Barack Obama, our next President
"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ... Full Story
Comments
929,181  929,200 of 1,144,329 Comments
Last updated 3 min ago
#1011542
Oct 25, 2013
We have a source that emits electron–positron pairs, with the electron sent to destination A, where there is an observer named Alice, and the positron sent to destination B, where there is an observer named Bob. According to quantum mechanics, we can arrange our source so that each emitted pair occupies a quantum state called a spin singlet. The particles are thus said to be entangled. This can be viewed as a quantum superposition of two states, which we call state I and state II. In state I, the electron has spin pointing upward along the zaxis (+z) and the positron has spin pointing downward along the zaxis (−z). In state II, the electron has spin −z and the positron has spin +z. Therefore, it is impossible (without measuring) to know the definite state of spin of either particle in the spin singlet.[12]:421–422


Since: Sep 08 22,952 Location hidden 
#1011543
Oct 25, 2013
Do you honestly think this is something new? My father died over 40 years ago of terminal cancer. Fluids were withdrawn and he was on continuous sedation until he died. The humane thing would have been to euthanize him. You must live a very sheltered life if you can't recognize that this has been a choice of death for decades. Very few people choose "Hail Mary" attempts to extend their lives ("money making interventions") when they are suffering. Go out and buy the book "Knocking at Heaven's Door" to get insight into end of life choices and how, often, the rise of technologies that are meant to extend life actually lead to more suffering at the end. IMO, more states need to adopt legislation similar to Oregon's "Death with Dignity Act: "The Death with Dignity Act allows terminally ill Oregon residents to obtain and use prescriptions from their physicians for selfadministered, lethal medications. Under the Act, ending one's life in accordance with the law does not constitute suicide. However, we use 'physicianassisted suicide' because that terminology is used in medical literature to describe ending life through the voluntary selfadministration of lethal medications prescribed by a physician for that purpose. The Death with Dignity Act legalizes PAS [physicianassisted suicide], but specifically prohibits euthanasia, where a physician or other person directly administers a medication to end another's life." http://euthanasia.procon.org/view.answers.php... 
#1011544
Oct 25, 2013
RIGHT its sonicfilth, lily, realtime, a few you can see certain patterns and know the script too many OBJECTIVE peole on this post it gets them upset and when they know a BLACK person doesnt go with the OBAMA script they lose their mind s lololololhahahahahahaha SUPPORT BARNEYS SUPPORT BARNEYS GO ONLINE BUY A KEY CHAIN SUPPORT BARNEYS 

#1011545
Oct 25, 2013
Alice now measures the spin along the zaxis. She can obtain one of two possible outcomes:+z or −z. Suppose she gets +z. According to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, the quantum state of the system collapses into state I. The quantum state determines the probable outcomes of any measurement performed on the system. In this case, if Bob subsequently measures spin along the zaxis, there is 100% probability that he will obtain −z. Similarly, if Alice gets −z, Bob will get +z.
There is, of course, nothing special about choosing the zaxis: according to quantum mechanics the spin singlet state may equally well be expressed as a superposition of spin states pointing in the x direction.[13]:318 Suppose that Alice and Bob had decided to measure spin along the xaxis. We'll call these states Ia and IIa. In state Ia, Alice's electron has spin +x and Bob's positron has spin −x. In state IIa, Alice's electron has spin −x and Bob's positron has spin +x. Therefore, if Alice measures +x, the system 'collapses' into state Ia, and Bob will get −x. If Alice measures −x, the system collapses into state IIa, and Bob will get +x. Whatever axis their spins are measured along, they are always found to be opposite. This can only be explained if the particles are linked in some way. Either they were created with a definite (opposite) spin about every axis—a "hidden variable" argument—or they are linked so that one electron "feels" which axis the other is having its spin measured along, and becomes its opposite about that one axis—an "entanglement" argument. Moreover, if the two particles have their spins measured about different axes, once the electron's spin has been measured about the xaxis (and the positron's spin about the xaxis deduced), the positron's spin about the zaxis will no longer be certain, as if (a) it knows that the measurement has taken place, or (b) it has a definite spin already, about a second axis—a hidden variable. However, it turns out that the predictions of Quantum Mechanics, which have been confirmed by experiment, cannot be explained by any hidden variable theory. This is demonstrated in Bell's theorem.[14] In quantum mechanics, the xspin and zspin are "incompatible observables", meaning the Heisenberg uncertainty principle applies to alternating measurements of them: a quantum state cannot possess a definite value for both of these variables. Suppose Alice measures the zspin and obtains +z, so that the quantum state collapses into state I. Now, instead of measuring the zspin as well, Bob measures the xspin. According to quantum mechanics, when the system is in state I, Bob's xspin measurement will have a 50% probability of producing +x and a 50% probability of x. It is impossible to predict which outcome will appear until Bob actually performs the measurement. 

