• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

Science & Technology Quiz 2: The one with the catchy title.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well not really, the answer is still that the cat is both dead and alive until the box is open. Its not just that we don't know wether its dead or alive until the box is open, as the states of the atom are superimposed. The only difference between the different interpretations is what happens when one state is picked out: does everything suddenly 'flip' to being that way (copenhagen interpretation), or do two parallel universes appear (many-world interpretation).
 
Well not really, the answer is still that the cat is both dead and alive until the box is open. Its not just that we don't know wether its dead or alive until the box is open, as the states of the atom are superimposed. The only difference between the different interpretations is what happens when one state is picked out: does everything suddenly 'flip' to being that way (copenhagen interpretation), or do two parallel universes appear (many-world interpretation).
Realism and counterfactual definiteness are somewhat subjective. QM in general doesn't say that the cat is both dead and alive until the box is open, it says that there is a 50% probability that, upon opening, you will find a dead cat in the box. QM itself doesn't say anything about whether or not the cat is actually dead or alive before the box is open. That's the job of the interpretation. CI and MWI are the most popular interpretations of QM, and they both say explicitly that we can't know whether the cat is dead or alive. It does NOT say that the cat is both dead and alive, or neither dead nor alive, before the box is opened. However, there are interpretations of QM that say that the cat's fate was determined when the poison was or was not released, and since then has always been either dead or alive. In otherwords, the cat being dead or alive is independent of whether or not we open the box, even though the observation happens when the box is opened. Furthermore, CI states that observation causes wavefunction collapse, but doesn't fully define what actually constitutes an "observation". Some interpretations of QM say that the observation occurs when the particle hits the detector, either because the environment is doing the observation, or because the cat is doing the observation, or whatever.

If you were also inside the box you'd probably know whether or not the cat was dead or alive before anyone opened the box. So what does observation mean again? :p
 
Well I observe that its midnight, my head hurts and QT has never made any sense to start with, so I will bow down to you on this one. But I'll be back ;).
 
Actually, I now see where the confusion is. I assume classical physics biases us to the Copenhagen interpretation, of which this is:

Well not really, the answer is still that the cat is both dead and alive until the box is open.

but the alternative idea is still valid

or do two parallel universes appear (many-world interpretation)

where opening the box merely splits reality into two branches, one where opening the box reveals a dead cat, and a second reality where the box reveals a live cat. 'Course realists probably won't ever like a many-worlds interpretation until they encounter a Stargate or something. Similar to the way an agnostic feels about the God question.


So really it's not such a good question, unless you ask it terms of the two dominant interpretations, as the question itself is not really resolved to date.
 
Somebody post a new question :p
 
No, I imagine it has to do with the temperature at which certain atoms fuse.... or something along those lines. It's got to be higher than the fusion point of Hydrogen, right? Could it be the fusion point of Iron?...

Of course, I have no idea what that value would be :crazyeye:
 
What is the highest (possible) temperature?

err....we don't know, if there even is such a temperature? (apart from the practical limit Mise mentioned). The standard model breaks down long before that and anything beyond is pure speculation.
 
Not quite. It's worth considering what we're refering too, when we talk about temperature. And thus what prequisites are required for 'Temperature'.
 
Well, temperature is the kinetic energy of atoms. Since atoms are not capable of moving faster than the speed of light, that should provide some upper bound. One could thusly work out a the kinetic energy of the heaviest known atom at say, 0.99c, and then convert that to a temperature.

Although that doesn't involve any heat flow, so that might not be the right idea.
 
Well, temperature is the kinetic energy of atoms. Since atoms are not capable of moving faster than the speed of light, that should provide some upper bound. One could thusly work out a the kinetic energy of the heaviest known atom at say, 0.99c, and then convert that to a temperature.

Although that doesn't involve any heat flow, so that might not be the right idea.

Although the speed of an atom is limited by the speed of light, the kinetic energy is not limited in any way (as far as we know).
 
Although the speed of an atom is limited by the speed of light, the kinetic energy is not limited in any way (as far as we know).

Kinetic energy is a function of velocity. If velocity is capped, and so is mass, then there is an upperbound to KE.
 
A black hole. If you pump enough energy into a specific mass, it will eventually turn into a black hole.
 
The temperature slightly after the big bang?
 
Kinetic energy is a function of velocity. If velocity is capped, and so is mass, then there is an upperbound to KE.

No. Kinetic energy has a singularity at light speed. That means kinetic energy becomes infinite at light speed. Therefore you can get any value for it, if the particle is close enough to light speed.
 
A black hole. If you pump enough energy into a specific mass, it will eventually turn into a black hole.

I'm going to give you this. :goodjob:

The actual number is 1.4×10^32 Kelvin. Or 100 million million million million million degrees. Or 1 Planck Temperature (TP). In comparison, the centre of our sun chugs along at 15 million degrees K (15 x 10^6) and silicon can be created by fusion at 1 billion K (10^9). Planck temperature, then, is very toasty indeed.

At this temperature particles have been skirting light speed for quite some time. At 1.0 x 10^10 K the affects of special relativity start to kick in. Particles have started to approach light speed, but they also become more massive. Thus temperature continues to rise. At At 1.4 x 10^32 K the whole shenanigan starts to break down. Such staggering densities obtain that any further increase would lead most particles of matter to become their own black hole. Some would just dissolve straight into energy. Ergo, it's nonsensical to talk about anything 'hotter' then Planck temperature, because matter can't exist at that level.

Other strange things happen around this temperature. Our understanding of Space and Time somewhat collapses. The fundamental forces are essentially re-unified, as the gravitational attraction between particles is on the same order of magnitued at the nuclear and electromagnetic. Fun times, all in all.

The temperature slightly after the big bang?

Correct. For about one Planck time. Or 5.4X10^-44 seconds.
 
I guess I didn't really answer the question, since I answered what would happen after the hottest temperature (e.g., "what's the hottest liquid water can be at STP?" "Steam!"). Still, I'll run with it.

Anyone want to explain the difference between HDL and LDL scores, if you get a blood test?
 
High Density and Low Density lipoproteins

since protein is more dense than lipids
more LDL means more cholesterol, therefore worse
more HDL is better as it is more protein based
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom