quantum leap

Discuss word origins and meanings.

quantum leap

Post by dalehileman » Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:26 pm

While there's no question but what quantum events are unpredictable, it's doubtful we have any control over them. Thus, even though the future is indeterminate and the quantum event spontaneous (and perhaps even uncaused), if thereafter the universe nonetheless follows consistent laws of cause and effect we must draw the bleak conclusion that free will is impossible. Anyone who doubts this should reflect on his past attempts to break a bad habit
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

quantum leap

Post by Phil White » Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:01 pm

Shelley wrote: I'll dip into that large stein of heisenberg, now, please.
After my toes have been in it??
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Phil White
Non sum felix lepus

quantum leap

Post by Erik_Kowal » Wed Jul 27, 2005 10:21 pm

I fear Che's bladder is close to bursting once again.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: -- Looking up a word? Try OneLook's metadictionary (--> definitions) and reverse dictionary (--> terms based on your definitions)8-- Contribute favourite diary entries, quotations and more here8 -- Find new postings easily with Active Topics8-- Want to research a word? Get essential tips from experienced researcher Ken Greenwald

quantum leap

Post by spiritus » Thu Jul 28, 2005 1:12 am

Erik_Kowal wrote: Gertrude Stein laid out her own uncertainty principle:

"The minute you or anybody else knows what you are you are not it, you are what you or anybody else knows you are and as everything in living is made up of finding out what you are it is extraordinarily difficult really not to know what you are and yet to be that thing."
Kinda' sounds like what Descartes said.

I'm referring to Tony 'Psuedosopher' Descartes, of Newark, New Jersey of course:

"I think, therefore you are what I think you are; and you just don't know it, because you think you're me."
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Che Baraka

quantum leap

Post by Ken Greenwald » Thu Jul 28, 2005 4:47 am

Che, A little more linear thinking might not only help pull you out of your stupor, but it would also avoid splash on your toilet seat, the raising of which I assume would be too straightforward an act for you to consider whilst cleansing your bladder. (&lt)
___________________

Ken G – July 27, 2005
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

quantum leap

Post by Ken Greenwald » Fri Jul 29, 2005 4:05 pm

Che, Circular thinking and a lack of attention to facts and detail probably have their place somewhere, but this is supposed to be the Language Discussion Forums area, whose categories are Word and Phrase Origins, Usage and Writing, and Miscellaneous. None of these is a creative writing section in which the spewing out of copious personal fantasies and misinformation would be marginally acceptable. This forum area does actually require research, logical thinking and analysis, and stream-of-consciousness vaporings aren't appropriate for it. I suggest that you either consider posting to the Addict’s Corner or No Wait. Don’t Tell Me areas of the Beyond Words section, or, preferably, that you find another website altogether on which to strut your overweening ego.
___________________

Ken G - July 29, 2005
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

quantum leap

Post by spiritus » Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:31 pm

Even the demands of an overweening ego must allow for the focusing of our attention upon the countless activities of interest available during summer vacation in New York.

Though our down time was well spent, we must honestly admit, to having missed Erik Koval's sparkling wit, keen intelligence, and charming personality.

We return from our haitus eagerly looking forward to the general frivolarity and merry high jinks offered by WW, only to find Ken's "Quantum Leap" has landed in the mud.


Ken Greenwald wrote:
Che, Circular thinking and a lack of attention to facts and detail probably have their place somewhere, but this is supposed to be the Language Discussion Forums area, whose categories are Word and Phrase Origins, Usage and Writing, and Miscellaneous. None of these is a creative writing section in which the spewing out of copious personal fantasies and misinformation would be marginally acceptable.
___________________

Ken G - July 29, 2005
Since one can not step twice into the same river, muddied or clear, we will remove the debris damming the thread, by-way of these quantum complementary observations:

1)Circular thinking and attention to facts and details, are not mutually exclusive.

2)Creative writing is not only an attribute of good fiction, but is always evident in the best non-fiction writing.

Out of respect for our readers and because of our appreciation for the WW site in general, and this subject in particular, we deleted our posts that might have contributed to the thread's floudering in the dirt.