#1011546
Oct 25, 2013
fk you, pusssccceee 

Since: Apr 09 6,428 Elmont, Long Island NY 
#1011547
Oct 25, 2013
first lets start with controlling health care costs by limiting medical malpractice rewards. Its already been tried and proven to be ineffective. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1... 
#1011548
Oct 25, 2013
morning, you old ja goff. wanna su ck your moms lipstick off my co ck? 

#1011549
Oct 25, 2013
BUSTED! Dem is really Bill Nyethe science guy!!!!!! 

#1011551
Oct 25, 2013
BOYCOTT OBAMACARE SUPPORT BARNEYS SUPPORT BARNEYS support BARNEYS NYC SUPPORT BARNEYS NYC SUPPORT BARNEYS NYC SUPPORT BARNEYS NYC


#1011552
Oct 25, 2013
fenris was very popular in the hispanic homosexual community till he started raping and killing ninos


Since: Jun 13 7,302 
#1011553
Oct 25, 2013
That was long before European countries proved it doesn't work. And most democrats as well as republicans didn't go along with it for the same obvious reasons the majority still don't go along with it now and didn't back then either. 
#1011554
Oct 25, 2013
Here is the crux of the matter. You might imagine that, when Bob measures the xspin of his positron, he would get an answer with absolute certainty, since prior to this he hasn't disturbed his particle at all. But Bob's positron has a 50% probability of producing +x and a 50% probability of −x—so the outcome is not certain. Bob's positron "knows" that Alice's electron has been measured, and its zspin detected, and hence B's zspin calculated, so its xspin is uncertain.
Put another way, how does Bob's positron know which way to point if Alice decides (based on information unavailable to Bob) to measure x (i.e. to be the opposite of Alice's electron's spin about the xaxis) and also how to point if Alice measures z, since it is only supposed to know one thing at a time? The Copenhagen interpretation rules that say the wave function "collapses" at the time of measurement, so there must be action at a distance (entanglement) or the positron must know more than it's supposed to (hidden variables). Here is the paradox summed up: It is one thing to say that physical measurement of the first particle's momentum affects uncertainty in its own position, but to say that measuring the first particle's momentum affects the uncertainty in the position of the other is another thing altogether. Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen asked how can the second particle "know" to have precisely defined momentum but uncertain position? Since this implies that one particle is communicating with the other instantaneously across space, i.e. faster than light, this is the "paradox". Incidentally, Bell used spin as his example, but many types of physical quantities—referred to as "observables" in quantum mechanics—can be used. The EPR paper used momentum for the observable. Experimental realisations of the EPR scenario often use photon polarization, because polarized photons are easy to prepare and measure. 

#1011555
Oct 25, 2013
The deaf, dumb, and blind can't see these things, and apparently Realtime can't either you idiot. Speaking of nuts, which squirrel is your keeper? It's the culture... 

#1011556
Oct 25, 2013
The principle of locality states that physical processes occurring at one place should have no immediate effect on the elements of reality at another location. At first sight, this appears to be a reasonable assumption to make, as it seems to be a consequence of special relativity, which states that information can never be transmitted faster than the speed of light without violating causality. It is generally believed that any theory which violates causality would also be internally inconsistent, and thus useless.[12]:427–428[15]
It turns out that the usual rules for combining quantum mechanical and classical descriptions violate the principle of locality without violating causality.[12]:427–428[15] Causality is preserved because there is no way for Alice to transmit messages (i.e. information) to Bob by manipulating her measurement axis. Whichever axis she uses, she has a 50% probability of obtaining "+" and 50% probability of obtaining "−", completely at random; according to quantum mechanics, it is fundamentally impossible for her to influence what result she gets. Furthermore, Bob is only able to perform his measurement once: there is a fundamental property of quantum mechanics, known as the "no cloning theorem", which makes it impossible for him to make a million copies of the electron he receives, perform a spin measurement on each, and look at the statistical distribution of the results. Therefore, in the one measurement he is allowed to make, there is a 50% probability of getting "+" and 50% of getting "−", regardless of whether or not his axis is aligned with Alice's. 

