watching bitcoin price and discussing it on this forum

[mmitech]

watching the price of bitcoin is like watching "how I met your mother", you get pissed because of not knowing the mother but at the same time you do not want to know who is the mother because simply the show will end

people want the price to go down to "buy cheap coins" yet they want bitcoin to go up.....   I want to shutdown the PC and try to not visit this forum for at least 3 months, but I cant.

so Bitcoin is not only an economical phenomena, it is a social phenomena where everyone built this communication bridge (this forum) where they can all discuss and work around together....

[1715549218]

1715549218

[1715549218]

1715549218

[1715549218]

1715549218

[1715549218]

1715549218

[1715549218]

1715549218

[MineForeman.com]

watching the price of bitcoin is like watching "how I met your mother", you get pissed because of not knowing the mother but at the same time you do not want to know who is the mother because simply the show will end

Read up on Schrödinger's Cat, it is a thought experiment in a similar vein, it will blow your mind .

[mmitech]

watching the price of bitcoin is like watching "how I met your mother", you get pissed because of not knowing the mother but at the same time you do not want to know who is the mother because simply the show will end

Read up on Schrödinger's Cat, it is a thought experiment in a similar vein, it will blow your mind .

I am trying to understand the experiment but Quantum physic in general is one of the things that I want to spend more time to study ( try to understand ).... thank you for the link already bookmarked it to read the full article later.

[bitpop]

Try the btce chat room, they're quite bright

[knightcoin]

Try the btce chat room, they're quite bright

on IRC ? good times ... http://everything2.com/title/7th+sphere 

[bitpop]

Try the btce chat room, they're quite bright

on IRC ? good times ... http://everything2.com/title/7th+sphere 

Remember sub7?

[arepo]

watching the price of bitcoin is like watching "how I met your mother", you get pissed because of not knowing the mother but at the same time you do not want to know who is the mother because simply the show will end

Read up on Schrödinger's Cat, it is a thought experiment in a similar vein, it will blow your mind .

I am trying to understand the experiment but Quantum physic in general is one of the things that I want to spend more time to study ( try to understand ).... thank you for the link already bookmarked it to read the full article later.

this is a little off-topic, but physics is my thing, and i'd love to try to give a layman's interpretation of such a technical thought experiment

the idea is that the classic notion of determinism, that one can use trajectory and velocity and momentum to determine the future state of a given system (similarly to how one judges and executes shots on a pool table), breaks down completely on small enough scales.

in pool each of the balls has a definite location. you can strike one, giving it a definite velocity in a definite direction and with practice pretty handily work backwards through the physics that governs the behavior of the balls and, remarkably consistently, make difficult shots.

if the pool table were the size of an atom, however, and the balls were subatomic particles, the game would be significantly harder. the early pioneers of quantum mechanics (quantum meaning "unit", like the indivisible subatomic particles) realized quickly that the smaller something is, the more strangely it behaved when they tried to "find" it -- that is, determine its location.

it turns out that nothing has a definite location, which is hard to wrap one's head around, but for small things at small scales it's very obvious and a whole new physics needed to be developed. when measuring an electron, for instance, its location seemed to correspond with the amplitude of a wave, with different probabilities of finding the particle in a certain location corresponding to the amplitude of the wave at different points. this, incidentally, is the basis of Schrodinger's Equation, which formalized de Broglie's work.

in the image i linked, the sharp and pointy distribution corresponds to a very massive thing, like a billiard-ball, whose location is much more definite than a very light thing, like an electron (lighter by about 30 orders of magnitude!), about which it isn't an exaggeration to say that it could be anywhere in the universe.

this brings us to the star of Schrodinger's thought experiment, a heavy atom undergoing radioactive decay. one of the insights that quantum mechanics gave us is an explanation of this strange phenomenon. some atoms, for reasons previously unknown, randomly and violently ejected bits of the nucleus from time to time. the strangest thing about this is that is is impossible to know exactly when this event would occur for a single atom, but groups of the same isotope always obey a half-life rule, such that after one half-life (a constant) for a given isotope has passed, exactly half of a given sample of isotope will have decayed.

sounds like quantum weirdness, doesn't it? that's because it is!

what's actually happening is that the particles in the nucleus suddenly find themselves outside of it and are ejected away by the electrostatic force that causes protons to repel each other. weird.

but this leaves us in a quagmire of conceptualization. is it really true that the deterministic world we perceive is really made up of unfathomable masses of fuzzy, random, indistinct processes?

