One of the dumbest ideas around.
” In the arrow paradox, Zeno states that for motion to be occurring, an object must change the position which it occupies. He gives an example of an arrow in flight. He states that in any one instant of time, for the arrow to be moving it must either move to where it is, or it must move to where it is not. It cannot move to where it is not, because this is a single instant, and it cannot move to where it is because it is already there. In other words, in any instant of time there is no motion occurring, because an instant is a snapshot. Therefore, if it cannot move in a single instant it cannot move in any instant, making any motion impossible. This paradox is also known as the fletcher’s paradox—a fletcher being a maker of arrows.
Whereas the first two paradoxes presented divide space, this paradox starts by dividing time – and not into segments, but into points. [from wikipedia] ”
Interesting but dumb in today’s world. [even in the world of the 19th century!]
Take a series of successive photographs very quickly. Show them all in a series. You have what looks like motion.
But you’re fooled. It’s an optical illusion of film. A series of fixed pictures put together looks like motion.
Now is reality a series of fixed pictures and no motion actually occurs?
No, I think motion does occur. I just see it as another example of catching the baseball. You catch the baseball here, then here, then here, then here. If you let go of the baseball in each of the locations where you caught it, you have to let go of the baseball in a paricular order in order to simulate what motion looks like.
But by catching the ball, you’ve stopped motion. To recreate it mathematically, the order in which you recreate the baseball moving it in a particular order, otherwise you recreate a reality that didn’t exist in the first place. Switch the numbers around and the baseball goes backwards but only in an illusionary recreation of what motion seems like — just like a film.
The act of observation – measuring – DOES “ruin the moment”, sort of like asking the composer in the middle of composing a piece, “Hey, what’s your next note going to be?” Once you’ve interrupped the composer, you’ve made it hard for him to get back on track. But give enough time, and he can. [I know because when I am “in the zone” and playing new stuff on the piano, any interruption at all ruins the ‘NOW’, then ‘FLOW’]
By choosing to use particle calculations to measure a quantum state, you’re stopping its motion in mid-stream and asking, “Okay, if you were a fixed object, where would you be fixed?” You stike it with a photon (that’s “shining a light on it” – literally) – and the quanta freezes so to speak – you’ve hit it over the head to ask it a few questions and it takes time to recover.
Now does that mean that observation by humans changes reality? No. It just means that it’s a crappy way to measure reality by taking a wave-particle and measuring it like a particle. Well, of COURSE it will give you a particle-style answer.
And if you measure it like a wave, of course it will not show you its “particle ways” because that’s NOT what you were measuring.
If you come up with a way to measure waves and particular simultaneously, THEN you’ll do alright and be able to measure a quanta’s location and movement.
Bah, it’s starting to make sense but some of this stuff is quite irritating.