Comments on: Why I am not a wavefunction

By: Alan

Alan — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 09:19:22 +0000

A thought is just an pattern of electrical impulses propagating across neurons or transistors. A neuron is about a trillion atoms and a transistor is a few thousand. So, no, an atom doesn’t really have any capacity for thought. Its an atom. Its not alive, it isn’t conscious(and what would that have to do with QM if it was?).
As Ian explained, we don’t see quantum effects unless the deBroglie wavelength and the system are about the same size. Since deBroglie wavelengths are stupid tiny on our scales we don’t see silly quantum effects like tunneling, entanglement or wavefunctions collapsing. It all is still happening, its just too damn tiny to matter. If it mattered, someone would have noticed a lot sooner. Baseballs don’t tunnel through windows, they break them.

]]>

By: John Patrick Cory

John Patrick Cory — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:47:35 +0000

“Quantum mechanics has ABSOLUTELY NO relevance at macroscopic scales.”

If Quantum Mechanics is the fundamental base for Matter…
Then obviously the existence of all matter … and the existence of the Universe is held in check… by Quantum Mechanics.

Does an atom have the capacity for thought?
What about a Quark?
What is the Origin of Thought?

JP Cory

]]>

By: Aditya

Aditya — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 11:40:36 +0000

Too bad people who come up with “theories” or “ideas” based on some small tiny bit of quantum mechanics they read in a Popular Science article don’t know what “macroscopic” means.

]]>

By: Dr. Jim

Dr. Jim — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 02:26:31 +0000

When its wavey out, you shouldn’t go canoeing…

]]>

By: Schroedinger

Schroedinger — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 00:11:55 +0000

Quantum mechanics does have relevance at the macroscopic scale. Any measurements of quantum effects must have macroscopic manifestations if they are to be measured by macroscopic individuals.

Second: If Quantum mechanics makes you think, then it means your education is working. If your mind is closed to thinking because you already know the answer then your education is worthless. I can’t see how calling yourself a freethinker makes any sense unless you and everyone around you is also free to think.

James’ comment regarding what constitutes intelligence is not that far fetched. There is something to be said for the difference between a human being and a neighbouring atom. Observations by the former “count” when observations by the latter do not. Obviously the intelligent observer does not need to be outside of the universe as you pointed out, but it does still need to be intelligent.

]]>