someone asked me to explain about wind measurements during storms and he made reference to Heissenburg. i planned to respond by the end of the year. however, a hardware problem caused me to lose my email records. so if you are still interested, please contant me and i'll do the writing. foxhill_at_shore.intercom.net in the mean time, i thought the reference to heissenburg was quite strange because i had just returned to the US after talking with Prof. Werner Alpers of Germany - who worked with Heissenburg some years ago. hopefully we will be working together on the wind measurments in storms soon. bye bye bliven *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
Hi Larry, That would be me. I remember being you saying something like you could predict rain or wind but not both, which reminded me of the Heissenburg Uncertainty Principle that you can know the speed or direction of a particle, but not both. Anyway, if you do have time to give a short, layperson-accessible explanation about the weather prediction thing, I'm still interested, and I suspect others on the list would be too. Reminds me of the most erudite graffiti I ever saw in a washroom: "I used to think I understood Heissenburg - but now I'm not so sure." Cheers, Philip T. At 10:29 PM 12/21/98 -0500, you wrote: >someone asked me to explain about wind measurements during storms and he >made reference to Heissenburg. > >i planned to respond by the end of the year. however, a hardware problem >caused me to lose my email records. so if you are still interested, please >contant me and i'll do the writing. foxhill_at_shore.intercom.net > >in the mean time, i thought the reference to heissenburg was quite strange >because i had just returned to the US after talking with Prof. Werner >Alpers of Germany - >who worked with Heissenburg some years ago. > >hopefully we will be working together on the wind measurments in storms >soon. > >bye bye bliven > > >*************************************************************************** >PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List >Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net >Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net >Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ >*************************************************************************** > **************************************** Mountain Equipment Co-op 1655 West 3rd Avenue, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6J 1K1 Tel: 640-732-1989 Fax: 604-731-6483 email: pid_at_mec.ca Visit our website at: http://www.mec.ca ***************************************** *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
> > That would be me. I remember being you saying > something like you could predict rain or wind > but not both, which reminded me of the Heissenburg > Uncertainty Principle that you can know the speed > or direction of a particle, but not both. OK, --- it doesn't really matter, but I can't let this one slip by. Your statement of the Heissenburg uncertainty principle is wrong. The correct statement is a bit complicated, but in its simplest form, it says that you can't simultaneously determine the position and momentum of a particle with arbitrary precision. As you more precisely measure one, you degrade your precision in the measurement of the other. Momentum is a vector quantity equal to the mass times the velocity of a particle. Hence, it includes both the speed and the direction of motion. According to my limited understanding of the problem (I'm a quantum mechanic not a meterologist), the problem with predicting wind and rain is due to issues that fall under the heading of complexity theory. I could explain this, but it would take more typing than my fingers could handle right now. Also, it doesn't really matter in a discussion of sea kayaking (but its fun --- I just love physics). --Tim *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
You're a Quantum Mechanic? Great, so what can you tell me about the mileage on the new 99 Quantums? Are they better than the 98 models? Have they solved the problem with the Tacyon (sp?) drive slippage? Sorry about that, couldn't resist. Thanks for correcting my over-simplification/misrepresentation of the Uncertainty Principle. My physics is at a purely PBS documentary/Steven Hawking's popular writings level. However, in my own defense, I'd like to say that at least I don't misrepresent the weirder aspects of quantum physics to suggest that we all "create our reality" or indulge in similar wooly new-age thinking. I do confess that when people talk about the "collapse of the wave function" I tend to picture a high brace failing rather than any lab experiment. Like you say, it may not matter in a sea kayak context, but it's fun. In a published essay, I once drew a parallel between how the length of water waves determines what effect, if any, they will have on a kayak, and the way the wavelength of electromagnetic radiation determines whether it will or will not interact with small particles. Hope I got that right. Cheers, Philip T. At 10:21 AM 12/22/98 -0800, you wrote: >OK, --- it doesn't really matter, but I can't let this one slip by. > >Your statement of the Heissenburg uncertainty principle is wrong. The >correct statement is a bit complicated, but in its simplest form, it says >that you can't simultaneously determine the position and momentum of a >particle with arbitrary precision. As you more precisely measure one, you >degrade your precision in the measurement of the other. > >Momentum is a vector quantity equal to the mass times the velocity of a >particle. Hence, it includes both the speed and the direction of motion. > >According to my limited understanding of the problem (I'm a quantum mechanic >not a meterologist), the problem with predicting wind and rain is due to >issues that fall under the heading of complexity theory. I could explain >this, but it would take more typing than my fingers could handle right now. >Also, it doesn't really matter in a discussion of sea kayaking (but its fun >--- I just love physics). > > >--Tim > > > **************************************** Mountain Equipment Co-op 1655 West 3rd Avenue, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6J 1K1 Tel: 640-732-1989 Fax: 604-731-6483 email: pid_at_mec.ca Visit our website at: http://www.mec.ca ***************************************** *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
OK, I've been watching this thread for a few posts now and I feel I must speak up. I'm really not trying to be picky, but....it's Heisenberg not Heissenburg. You mechanics of quantum should know that. Have a great holiday(s)......Bill Leonhardt *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
At 05:20 PM 12/22/98 -0500, Bill Leonhardt wrote: >OK, I've been watching this thread for a few posts now and I feel I must >speak up. I'm really not trying to be picky, but....it's Heisenberg not >Heissenburg. You mechanics of quantum should know that. > >Have a great holiday(s)......Bill Leonhardt didn't he have a blimp named after him , no that was the guy experimenting with matches sorry. Dana *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
Bottom line... just when can we expect Santa? Best of the season, Richard Culpeper ---------- > From: Mattson, Timothy G <timothy.g.mattson_at_intel.com> --snip-- > Your statement of the Heissenburg uncertainty principle is wrong. The > correct statement is a bit complicated, but in its simplest form, it says > that you can't simultaneously determine the position and momentum of a > particle with arbitrary precision. As you more precisely measure one, you > degrade your precision in the measurement of the other. > > Momentum is a vector quantity equal to the mass times the velocity of a > particle. Hence, it includes both the speed and the direction of motion. > *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
That would depend on where. Realizing that due Heissenburg's principle you can never precisely know where and when. At 04:14 PM 12/22/98 -0500, Richard Culpeper wrote: >Bottom line... just when can we expect Santa? > >Best of the season, >Richard Culpeper > >---------- >> From: Mattson, Timothy G <timothy.g.mattson_at_intel.com> >--snip-- > >> Your statement of the Heissenburg uncertainty principle is wrong. The >> correct statement is a bit complicated, but in its simplest form, it says >> that you can't simultaneously determine the position and momentum of a >> particle with arbitrary precision. As you more precisely measure one, >you >> degrade your precision in the measurement of the other. >> >> Momentum is a vector quantity equal to the mass times the velocity of a >> particle. Hence, it includes both the speed and the direction of motion. >> >*************************************************************************** >PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List >Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net >Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net >Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ >*************************************************************************** > *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:32:55 PDT