Schrodinger tried to bridge the gap to demonstrate just how weird the implications of this are. if we arrange things so that the radioactive decay of an atom, for which it is literally impossible to know whether or not it has decayed after a certain time t, is tied to a mechanism that will kill a cat (why a cat? ask Schrodinger), then we end up in a situation in which the entire state of the box becomes quantumly uncertain. generally, we model this uncertainty on the subatomic scale as a superposition of every possibility, i.e. a probability curve, but it seems extremely counterintuitive to try to conceptualize the contents of the box as a superposition of live cat and dead cat (and if time t is the isotope's half-life, the chances are exactly 50-50!).

anyway, i hope you appreciated the explanation i tried to give a complete picture of the conceptual underpinnings without going into too much detail. lots of good vocabulary to wiki for future inquiries, too!

--arepo

[oda.krell]

watching the price of bitcoin is like watching "how I met your mother", you get pissed because of not knowing the mother but at the same time you do not want to know who is the mother because simply the show will end

Read up on Schrödinger's Cat, it is a thought experiment in a similar vein, it will blow your mind .

I am trying to understand the experiment but Quantum physic in general is one of the things that I want to spend more time to study ( try to understand ).... thank you for the link already bookmarked it to read the full article later.

this is a little off-topic, but physics is my thing, and i'd love to try to give a layman's interpretation of such a technical thought experiment

the idea is that the classic notion of determinism, that one can use trajectory and velocity and momentum to determine the future state of a given system (similarly to how one judges and executes shots on a pool table), breaks down completely on small enough scales.

in pool each of the balls has a definite location. you can strike one, giving it a definite velocity in a definite direction and with practice pretty handily work backwards through the physics that governs the behavior of the balls and, remarkably consistently, make difficult shots.

if the pool table were the size of an atom, however, and the balls were subatomic particles, the game would be significantly harder. the early pioneers of quantum mechanics (quantum meaning "unit", like the indivisible subatomic particles) realized quickly that the smaller something is, the more strangely it behaved when they tried to "find" it -- that is, determine its location.

it turns out that nothing has a definite location, which is hard to wrap one's head around, but for small things at small scales it's very obvious and a whole new physics needed to be developed. when measuring an electron, for instance, its location seemed to correspond with the amplitude of a wave, with different probabilities of finding the particle in a certain location corresponding to the amplitude of the wave at different points. this, incidentally, is the basis of Schrodinger's Equation, which formalized de Broglie's work.

in the image i linked, the sharp and pointy distribution corresponds to a very massive thing, like a billiard-ball, whose location is much more definite than a very light thing, like an electron (lighter by about 30 orders of magnitude!), about which it isn't an exaggeration to say that it could be anywhere in the universe.

this brings us to the star of Schrodinger's thought experiment, a heavy atom undergoing radioactive decay. one of the insights that quantum mechanics gave us is an explanation of this strange phenomenon. some atoms, for reasons previously unknown, randomly and violently ejected bits of the nucleus from time to time. the strangest thing about this is that is is impossible to know exactly when this event would occur for a single atom, but groups of the same isotope always obey a half-life rule, such that after one half-life (a constant) for a given isotope has passed, exactly half of a given sample of isotope will have decayed.

sounds like quantum weirdness, doesn't it? that's because it is!

what's actually happening is that the particles in the nucleus suddenly find themselves outside of it and are ejected away by the electrostatic force that causes protons to repel each other. weird.

but this leaves us in a quagmire of conceptualization. is it really true that the deterministic world we perceive is really made up of unfathomable masses of fuzzy, random, indistinct processes?

