I guess Maangchi had a meetup in your homeland! I believe this was mid-October 2011 in Copenhagen. http://videosift.com/video/Maangchi-Spicy-Radish-and-Beef-Soup

Well, sure, some of them... and we like beer and have no shortage of stupid.

This video on the other hand comes from Valby, in Copenhagen.
>> ^bamdrew:

where do people sport haircuts like that? australia?

The only time I've ever heard of Monckton before is:

http://videosift.com/video/Copenhagen-Lord-Monckton-rap-battles-Al-Gore-Rap-News

This misses the entire point of the thought experiment.

It's not that the poison gas has a 50% chance of being let loose (I like the gas version).
It's that the trigger is the decay of an atomic nucleus; which--under the theory of Quantum Superposition--has the ability to be in both states simultaneously (decayed--or whole; dead cat--or live cat).

If the cat flips a coin and will die if it's heads (for the purpose of this comment we will ignore the fact that cats have no thumbs) --that's a 50% chance. But, that has nothing to do with the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum physics.

Also, Schrödinger used this scenario to refute the Copenhagen interpretation--because he didn't believe it was an accurate statement of reality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat

(I still upvote this for the promotion of thought )

>> ^syncron:

Wrong. Alive or dead is not a quantum state.

It is if the cat's being alive or dead is dependent on a quantum event: if the Geiger counter in the box detects radiation from the decay of the radiactive source, a mechanism will release the poison that kills the cat. In any case, Schroedinger intended his thought experiment to be a reductio ad absurdum of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, and he never intended to present the idea of cats in quantum superpositions as a real phenomenon. It's a satire.

Or you could try living in reality.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Yawn. Global warming is debunked. Every premise they have ever had is falling flat on its face.
http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global
-warming-alarmism-192334971.html
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/0
7/29/polar-bear-researcher-under-investigation-for-integrity-issues/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6678469/Climategate-University-of-East-Anglia-U-turn-in-climate-change-row.html

http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm
How many of these climiate alarmists have to be brought up on charges, placed on administrative leave, have their findings utterly discredited, or otherwise be proven to be a bunch of liars before the Warmers give up and just admit that humans are NOT the drivers of whatever climate change may or may not be happening?

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Yawn. Global warming is debunked. Every premise they have ever had is falling flat on its face.
http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global
-warming-alarmism-192334971.html
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/0
7/29/polar-bear-researcher-under-investigation-for-integrity-issues/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6678469/Climategate-University-of-East-Anglia-U-turn-in-climate-change-row.html

http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm
How many of these climiate alarmists have to be brought up on charges, placed on administrative leave, have their findings utterly discredited, or otherwise be proven to be a bunch of liars before the Warmers give up and just admit that humans are NOT the drivers of whatever climate change may or may not be happening?


http://mgilbert.net/ostrich.jpg

Yawn. Global warming is debunked. Every premise they have ever had is falling flat on its face.

http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/07/29/polar-bear-researcher-under-investigation-for-integrity-issues/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenhagen-climate-change-confe/6678469/Climategate-University-of-East-Anglia-U-turn-in-climate-change-row.html

http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm

How many of these climiate alarmists have to be brought up on charges, placed on administrative leave, have their findings utterly discredited, or otherwise be proven to be a bunch of liars before the Warmers give up and just admit that humans are NOT the drivers of whatever climate change may or may not be happening?

I am in the south-east but I guess I am mainly referring to road cyclists and uni students. Plus I am kind of biased as I used to do amateur road/mountain biking and NO ONE didn't wear a helmet but then again they are far more seriously about it than teenagers mucking about after school etc. However, if I see someone riding without a helmet it usually sticks in my head . I used to live in the north and you are probably right. Not that they are necessarily bad kids but they do seem to respect authority less.

In copenhagen where this guy us referring to the roads in the CBD are bike oriented and they don't have helmet rules to encourage everyone to ride. There is far more adequate road safety there where you don't have to compete with cars like normal cities. So while his argument is slightly less invalid in Copenhagen it does not transfer to almost anywhere else.

I crashed my bike when I was younger and fractured my skull simply because I didn't feel like wearing a helmet. My advice is WEAR A FUCKING HELMET! For this talk to have any context you must first look at Copenhagens roads. They are designed extremely well for bicycles. Riding without a helmet here in Melbourne is insane!! The amount of times I have nearly had serious accidents let alone the times when I have intentionally been targeted by random drivers (No, I did nothing to piss them off) was enough to scare off of road cycling for good. My life and brain is worth more than the whim of a lazy or psychotic driver.
Get over how your hair looks or how you look and do the right thing. Your wife/mother/nurse does not want to be wiping your ass for the rest of your life because of the threat of helmet hair.

There are many models which have their own proofs. Without wave-particle duality, there would be not electron microscopes. One definition of a wave is the probability of a particle being at a certain time t. This is one topic where Einstein disagrees with de Broglie, who also disagrees with Feynman, and so on, hence the Copenhagen interpretation. They all agree on the differential equations behind the wave-particle model, but their interpretations of the equations are all in violent disagreement. Great topic though

>> ^offsetSammy:

According to Feynman's QED, there's no such thing as "wave-particle duality", it's just all particles. The behavior of the particles, however, is very strange, and that's what accounts for their wave-like characteristics. QED came after Dirac and Schrodinger (it was a refinement of their theories), so I'm not sure why it doesn't get acknowledged in these kinds of discussions.
QED also predicts exactly the results of things like the double slit experiment without ever resorting to the "well the wave collapses into a particle when we observer it" kind of thing.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Inuit, Greenland, Copenhagen, English' to 'Inuit, Greenland, Copenhagen, English, Angu Motzfeldt' - edited by JesseoftheNorth

Or a reply.
>> ^mxxcon:

both videos have boombox in the front seat playing the same music...either it's the same guy or it's some organized setup

It's a dance off!
http://videosift.com/video/Awesome-Danish-Policeman-Dances-in-Copenhagen