Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-09-2013, 06:27 AM   #2401
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by konraDarnok Quote
I'm not claiming anything that isn't cited in the article
You actually did. And the article in itself made false promises too (or at least was suggesting them -- tank in the desert ...).

Rather than referring to a Google search, let me refer to http://arxiv.org/pdf/0807.2614v1 and the role of the near-field detector (named bucket detector in the article). It is always important to understand. Simply quoting from articles is one of the big illnesses of the internet age.


Last edited by Parallax; 08-09-2013 at 07:18 AM.
08-09-2013, 08:29 AM - 1 Like   #2402
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 106
QuoteOriginally posted by konraDarnok Quote
FWIW, my father had corrective surgery 15 years ago and says it's the greatest thing ever, and most people I know with glasses would do it if they could afford it. YMMV.
I didn't think corrective surgery was too expensive, depending on which tech is being used. That being said, I have a science/research/heath care background, and I've worked with plenty of ophthalmologists, and many of them still wear corrective lenses (in contact lens form). Although to be honest I haven't kept up with the latest research on laser eye surgery. That being said, non-laser based vision corrective surgery like lens-replacement surgery is also very good (being a strong alternative for people who do not qualify for laser eye surgery).
08-09-2013, 03:58 PM   #2403
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
Moores law isn't applying to viewfinders.

One analogy is watches. Digital watches was going to take over the world. No moving parts and much cheaper. I saw a Seiko (or Citizen or whatever) brochure around 1980 and there was one analog watch in there (for the luddites presumably) among all the digital. Now you're lucky to find any digital watches except for niche watches. As with viewfinders, watches are for looking at (or through for viewfinders) and the old way was much more intuitive in spite of higher cost and more moving parts. Also, mechanical watches have increased in popularity in spite of old technology, incredible level of precision, lots of mechanical parts and significantly higher cost. .
They still sell sundials, too.

I think you need an app to rememebr how to use one
08-09-2013, 08:08 PM   #2404
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 8,934
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
As for quantum computing: I am personally convinced that taking the interaction of energy density with quantum fields into account (aka as quantum gravity theory, a theory still to be discovered) will break the strict linearity of quantum mechanics thereby destroying the possibility of a larger scale quantum computer and resolving the Schrödinger's Cat paradox.
Is the Schrödinger's Cat paradox already resolved by the notion of an unconscious observer? I can't see what would be wrong about it.

08-09-2013, 09:59 PM   #2405
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Is the Schrödinger's Cat paradox already resolved by the notion of an unconscious observer? ...
ROFL ...
08-09-2013, 10:31 PM   #2406
bvg
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 253
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Is the Schrödinger's Cat paradox already resolved by the notion of an unconscious observer?
Yes. If the observer is unconscious, what is matter to him, is the cat died or no?
08-10-2013, 04:43 AM   #2407
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
unconscious observer?

But no, observers need to be conscious to observe ( Quantum mind?body problem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ).

Wigner replaced the Cat by his Friend and named it Wigner's Friend Paradox. I had the chance to have a conversation with Eugene Wigner about this and he considered the paradox to be as unresolved as when he stated it originally.

And I don't buy the Many World interpretation either, it is against Occam's razor.

Being a Theoretical Physicist myself and as I already mentioned above, personally I believe that a more universal theory will discover that the linearity of quantum theory is an (excellent) approximation. And that higher-order non-linear terms can cause what is called the collapse of the wave function. (We already got a hint in this direction: the (yet to be discovered) M-theory would have 6 known linear approximations which however have different space-time dimensions; which makes it unlikely (to me) that the M-theory itself would be a linear theory.) If things turn out this way, it would be bad news for quantum computing. So, don't bet your future on it

Last edited by falconeye; 08-10-2013 at 05:01 AM.
08-10-2013, 06:00 AM   #2408
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
We need a Heiseneberg camera to take pictures of Schrödinger's Cat so when the unconscious observer wakes up he can look at the photos taken and tell us if it is FF and made by Pentax.

08-10-2013, 06:35 AM   #2409
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 8,934
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
But no, observers need to be conscious to observe...
Not buying it.

This idea is like claiming that if no one is around to hear the tree fall, the latter doesn't make a sound (this is an analogy only).

I've read the reference you provided (thanks) and it is full of criticism towards Wigner's concept.

Does anyone really believe that no wave function ever collapsed on the developing earth before a conscious mind developed?

This seems just absurd to me.

Schrödinger's original thought experiment is a thing of beauty and he nails it when he says
"There is a difference between a shaky or out-of-focus photograph and a snapshot of clouds and fog banks."
Wigner's extension doesn't add anything useful, AFAIC, and falls into the same ill-guided "the mind is so special" camp as Penrose's idea about the mind not being computable. Not buying that either.

QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
And I don't buy the Many World interpretation either, it is against Occam's razor.
It can be a computational aid, but as to describing "reality", yeah, it would be an expensive variant.

QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Being a Theoretical Physicist myself and as I already mentioned above, personally I believe that a more universal theory will discover that the linearity of quantum theory is an (excellent) approximation. And that higher-order non-linear terms can cause what is called the collapse of the wave function. (We already got a hint in this direction: the (yet to be discovered) M-theory would have 6 known linear approximations which however have different space-time dimensions; which makes it unlikely (to me) that the M-theory itself would be a linear theory.) If things turn out this way, it would be bad news for quantum computing. So, don't bet your future on it
My personal universe will have ended before a quantum computer ever does something impressive (if ever).

It would be fascinating to have a chat with you in person about your M-theory related ideas. I may run out of steam after a while, though. I followed this stuff for quite a bit but not recently.

BTW, it seems we must have met some day already because I recently found a business card of yours in my drawers!

Somehow I think it could have been during NetObjectDays 2002.
08-10-2013, 02:10 PM   #2410
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
This idea is like claiming that if no one is around to hear the tree fall, the latter doesn't make a sound (this is an analogy only).

I've read the reference you provided (thanks) and it is full of criticism towards Wigner's concept.

Does anyone really believe that no wave function ever collapsed on the developing earth before a conscious mind developed?
Personally, I think that Wigner's friend is more to the point. The question really isn't if the cat can be in a superimposed state but if the human conscious mind can be. Wigner's thought experiment makes this a bit more clear.

Today, most wouldn't make a big difference between a cat and a human anyway anymore

Wigner's argument is not that a conscious mind must make a wave function collapse (at least, this is not what he told me). But that something in between the quantum scale and the level of a conscious mind (inclusive) must make it collapse.

Your tree argument would mean that it is something in between but exclusive a conscious mind. Note however that this is more speculative than Wigner's argument.

To make Wigner's argument clear: if a conscious mind could be in a superimposed state, than it could make superimposed decisions (like murder or not murder Hitler) and thereby create superimposed universes. A conscious mind is the largest amplificator which we know about. Which would enforce a many world interpretation not originally covered by the Copenhagen interpretation. The many world interpretation has too many problems to be acceptable (IMHO). I think Wigner's argument points this out more clearly than Schrödinger's Cat.

Question to the mods: may it be that we are moving off-topic here?

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
BTW, it seems we must have met some day already because I recently found a business card of yours in my drawers!

Somehow I think it could have been during NetObjectDays 2002.
Quite possible I was one of the organizers of the Net.ObjectDays series of conferences.
08-10-2013, 07:30 PM   #2411
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,435
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
So, future high end EVFs will use large chips which will both bring betetr resolution and better contrast. Current technology can already do this. But it won't be cheap and Moore's law won't help. However, progress in OLED technology will.
Jim Malcolm mentioned this very thinking in repsonse to our question about EVF's (external and integrated) for Pentax cameras. He (and apparently Pentax) is not convinced current EVF technology is well enough developed to warrant their investment, but believes OLED will get there.
08-10-2013, 07:37 PM   #2412
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 592
And now it's turned into a non-camera related quantum physics discussion....
08-10-2013, 07:42 PM   #2413
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,435
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
Also, mechanical watches have increased in popularity in spite of old technology, incredible level of precision, lots of mechanical parts and significantly higher cost. .
To the user, the utility of knowing the time by viewing the position of the hands on the face has become intuitive. Reading the digits is cognitive. Intuitive is faster and more comfortable.

To me, the interesting change about watches is how the smartphone has reduced the wearing of watches altogether by those under about age 30.
08-10-2013, 09:12 PM   #2414
Forum Member




Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 52
It is very very sweet and not being named K-3 ! One should be looking forward to this late fall leaves Ffalling. Read between the lines somewhere. K-mount BTW.
08-10-2013, 09:16 PM   #2415
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Ohio (formerly SF Bay Area)
Posts: 1,464
Huh. I'm not sure I get it. What do you think, ffolks?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
aps-c, body, k-5, k-7, k-7/k-5, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, reason, sensor, sony
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Speculation: What if Pentax did not go FF but rather a 1.3x? brecklundin Pentax DSLR Discussion 36 08-13-2013 10:36 PM
Any speculation on how long... Tom S. Pentax K-5 10 12-16-2010 09:19 PM
K-x price speculation SylBer Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 10-13-2010 12:29 PM
Small rant + speculation ilya80 Pentax News and Rumors 35 04-20-2010 11:42 PM
speculation about FA lenses on FF DSLR lpfonseca Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 11-05-2009 10:34 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:24 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top