Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:I thought we were trying to end sexism? (Score 1) 599

It is a regional dialectical usage, mostly in the midland US. It's spread, but is less common elsewhere, and pretty much absent in New England and outside the US. In most other places it requires a preceding negative construction, eg "Activists aren't as effective any more because they get caught up in this sort of shite, leaving important worries like electing good people to govern us laguishing on the back burner." It is often a rather confusing construction to people who haven't seen it before, because they're used to the negation beforehand. So it seems like you're trying to negate your own point, decreasing clarity.

Comment: Re:The fucking cat (Score 1) 172

You just described the Everettian model. That model doesn't have any paradox for Schrodinger's cat. Several of the others (the ones Schrodinger was criticizing) do. EG de Broglie-Bohm theory, Transactional QM, and Objective Collapse theories don't have the issue, while von Neumann/Wigner does.

Comment: Re:The fucking cat (Score 3, Informative) 172

Actually, it was that if the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory was correct then that would be the absurd conclusion.

So the Copenhagen interpretation is wrong, as is any other interpretation that necessarily comes to the same absurd conclusion.

The interpretations that don't make such a conclusion are unaffected by the thought experiment.

"Ahead warp factor 1" - Captain Kirk