Page 2 of 2

Re: Schrödinger's Cat and Murder

PostPosted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:03 pm
by OneArrow
thedotmaster wrote:
OneArrow wrote:Depends, did you put them in that situation in the first place?

No, but you could very easily - at no risk to yourself - get them out of that situation.


While it perverts the original scenario, no - to murder someone would imply intent and premeditation. But that doesn't make the act any less morally reprehensible.

Re: Schrödinger's Cat and Murder

PostPosted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 2:50 am
by thedotmaster
OneArrow wrote:
thedotmaster wrote:
OneArrow wrote:Depends, did you put them in that situation in the first place?

No, but you could very easily - at no risk to yourself - get them out of that situation.


While it perverts the original scenario, no - to murder someone would imply intent and premeditation. But that doesn't make the act any less morally reprehensible.


True, true..

Re: Schrödinger's Cat and Murder

PostPosted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:10 am
by Qubit
Bob. After long enough the superposition would no longer be a dead poisoned Alice and an alive Alice, but a dead poisoned Alice and a dead Alice that died of hunger/thirst/age. So Bob would kill Alice 100% even if Charles didn't make the observation. Charles making the observation would actually have given a chance of saving Alice. :)