Schrodinger's cat

[uniacidz]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

Yeah, we've all seen The Big Bang Theory.

Dont admit to that man

[mike_nofx]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Problem with that idea, is that nomatter the outcome, you're still stuck with a Holden.

Similar to a cat really. People who can't get laid start buying cats, same with Holdens.

[xtremerus]

But is the cat male or female??
Is it transgender or maybe bi.
The GLBT mob would have a field day if that cat was discriminated against in this experiment.
Therefore there would have to be a couple of cats in the box to eliminate discrimination, not just one.
But we will never know, as we can't open the box to be sure.

[superyob]

Even more importantly, is there a 'gender pay gap' if the cats identify with different genders at any specific time???

[Bushbasher]

You guys are making my head hurt and making me laugh out loud all at the same time....




This is the best thread I've ever seen.

[wodahs]

Originally Posted by superyob

Even more importantly, is there a 'gender pay gap' if the cats identify with different genders at any specific time???

cats genders identify discrimination is not aloud due to the fact that it goes against the views of desexed cat marriages

Besides that's moving away the realm of science and more into law like slowing a union between a ford car and an ls motor area of league statutes

[superyob]

wodahs, I bow to your superior logic. Schrodinger has nothing on your line of thought...

[Qwerty321]

If you think this is bad, I'll give you the one that keeps me awake at night.

Light is transmitted in frequencies. Fact. Different frequencies of light equal the different colours. Fact. Our eyes has optical receptors in our retinas that detect the specific frequency and report it to the brain. Also a fact. Our brain interprets the electrical information reported via the nerves from the retina and gives us an "image" that we "see". Alright, everyone on the same page?

What's to say that what I see as blue, you don't see as red? What if my brain takes the 480nm wavelength and depicts that as a different colour to what your brain does. We'll never know cause you've grown up your entire life calling it blue, and so have I. But what if you're actually seeing what I call red or green etc. and calling that blue?

Here's a little article on it a quick google dug up for me. http://www.livescience.com/21275-col...cientists.html

[superyob]

Originally Posted by xtremerus

But is the cat male or female??
Is it transgender or maybe bi.
The GLBT mob would have a field day if that cat was discriminated against in this experiment.
Therefore there would have to be a couple of cats in the box to eliminate discrimination, not just one.
But we will never know, as we can't open the box to be sure.

Are you suggesting there is a pussy in fishnets in a box??? Why, I think you might be referring to Schrodinger's transvestcat, from Transcatual, Transylvania.This was actually his lesser known hypothesis I think...

[redxm]

Originally Posted by Qwerty321

If you think this is bad, I'll give you the one that keeps me awake at night.
What's to say that what I see as blue, you don't see as red? What if my brain takes the 480nm wavelength and depicts that as a different colour to what your brain does. We'll never know cause you've grown up your entire life calling it blue, and so have I. But what if you're actually seeing what I call red or green etc. and calling that blue?

^^ I have pondered the same thing for years. Throwing in colour blindness adds to the mystery

[Crazy Dazz]

Best thing about Schrödinger's cat is that it keeps the PETA whackos occupied in a perpetual loop (a bit like a Mobius Strip.) Because the cat is both alive and dead, they remain both outraged and passive.

And the best bit, is that they can do nothing about it. If they storm the laboratory to free the cat, open the box and the cat is dead, then according to the Copenhagen Interpretation they would be blamed for killing the cat.

[Whitey-AMG]

I like this one...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem

I like it because it implies that random multiple continuous efforts may eventually result in genius. It explains the way I like to operate......random continuous efforts, that to others looks like I'm trying to cover up mistakes , whereas what I'm actually doing is trying to achieve the "gamblers phallacy"

Suffice to say , I'm banned from family dinner conversations at most times which is a paradox to me because based on the above it means eventually I'll be talking more , not less at these functions.......