Schrodinger's Cat is used to explain something

>male and female gender in quantum superstition

Only good use of that experiment, to be honest.

If they want to explain their fictional plot device then they could just explain it. When they namedrop schrodinger's cat just for the sake of it when it has nothing to do with it then it just become kinda annoying.

Was that the actual reason?

But it was accepted in the community as a good example, regardless of what Shroedinger intended.

This. I was actually confused about it until I realized it was just something about a cat being both alive and dead until you've open the box. Basically, innocent and guilty until proven otherwise.

Cats are spooks.

It is a good, tangible example of what superposition means, but it's not some grand philosophical revelation about the nature of the universe

There aren't enough Pavlov's dogs

>Something completely fucking retarded happens
>It was the Butterfly effect! We displaced too many oxygen molecules in the past so the world ran out of oxygen, leading to the end of the world!

>regardless of what Shroedinger intended

>Shroedinger found a cool way to call Heisenberg a retard
>Get remembered by the masses for it regardless of the initial intent

Bazinga.

It's combination of people not knowing much about science and meme going popular.

I'm tired of that Schrodinger's Cat nonsense anyway.

Do you open it?

I gotta hand it to the writers of S;G for actually making a decent demonstration of the Butterfly effect.

>superstition
Lol

Same happened with the mocking "Big Bang" nickname for a certain theory.

Anything which does not violate the laws of physics will, if given enough time, happen. And since the Butterfly Effect renders time infinite...

>People treat it as if it's some spooky revelation about reality 'oh the cat is dead and alive at the same time wow'

Legit interpretation when you take parallel universes into consideration

It's gonna be pleasant anyway, so yes.

There's literally no question about her gender though. She has confirmed babyhole.

That's an awfully big claim you're making. In an expanding thermodynamic system, you can't assume that anything that CAN happen will.

He's mainly remembered for his equation not his thought experiment.

>actually railroading the butterfly effect with the convergence shit

I do

I'm not saying the Butterfly effects that are made to happen in anime are impossible. I'm saying they're always the most far-fetched possibility imaginable. It's contrived and weights too much on one's suspension of disbelief. I can accept that the chain of events that you showed actually did lead to that world-ending event but I will think it's bullshit and that you're a shitty writer.

>In an expanding thermodynamic system, you can't assume that anything that CAN happen will.

Yes but the butterfly effect ensures an infinite amount of expanding thermodynamic systems, one for every possible outcome.

>all that talk about dead cats in the Madoka concept movie
Fuck, please don't ruin my favourite anime with this shit.

Who do you think this was?

>I'm saying they're always the most far-fetched possibility imaginable

Well duh, that's what's interesting from a narrative perspective.

>It's contrived and weights too much on one's suspension of disbelief.

How can it be when it is a certainty that even the most far fetched possibility WILL happen?

Isn't that Schrodinger's panties?

Time may not be infinity deep within a particular world but with the Butterfly Effect it is infinitely broad across the infinite number of worlds created, if that makes sense.

That's the many worlds interpretation. There are others such as String Theory so to declare it as the truth is conjecture. Could be right though.

wait, i am missing something here, how in the hell does the butterfly effect have ANYHTING to do with expanding thermodynamic? Or
>And since the Butterfly Effect renders time infinite...
what the hell, do you guys even know what the butterfly effect is?

You obvious don't know what you're talking about if you say that chaos theory has nothing to do with thermodynamics

>so to declare it as the truth is conjecture

Well duh, it's theoretical physics.

I'm assuming an expanding thermodynamic system is a wanky way of saying a (finite) universe. So if you have an infinite amount of universes each with a finite lifespan (in which things could actually happen) then you have, in effect, an infinite amount of time. Or at least, and infinite amount of time in which is it possible for things to happen.

>WILL happen
Can happen*. It CAN happen. Doesn't mean it WILL happen and not in this particular story. But that's what the author decides to do because he's the god of the story.

But is something so extreme interesting when it's so contrived? You can come up with an infinite amount of other ways to generate conflict in your story. Making a slippery slope argument for a narrative that you have FULL CREATIVE CONTROL OVER is not the best way to go about it.

Theoretical physics aims to present possible truths, it does not declare itself absolute.

>Doesn't mean it WILL happen

The probability of a thing happening always decreases towards one given an infinite amount of time, if that thing does not violate the laws of physics.

In other words, if it CAN happen it will if you are given an infinite amount of time.

You see user, most people aren't idiots and understand that this goes without saying.

Yes, but we're not talking about an infinite amount of time here. We're talking about a story. A story has a set time frame. It has a beginning and an end in which the audience is involved. That cataclysmic event can happen off-screen in the far distant future of the story's universe for all I care but it doesn't have to happen now.

