FOM: Alice, Carol and Leibniz
Kanovei
kanovei at wmwap1.math.uni-wuppertal.de
Tue Apr 16 07:10:49 EDT 2002
>Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 14:19:09 -0500
>From: "Miguel A. Lerma" <mlerma at math.northwestern.edu>
> then look
> at them again, you may still see one electron in the NW corner
> and another one in the SE corner, but you will be unable to
> determine whether the electron in the NW corner is the same
> electron that was in the NW corner before or is the one that
> was in the SE corner.
Between the observations, the two electrons just do not
exist as such, what exists is a sort of probability distribution,
that they speak about "two electrons" is just a mathematical
abstraction which does not imply that there are two
physically existing things of any kind whether distinguishable
or not.
It is physically meaningless to ask whether the electron
in the SE corner is the same as the SE electron of the
earlier observation, or, if you want, the answer
can be formulated only in terms YES with 0.77 probability
NO with 0.23 probability, which also reflects rather
certain mathematical abstractions than physical entities.
To conclude you cannot use the electrons between the observations
to count anything, while in the moment of observation you can
use them to count but they are well distinguishable in NW/SE
manner.
V.Kanovei
More information about the FOM
mailing list