Cable burn in

Not exactly, the Copenhagen Interpretation only says that on observation, the wave function collapses, not into what it collapses.

1 Like

Point taken. In fact, the CI says very little concrete and is most likely BS anyway.

I also agree to a degree with your point above that electricity is a quantum phenomenon and thus requires quantum descriptions. “To a point” because there are applicable theories of emergent phenomena that work in the classical way and are successfully applied most of the time. We can describe much of fluid behaviors very well without quantum physics and huge, working machines are constructed all the time based on this. Same for much of electronics.

Of course, certain aspects do require quantum physics, and the questions asked in this thread may belong to those. In this case, most of the above speculations and arguments for burn-in or related phenomena are useless as they were all based in classical images, like little electrons being hindered in their movement by impurities similar to billiard balls on a dirty table.

Leaving us, still, with no plausible hypothesis whatsoever for a physical foundation of the thread topics’ phenomena.

1 Like

Fun though!

No…the more modern concept is of ‘becomes information’.

I intended to say exceeds my expectations in a positive way.

But I have to study much harder!

Unsure but I think “becomes information” happens only near or inside a black hole.

Got an excuse for any variety of finding in your experiment though!

Yeah, see above my opinion on the CI :slight_smile:
Newer concepts are better mathematical descriptions, but, let’s face it, don’t tell us “reality” either. In any case, no plausible quantum hypothesis for burn-in has been proposed either

…I take becomes information to mean 'any interactions…cannot bet broader than that.

Still doesn’t help us with the topic

As you said to me last week

“Please, you have no idea what you are talking about” :grinning:

Copper wire consists of grains of copper encased by impurities (the grain boundaries). The copper in the grain has a different value of electronegativity than the impurities that surround the grain.

So, it seems feasible that the electrons flowing along a piece of copper wire, from grain to grain, will be affected/hindered by impurities surrounding the grain.

That’s the classical view with the billiard balls and the dirt. Much energy was expended above to explain how it does not apply. Pls take it up with the others who said so :slight_smile:

No.

The billiard balls are surrounded by pool balls. Different weight and density.

As long as you are talking about any balls at all it is classical. The points made above were that it’s all just wave functions or information.

You started talking about balls.

But whatever is happening it involves passing through grains (copper) and grain boundaries (impurities). Two different structures.

Perhaps we should unify to develop a theory!

I don’t think it makes sense to repeat myself, I have tried to make my points above as well as I could. The whole balls thing must be seen in the above discussion about quantum physics

Only in the classical view (and even then I’m not convinced), but this was said to be a poor description with some good arguments

Can everyone stop talking about balls please I’m getting excited

1 Like

Well when stuff behaves like balls is the only way we can macroscopically measure them right? So i think it’s still useful in these circumstances.

Talking about the universe as information is interesting from a philosophical point of view but a lot less interesting for practical measurements.

I didn’t disagree above when I mentioned emergent behaviors, fluid dynamics, etc.

I follow the arguments that were made to a certain point, but yes, it hasn’t brought us any useful hypotheses for this thread so far (and as far as I can tell)

But as I tried to argue further up when the criticism was brought up regarding moving electrons, either we allow for some classical imagery (which in my humble opinion can be useful, cf. fluid dynamics) or it’s all quantum level, then none of the previously suggested mechanism in the thread (as far I can remember) make any sense, for example the purity thing.