Schrodinger tried to bridge the gap to demonstrate just how weird the implications of this are. if we arrange things so that the radioactive decay of an atom, for which it is literally impossible to know whether or not it has decayed after a certain time t, is tied to a mechanism that will kill a cat (why a cat? ask Schrodinger), then we end up in a situation in which the entire state of the box becomes quantumly uncertain. generally, we model this uncertainty on the subatomic scale as a superposition of every possibility, i.e. a probability curve, but it seems extremely counterintuitive to try to conceptualize the contents of the box as a superposition of live cat and dead cat (and if time t is the isotope's half-life, the chances are exactly 50-50!).

anyway, i hope you appreciated the explanation i tried to give a complete picture of the conceptual underpinnings without going into too much detail. lots of good vocabulary to wiki for future inquiries, too!

--arepo

Very good write up. Not the first one I've read, but one of the better ones for sure. Thanks.

[mmitech]

watching the price of bitcoin is like watching "how I met your mother", you get pissed because of not knowing the mother but at the same time you do not want to know who is the mother because simply the show will end

Read up on Schrödinger's Cat, it is a thought experiment in a similar vein, it will blow your mind .

I am trying to understand the experiment but Quantum physic in general is one of the things that I want to spend more time to study ( try to understand ).... thank you for the link already bookmarked it to read the full article later.

this is a little off-topic, but physics is my thing, and i'd love to try to give a layman's interpretation of such a technical thought experiment

the idea is that the classic notion of determinism, that one can use trajectory and velocity and momentum to determine the future state of a given system (similarly to how one judges and executes shots on a pool table), breaks down completely on small enough scales.

in pool each of the balls has a definite location. you can strike one, giving it a definite velocity in a definite direction and with practice pretty handily work backwards through the physics that governs the behavior of the balls and, remarkably consistently, make difficult shots.

if the pool table were the size of an atom, however, and the balls were subatomic particles, the game would be significantly harder. the early pioneers of quantum mechanics (quantum meaning "unit", like the indivisible subatomic particles) realized quickly that the smaller something is, the more strangely it behaved when they tried to "find" it -- that is, determine its location.

it turns out that nothing has a definite location, which is hard to wrap one's head around, but for small things at small scales it's very obvious and a whole new physics needed to be developed. when measuring an electron, for instance, its location seemed to correspond with the amplitude of a wave, with different probabilities of finding the particle in a certain location corresponding to the amplitude of the wave at different points. this, incidentally, is the basis of Schrodinger's Equation, which formalized de Broglie's work.

in the image i linked, the sharp and pointy distribution corresponds to a very massive thing, like a billiard-ball, whose location is much more definite than a very light thing, like an electron (lighter by about 30 orders of magnitude!), about which it isn't an exaggeration to say that it could be anywhere in the universe.

this brings us to the star of Schrodinger's thought experiment, a heavy atom undergoing radioactive decay. one of the insights that quantum mechanics gave us is an explanation of this strange phenomenon. some atoms, for reasons previously unknown, randomly and violently ejected bits of the nucleus from time to time. the strangest thing about this is that is is impossible to know exactly when this event would occur for a single atom, but groups of the same isotope always obey a half-life rule, such that after one half-life (a constant) for a given isotope has passed, exactly half of a given sample of isotope will have decayed.

sounds like quantum weirdness, doesn't it? that's because it is!

what's actually happening is that the particles in the nucleus suddenly find themselves outside of it and are ejected away by the electrostatic force that causes protons to repel each other. weird.

but this leaves us in a quagmire of conceptualization. is it really true that the deterministic world we perceive is really made up of unfathomable masses of fuzzy, random, indistinct processes?