#1011557
Oct 25, 2013
However, the principle of locality appeals powerfully to physical intuition, and Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen were unwilling to abandon it. Einstein derided the quantum mechanical predictions as "spooky action at a distance". The conclusion they drew was that quantum mechanics is not a complete theory.[16]
In recent years, however, doubt has been cast on EPR's conclusion due to developments in understanding locality and especially quantum decoherence. The word locality has several different meanings in physics. For example, in quantum field theory "locality" means that quantum fields at different points of space do not interact with one another. However, quantum field theories that are "local" in this sense appear to violate the principle of locality as defined by EPR, but they nevertheless do not violate locality in a more general sense. Wavefunction collapse can be viewed as an epiphenomenon of quantum decoherence, which in turn is nothing more than an effect of the underlying local time evolution of the wavefunction of a system and all of its environment. Since the underlying behaviour doesn't violate local causality, it follows that neither does the additional effect of wavefunction collapse, whether real or apparent. Therefore, as outlined in the example above, neither the EPR experiment nor any quantum experiment demonstrates that fasterthanlight signaling is possible. 

#1011558
Oct 25, 2013
The Train Wreck has arrived. Garbage in. Garbage out. The Rats are jumping ship!
Obamakare creating a demand for insurance, cancelling existing healthcare policies to justify a demand for obamakare and the exchanges.. Healthcare.gov forces people to create an account, a selfincrimination surveillance program requiring detailed personal information selling yourself out before you can shop for obamakare. Trojan Horse obamakare: The teat that's stuck in the ringer and demokRATs can't back down... facebook hates obamakare: Read the hatefilled posts and see ads pandering to blacks, losers, and Hispanics... https://www.facebook.com/Healthcare.gov... "Carole Pratt facebook: I have had my own private policy that I will not be able to afford to keep once the rates triple per the letter I received from Humana. I'm not eligible for "affordable" coverage on the exchange, don't qualify for subsidy. I am living, documented proof this is system will not work for me. No propaganda here." Addie Cola facebook: I'm 26 and uninsured and I refuse to sign up for this disaster. October 21 at 1:00pm via mobile Janet King Beckett facebook: Again, the Affordable Health Care Act is not for everyone. I found that out when I discovered the BRoNZE plan would cost us $6K each in my family. And that's the bottom of the barrel plan. Good luck y'all!!! We are all screwed because of this stupid government program. Another tax on the middle class!! It's actually better obama got reelected, look like shit, get all the blame for Trojan horse obamakare and failure for the next 3 years than blaming Romney for sabotage... If not for obamakare, Ted Cruz and the Tea Party would not have been a great success.. AND... when we Tea Party Patriots take back the country in 2014, you commies, brown shirt liberals and moochers will need to learn and fish or cut bait... It's the culture... 

#1011559
Oct 25, 2013
In 1964, John Bell showed that the predictions of quantum mechanics in the EPR thought experiment are significantly different from the predictions of a particular class of hidden variable theories (the local hidden variable theories). Roughly speaking, quantum mechanics has a much stronger statistical correlation with measurement results performed on different axes than do these hidden variable theories. These differences, expressed using inequality relations known as "Bell's inequalities", are in principle experimentally detectable. Later work by Eberhard showed that the key properties of local hidden variable theories which lead to Bell's inequalities are locality and counterfactual definiteness. Any theory in which these principles apply produces the inequalities. Arthur Fine subsequently showed that any theory satisfying the inequalities can be modeled by a local hidden variable theory.
After the publication of Bell's paper, a variety of experiments were devised to test Bell's inequalities (experiments which generally rely on photon polarization measurement). All the experiments conducted to date have found behavior in line with the predictions of standard quantum mechanics theory. However, Bell's theorem does not apply to all possible philosophically realist theories. It is a common misconception that quantum mechanics is inconsistent with all notions of philosophical realism, but realist interpretations of quantum mechanics are possible, although, as discussed above, such interpretations must reject either locality or counterfactual definiteness. Mainstream physics prefers to keep locality, while striving also to maintain a notion of realism that nevertheless rejects counterfactual definiteness. Examples of such mainstream realist interpretations are the consistent histories interpretation and the transactional interpretation. Fine's work showed that, taking locality as a given, there exist scenarios in which two statistical variables are correlated in a manner inconsistent with counterfactual definiteness, and that such scenarios are no more mysterious than any other, despite the inconsistency with counterfactual definiteness seeming 'counterintuitive'. Violation of locality is difficult to reconcile with special relativity, and is thought to be incompatible with the principle of causality. On the other hand the Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics keeps counterfactual definiteness while introducing a conjectured nonlocal mechanism in form of the 'quantum potential', defined as one of the terms of the Schrödinger equation. Some workers in the field have also attempted to formulate hidden variable theories that exploit loopholes in actual experiments, such as the assumptions made in interpreting experimental data, although no theory has been proposed that can reproduce all the results of quantum mechanics. There are also individual EPRlike experiments that have no local hidden variables explanation. Examples have been suggested by David Bohm and by Lucien Hardy. 