Only the author of this muck can reveal its buried meaning:
This forum area does actually require research, logical thinking and analysis, and stream-of-consciousness vaporings aren't appropriate for it. I suggest that you either consider posting to the Addict’s Corner or No Wait. Don’t Tell Me areas of the Beyond Words section, or, preferably, that you find another website altogether on which to strut your overweening ego.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Che Baraka

quantum leap

Post by Erik_Kowal » Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:43 pm

But now everyone else is going to have to go back and delete their posts also, in order to preserve the coherence of this thread and the rhetorical balance of insult and riposte. In this manner, Che, we are all doomed to revert to our starting-point through the domino effect that you are responsible for initiating. Man, have you no consideration for others?
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: -- Looking up a word? Try OneLook's metadictionary (--> definitions) and reverse dictionary (--> terms based on your definitions)8-- Contribute favourite diary entries, quotations and more here8 -- Find new postings easily with Active Topics8-- Want to research a word? Get essential tips from experienced researcher Ken Greenwald

quantum leap

Post by spiritus » Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:51 pm

"During the course of our discussion of "calibrated"; Janus word? , it was mentioned that QUANTUM was a Janus word. I protested that it wasn’t, based on my familiarity with the word in quantum mechanics. However, it was pointed out to me how the word has taken on new meaning as a result of its use in the expression ‘QUANTUM LEAP.’ And in light of that new meaning and a lack of understanding of what the original 'quantum' really means (&lt), I agree that ‘quantum’ could be construed to be a Janus word".

------- Ken Greenwald



In light of the meaning implied when we state, "I smell a rat ( or weasel )", and understanding what a lack of intellectual honesty and courage really means (&lt), we provide this "dated" ( 1619 ) definition from Merriam-Webster's Unabridged Dictionary:

QUANTUM 1619, "one's share or portion," from L. quantum "how much," neut. sing. of quantus "how great" (see quantity).

1.) QUANTUM - adjective a : any of the very small increments or parcels into which many forms of energy are subdivided b : any of the small subdivisions of a quantized physical magnitude (as magnetic moment)

2.) QUANTUM - noun LARGE, SIGNIFICANT <a quantum improvement>
( Introduced in physics by Max Planck, 1900; reinforced by Einstein, 1905.)

noun
QUANTUM LEAP: an abrupt change, sudden increase, or dramatic advance.( "Quantum leap", first recorded, 1970. )

noun
QUANTUM JUMP: an abrupt transition (as of an electron, an atom, or a molecule) from one discrete energy state to another
( "Quantum jump" is first recorded, 1955. )
Quantum, beginning with its original usage and origin ( 1619 ), has always been a Janus word; because its adjective function's meaning is an antonym of its noun function's meaning. This generally accepted fact does not require a quantum leap; quantum jump; or Ken's agreement as validation.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Che Baraka

quantum leap

Post by spiritus » Mon Aug 15, 2005 12:10 am

Erik_Kowal wrote: But now everyone else is going to have to go back and delete their posts also, in order to preserve the coherence of this thread and the rhetorical balance of insult and riposte. In this manner, Che, we are all doomed to revert to our starting-point through the domino effect that you are responsible for initiating. Man, have you no consideration for others?
Erik,
In truth, I did give considerable thought to the point you raised. Only after careful review, did I conclude that several of my posts contributed little to the subject of the thread; and it is my consideration for "others" that prompted their removal. Call me silly, but I actually think that by having done so, something of value may be gained by all.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Che Baraka

quantum leap

Post by spiritus » Mon Aug 15, 2005 12:58 am

Speaking of "decoherence"; quantum and otherwise:

Spiritus: "In quantum ( a Janus word ) physics, the instrument used for observation may be altered by that which is observed..."


Ken Greenwald: "Che, I noticed these blunders of yours some time ago, but just discovered my sticky note reminding me to post a reply.

In my humble opinion, I think you ought to stick to your day job and hold off making erroneous pontifications on quantum mechanics! (&lt)

1) You’ve actually got the above story backwards. In quantum physics it is not the instrument that is altered by that which is observed, it is that which is observed is altered by the instrument.

We respectfully suggest that any "observer/reader", prior to interpretating the "story" as "backward", take into account these considerations:

1. The "whole story" of quantum measurement. ( Commonly referred to as "The Measurement Problem". )

2. Quantum physic's varied contextual definitions of; "observation", "instrument", "object", and "altered". ( In this respect, "language" really may, or may not, say it all. )

3. Different, yet equally valid and generally accepted interpretations of quantum states. ( Read, Copenhagen or EverettInterpretations ).