It's both a squap and a pee pee until you open it.

>they explain schrodingers cat as if its something nobody has ever heard of before

No, with enough time it is possible for anything to happen; the outcome is not guaranteed. Imagine flipping a coin and you keep getting heads. You figure if you keep at it long enough you must get tails, but that isn't actually the case. You probably will due to the law of large numbers, but it is entirely possible that even with an infinite timeframe you still get nothing but heads.

>Hey, MC-kun. Have you ever heard of the Hedgehog's dilemma/Trolley problem/Schrodinger's Cat etc.?
>Yes. Fuck off, you pretentious shit.
If only.

>m assuming an expanding thermodynamic system is a wanky way of saying a (finite) universe. So if you have an infinite amount of universes each with a finite lifespan (in which things could actually happen) then you have, in effect, an infinite amount of time. Or at least, and infinite amount of time in which is it possible for things to happen.
so what does that have to do with the butterfly effect again?

that's like saying "Hey, did you know that grass is green? Therefore abiogenesis" Just because it is a part of it doesn't mean that Chaostheory/butterflyeffect somehow brings up that topic. That's just insane.
"One small thing can lead to bigger things" "Oh i see, multi verse hypothesis is true i guess" how in the fuck did you get there?

>Yes, but we're not talking about an infinite amount of time here.

Except my argument is that with the Butterfly Effect you are dealing with and infinite amount of time, as you have an infinite amount of worlds based upon your decisions and the effects you had on the past, the numerous different possible outcomes of these decisions and effects etc. etc.

The writers are just showing us the ones that serve the story best.

>No, with enough time it is possible for anything to happen; the outcome is not guaranteed

True, within one particular universe. But as has been established with the Butterfly Effect we are dealing with an infinite number of universes, one for each and every possible outcome.

An "infinite timeframe" doesn't exist. However, the probability of getting tails approaches 1 as the amount of coin flips approaches infinity.

>so what does that have to do with the butterfly effect again?

The Butterfly Effect is just another mechanism by which further outcomes and hence further universes are created.

>and hence further universes are created.
what, how, why...the butterfly effect doesn't negate entropy. It never did

The idea was that unless you made a significant enough change, the momentum of events would always lead to the same conclusion regardless of minor details. It was a more interesting take than most settings go for.

I wasn't arguing against that. But there is no reason to take that information as absolute assurance that it will happen.

According the many worlds theory a new universe is created for each and every possibly outcome. Whilst entropy may exist within these universes it does not within the multiverse, since the multiverse is perpetuated not by energy but by potential.

There's always somebidy hearing it for the first time. I liked the solution that the S;G VN used in a few places of putting the relevant explanation in a glossary, so you could go read up on something if you needed it explained and characters got to act like they weren't born yesterday.

It's like the OP wouldn't just fucking SHUT UP AND CALCULATE, SHINJI!

I've had it with how that you can't tolerate deterministic view of QM. Just accept that waveform collapse fucking works already.

Unless, of course, there AREN'T an infinite number of possibilities and, hence, an infinite number of universes.

>Fuck off, you pretentious shit
I bet you think that God does not play dice and that everything has hidden variables.

t. many worlds interpretation fag

I have no idea why either of you replied to considering it's just talking about the presentation of a game.

Not necessary true. One universe is one where entropy is always increasing, and not agreeing on this means that we have no established view on causality.

>presentation of a game that is wholly relevant to probabilistic distribution

Well I am just an archaeology student.

>squap
I remember that thread. Glad someone's still using it.

>to show the flaws in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics

Not really flaws, he just tried to make the idea sound retarded. Basically, he was the frogposter of his time.

I don't agree that the pepe can only be rare after it's been observed. I held to Einstein's view that it's already pre-determined prior to any human observation that pepe was rare through some variable that's not known to the human observer.

If the characters and the show's target demographic are 15-year-old high school students, then yeah, they probably haven't heard it explained before, unlike you, a 20-something manchild who has nothing to do but browse wikipedia and watch children's cartoons.

Honestly the best evidence of parallel universes is how convenient the apparent "paradox" of Schrodinger's cat is while using it. The fact that it's dead and alive at the same time just becomes obvious. Of course convenience doesn't prove anything, but it is nifty.

Please. Not even people who've studied computer science necessarily know anything about the spooky action at a distance.

In the last chapter Kafka in wedding dress was actually that storyteller bro, who got blood transition from her. So yeah, we know her gender, but we have no idea about the sex.

Cred Forums - Astrophysics

>Superposition of states
>entangled state of observer noting cat is (alive or dead)