Is the Quantum/Classical boundary, Coherence VS Decoherence?

The unreal is possible when spacetime is not involved. Coherence does not use spacetime.
Anything coherent isn’t real. Unobserved quantum waves are not real.

@pittsburghjoe - Do any of you grasp what I’ve solved here?
Nope, not in the least. Because you've made no effort to explain any or to field questions, so that it's a little more understandable. It takes more to teaching than simply tossing out self-satisfied claims.

All we see is a sock puppet, running away from every challenge. Ever hear of a Gish Gallop? Or throwing a bag of poop at a fan?

You don’t seem to appreciate the difference between that and trying to have a constructive dialogue?

It’s lonely at the top. Ask me something besides what size atoms need to be.

This has all the math you need. There isn’t any reason for the math to be any different than what is already known. You aren’t interested in what is actually happening in Physics/QM?

“Decoherence means that the quantum object’s wave function becomes entangled with the detector and the environment.”

yeah, uhhh, I don’t care. They didn’t understand it when claiming that.

 

All I’m saying is that you aren’t looking at it from the real perspective. I’m explaining what is actually happening, I’m not out to change existing equations.

@pittsburghjoe - Someone actually wrote something worth reading for once. Thank you.
Lip service, then joey goes on and totally ignores the.
W4U - April 4, 2020 at 2:19 pm

pjoe said; Does it take around 50,000 bonded atoms to be physical particles?
No it takes a bunch of atoms to form molecules (physical patterns) with emergent properties over and beyond the individual properties of the atoms.

A Hydrogen atom is not wet, an Oxygen atom is not wet, an H2O molecules is not wet . However, 50,000 H2O molecules arranged in a specific pattern may have an emergent property of “wetness” , i.e. liquid water. Arranged in a denser pattern it may attain an emergent property of non-wet solid, i.e. ice.

Think of patterns at all levels. It is the patterns


So we are still left puzzling over the mystery of your 50,000 atoms.

 

Coherence VS Decoherence

wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)

… If a quantum system were perfectly isolated, it would maintain coherence indefinitely, but it would be impossible to manipulate or investigate it. If it is not perfectly isolated, for example during a measurement, coherence is shared with the environment and appears to be lost with time; a process called quantum decoherence. As a result of this process, quantum behavior is apparently lost, just as energy appears to be lost by friction in classical mechanics.

Decoherence was first introduced in 1970 by the German physicist H. Dieter Zeh[1] and has been a subject of active research since the 1980s.[2] Decoherence has been developed into a complete framework, but it does not solve the measurement problem, as the founders of decoherence theory admit in their seminal papers.[3] …

 

… Decoherence has been used to understand the collapse of the wave function in quantum mechanics. Decoherence does not generate actual wave-function collapse. It only provides an explanation for apparent wave-function collapse, as the quantum nature of the system “leaks” into the environment. That is, components of the wave function are decoupled from a coherent system and acquire phases from their immediate surroundings. A total superposition of the global or universal wavefunctionstill exists (and remains coherent at the global level), but its ultimate fate remains an interpretational issue. Specifically, decoherence does not attempt to explain the measurement problem. Rather, decoherence provides an explanation for the transition of the system to a mixture of states that seem to correspond to those states observers perceive. Moreover, our observation tells us that this mixture looks like a proper quantum ensemble in a measurement situation, as we observe that measurements lead to the “realization” of precisely one state in the “ensemble”.

Decoherence represents a challenge for the practical realization of quantum computers, since such machines are expected to rely heavily on the undisturbed evolution of quantum coherences. Simply put, they require that the coherence of states be preserved and that decoherence is managed, in order to actually perform quantum computation. The preservation of coherence, and mitigation of decoherence effects, are thus related to the concept of quantum error correction. …


So what of it joe?

It’s lonely at the top.
I'll bet it is.

That’s why I keep wondering rather than you dumping thread after thread on us pions, (without the slightest interest in engaging or explaining anything to anyone who doesn’t totally get your genius) - so why aren’t you taking to real physicists who have a clear understanding of all those slides you were showing off ?

What do you want from us?

I want your dignity

 

hahahaaha

We must each achieve our own individual dignity.

You aren’t doing too well. What here is most undignified. It’s silly and irritating.

This is a discussion forum, not the back hall of one of them stores.