#1011560
Oct 25, 2013
Einstein's hope for a purely algebraic theory[edit]The Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics hypothesizes that the state of the universe evolves smoothly through time with no collapsing of quantum wavefunctions. One problem for the Copenhagen interpretation is to precisely define wavefunction collapse. Einstein maintained that quantum mechanics is physically incomplete and logically unsatisfactory. In "The Meaning of Relativity," Einstein wrote, "One can give good reasons why reality cannot at all be represented by a continuous field. From the quantum phenomena it appears to follow with certainty that a finite system of finite energy can be completely described by a finite set of numbers (quantum numbers). This does not seem to be in accordance with a continuum theory and must lead to an attempt to find a purely algebraic theory for the representation of reality. But nobody knows how to find the basis for such a theory." If time, space, and energy are secondary features derived from a substrate below the Planck scale, then Einstein's hypothetical algebraic system might resolve the EPR paradox (although Bell's theorem would still be valid). Edward Fredkin in the Fredkin Finite Nature Hypothesis has suggested an informational basis for Einstein's hypothetical algebraic system. If physical reality is totally finite, then the Copenhagen interpretation might be an approximation to an information processing system below the Planck scale.


#1011561
Oct 25, 2013
Acceptable theories" and the experiment[edit]According to the present view of the situation, quantum mechanics flatly contradicts Einstein's philosophical postulate that any acceptable physical theory must fulfill "local realism".
In the EPR paper (1935) the authors realised that quantum mechanics was inconsistent with their assumptions, but Einstein nevertheless thought that quantum mechanics might simply be augmented by hidden variables (i.e. variables which were, at that point, still obscure to him), without any other change, to achieve an acceptable theory. He pursued these ideas for over twenty years until the end of his life, in 1955. In contrast, John Bell, in his 1964 paper, showed that quantum mechanics and the class of hidden variable theories Einstein favored[17] would lead to different experimental results: different by a factor of 3⁄2 for certain correlations. So the issue of "acceptability", up to that time mainly concerning theory, finally became experimentally decidable. There are many Bell test experiments, e.g. those of Alain Aspect and others. They support the predictions of quantum mechanics rather than the class of hidden variable theories supported by Einstein.[2] According to Karl Popper these experiments showed that the class of "hidden variables" Einstein believed in is erroneous.[ 

#1011562
Oct 25, 2013
BOYCOTT OBAMACARE SUPPORT BARNEYS NYC BOYCOTT OBAMACARE SUPPORT BARNEYS NYC SUPPORT BARNEYS NYC SUPPORT BARNEYS NYC BOYCOTT OBAMACARE nyc Support BARNEYS BOYCOTT OBAMACARE 

Add your comments below
Chicago Discussions
Title  Updated  Last By  Comments 

Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09)  15 min  market indicators  98,698 
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09)  1 hr  WelbyMD  180,965 
Song Titles Only (group/artist in parenthesis m... (Mar '10)  1 hr  _Zoey_  7,856 
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09)  1 hr  Mandela  68,801 
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08)  2 hr  Eric  70,629 
Once slowmoving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08)  2 hr  ritedownthemiddle  48,595 
4 injured in separate Thanksgiving Day shootings  2 hr  reality is a crutch  1 
Find what you want!
Search Chicago Forum Now
Copyright © 2014 Topix LLC