4. Inquiring of this author; upon what knowledge or understanding is the assertion based? ( The advantage of asking the right question ).
When an observation is made by an instrument/observer, the wave function (a probabilistic mathematical description of that which is being observed), which is a superposition of simultaneous states (all of the existing quantum possibilities), suddenly collapses down to a single state (the result of the observation caused by the instrument/observer) – the famous ‘collapse of the wave function’ (think Schrödinger’s Cat, if you happen to know what that is) – and that is the reading the observer sees.

---- Ken Greenwald
( We might have responded in kind with; think Wigner's Friend, if you happen to know what that is. )

Let us assume that we did not know what "Schrödinger’s Cat" was. Since your posting is only meant to inform, of course, why did you fail to explain it? An unintentional oversight, no doubt.

A med student to whom we'd recommended the WW site, e-mailed us the following:
Main Entry: quan·tum
Pronunciation: 'kwänt-&m
Function: noun
Inflected Form: plural quan·ta /'kwänt-&/
1 : one of the very small increments or parcels into which many forms of energy are subdivided <a molecule of rhodopsin in the human eye can cause a response to a single quantum of light>
2 : one of the small molecular packets of a neurotransmitter (as acetylcholine) released into the synaptic cleft in the transmission of a nerve impulse across a synapse


Source: Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, © 2002 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
The med student is also something of a wag; often referring to the OED as, "Often Erroneous Definitions". That did make us smile.

The above definition speaks to a "special case", in which the observer/instrument is altered by the quantum object:
"In quantum ( a Janus word ) physics, the instrument used for observation may be altered by that which is observed..."

Spiritus
But the final "proof" for our statement must be found within quantum physics and must apply in all cases; therefore, we'll just provide that, if there are no objections.

Spiritus[/quote]
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Che Baraka

quantum leap

Post by spiritus » Wed May 17, 2006 11:01 pm

spiritus wrote: Speaking of "decoherence"; quantum and otherwise:

Spiritus: "In quantum ( a Janus word ) physics, the instrument used for observation may be altered by that which is observed..."


Ken Greenwald: "Che, I noticed these blunders of yours some time ago, but just discovered my sticky note reminding me to post a reply.

In my humble opinion, I think you ought to stick to your day job and hold off making erroneous pontifications on quantum mechanics! (&lt)

1) You’ve actually got the above story backwards. In quantum physics it is not the instrument that is altered by that which is observed, it is that which is observed is altered by the instrument.

We respectfully suggest that any "observer/reader", prior to interpretating the "story" as "backward", take into account these considerations:

1. The "whole story" of quantum measurement. ( Commonly referred to as "The Measurement Problem". )

2. Quantum physic's varied contextual definitions of; "observation", "instrument", "object", and "altered". ( In this respect, "language" really may, or may not, say it all. )

3. Different, yet equally valid and generally accepted interpretations of quantum states. ( Read, Copenhagen or EverettInterpretations ).

4. Inquiring of this author; upon what knowledge or understanding is the assertion based? ( The advantage of asking the right question ).
When an observation is made by an instrument/observer, the wave function (a probabilistic mathematical description of that which is being observed), which is a superposition of simultaneous states (all of the existing quantum possibilities), suddenly collapses down to a single state (the result of the observation caused by the instrument/observer) – the famous ‘collapse of the wave function’ (think Schrödinger’s Cat, if you happen to know what that is) – and that is the reading the observer sees.

---- Ken Greenwald
( We might have responded in kind with; think Wigner's Friend, if you happen to know what that is. )http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner%27s_friend

"In quantum ( a Janus word ) physics, the instrument used for observation may be altered by that which is observed..."

Spiritus
But the final "proof" for our statement must be found within quantum physics and must apply in all cases; therefore, we'll just provide that, if there are no objections.

Spiritus
A "thought experiment" is what I refer to as the "object observing the object". Consciousness seems to be the object/agent/observer of all that is and is not.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Che Baraka

quantum leap

Post by spiritus » Wed May 17, 2006 11:04 pm

But then again, I could be wrong.(:-D
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Che Baraka

quantum leap

Post by gdwdwrkr » Wed May 17, 2006 11:30 pm

or subjective
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

quantum leap

Post by spiritus » Thu May 18, 2006 4:00 am

or connective.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Che Baraka

Post Reply