Schrodinger tried to bridge the gap to demonstrate just how weird the implications of this are. if we arrange things so that the radioactive decay of an atom, for which it is literally impossible to know whether or not it has decayed after a certain time t, is tied to a mechanism that will kill a cat (why a cat? ask Schrodinger), then we end up in a situation in which the entire state of the box becomes quantumly uncertain. generally, we model this uncertainty on the subatomic scale as a superposition of every possibility, i.e. a probability curve, but it seems extremely counterintuitive to try to conceptualize the contents of the box as a superposition of live cat and dead cat (and if time t is the isotope's half-life, the chances are exactly 50-50!).

anyway, i hope you appreciated the explanation i tried to give a complete picture of the conceptual underpinnings without going into too much detail. lots of good vocabulary to wiki for future inquiries, too!

--arepo

thank you very much for the effort, I realy like how you tried to keep it as simple as it can be, you must be a teacher ?  it is not my domain of work but I remember studying Structure of materials at university, and it was a hell of fun, but since then I didn't read any relatedcscience articles or magazines, I would love to make sometime to educate my self..

 maybe spending less time on these forum and stop reading some worthless posts and trolls will spare me the time to do so

[bitrider]

anyway, i hope you appreciated the explanation i tried to give a complete picture of the conceptual underpinnings without going into too much detail. lots of good vocabulary to wiki for future inquiries, too!

--arepo

Much appreciated. And one of the reasons I'm also addicted to this forum. You just never know what will show up.   

[HairyMaclairy]

If the box stinks the cat is dead.

[cr1776]

watching the price of bitcoin is like watching "how I met your mother", you get pissed because of not knowing the mother but at the same time you do not want to know who is the mother because simply the show will end
...

You need to catch up to the current episode!  ;-)

[knightcoin]

Try the btce chat room, they're quite bright

on IRC ? good times ... http://everything2.com/title/7th+sphere 

Remember sub7?

wow everybody ... sometimes I get connected via jabber ... but most of the time I am on COM ... ~
/usr/pkg/bin/rc     PLAN 9 'Run Commands' Shell


or

/usr/pkg/bin/bash   GNU's Broken Again SHell

 
 

[mmitech]

watching the price of bitcoin is like watching "how I met your mother", you get pissed because of not knowing the mother but at the same time you do not want to know who is the mother because simply the show will end
...

You need to catch up to the current episode!  ;-)

I am following every episode, disappointing isn't ?

[undeadbitcoiner]

This is the market, If there will not be such mixed expressions and such up and dowm how market will follow, If such up and downs will not happen then how could we work. By the way Market is now slowly stable so atleast we could believe that price is going up with a hard standups, Its quite interesting.

[piramida]

If the box stinks the cat is dead.

no, but depends on how exactly it stinks.

[Parazyd]

We're one big happy family

[GigaCoin]

watching the price of bitcoin is like watching "how I met your mother", you get pissed because of not knowing the mother but at the same time you do not want to know who is the mother because simply the show will end

people want the price to go down to "buy cheap coins" yet they want bitcoin to go up.....   I want to shutdown the PC and try to not visit this forum for at least 3 months, but I cant.

so Bitcoin is not only an economical phenomena, it is a social phenomena where everyone built this communication bridge (this forum) where they can all discuss and work around together....

That show got boring after season 6 :p

[mmitech]

watching the price of bitcoin is like watching "how I met your mother", you get pissed because of not knowing the mother but at the same time you do not want to know who is the mother because simply the show will end

people want the price to go down to "buy cheap coins" yet they want bitcoin to go up.....   I want to shutdown the PC and try to not visit this forum for at least 3 months, but I cant.

so Bitcoin is not only an economical phenomena, it is a social phenomena where everyone built this communication bridge (this forum) where they can all discuss and work around together....

That show got boring after season 6 :p

the end is soon (last season now) now that we know who is the mother...

Edit: same Bitcoin Price is getting boring now that the market is slow

[bitpop]

Who is the mother??