I’m not sure what (if anything) this statement means, particularly in the context of this discussion. A brief, torrid Google search does turn up some references to quantum biology (as a framework for studying cellular processes, photosynthesis, etc.) but no research suggesting that a 400-pound man stacking up his ninth plateful of steaks is simultaneously fat and not-fat, thanks to quantum “weirdness”…
I don’t know about any “chemical stuff.” But the sugary free Mimosas offered at many brunch buffets definitely help curtail the appetite.
No, that’s not what I’m saying. Quit being so obtuse you fucking droll bastard. There exists a quantum potential for genetic mutations and anomalies in every egg’s development. Quantum probabilities govern those processes.
<mod>
devilsknew, please take a look at the top of this page and remind yourself what forum you’re in.
Uncalled for.
</mod>
Inappropriate, perhaps, but it made me laugh.
That’s because you have it wrong.
You have to set it up like this:
A 400 pound man is penned up in a steel chamber, along with the following device (which must be secured against direct interference by the man): in a Geiger counter there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small, that perhaps in the course of the hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges and through a relay releases a latch which opens a door to a buffet with unlimited crab legs and steak. If one has left this entire system to itself for an hour, one would say that the man is not fat if meanwhile no atom has decayed. The psi-function of the entire system would express this by having in it the fat and non-fat man (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts.
No, they don’t. Not all probabilistic or random processes are quantum.
That can be misinterpreted in so many wrong ways.
By definition, all of reality are quantum processes. Probablistic and random in quantum governance.
Not by any meaningful definition, any more than we describe everything made up of atoms as nuclear, e.g. “I’m going to put a nuclear chicken on this nuclear table.”
Typically, quantum as an adjective is reserved for events or interactions which can not be correctly described with a more simplified (i.e. classical) description. Interactions in which the probability of the outcome is the result of interference between different states, for example. Rolling dice is not a quantum process.
Rolling dice is a quantum process if you look closely enough. You’re speaking at a macroscopic level, I am speaking at a quantum level, which is quite appropriate and entirely accurate in the context of this thread and the subject matter of which I am speaking of, i.e.- quantum biological anomalies, genetic mutations, quantum biology, etc. Just because you choose to remain obtuse and refuse to read in context doesn’t mean my usage is wrong.
I think you’re using buzzwords you don’t fully understand. However, let’s stop hijacking this thread. If you start another one, I’d be more than happy to continue the discussion there.
“All you can eat” is pretty clear: it means “all you can eat.” If the occasional hungry customer is breaking the bank, then put an asterisk on your sign with the note, “Patrons who eat more than 30 lbs. of filet mignon will be charged an additional fee,” or whatever. That won’t offend your customers; it won’t even affect the overwhelming majority of them, but going back on your word will probably piss off quite a few.
I read that too! The same 20-year-old issue of F & SF–what are the odds?
With with some fava beans and a nice chianti?
It sure beats galley food!