex organisms. It was a counter-example, yet everyone uses it as if there would be a undead cat in the box.

  source
• MixOpossum@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Poor kitty

  source