Schoenfeld wrote:

We fill a box with a radioactive material which randomly emits
radiation. The box has a shutter, which is opened and immediately
thereafter shut by a clock at a precise time, thereby allowing some
radiation to escape. So the time is already known with precision. We
still want to measure the conjugate variable energy precisely. We
measure the energy by weighing the box before and after. The
equivalence between mass and energy from special relativity will allow
us to
determine precisely how much energy was left in the box.

Schoenfeld, you are an idiot both on paper and in the lab.

The experiment allows us to determine the exact energy of the box at
the exact time, violating quantum uncertainty with extreme prejudice.
:-)

Idiot. How accurately can you weigh? How accurately can you tell
time? How fast can you drop a shutter - faster than a
foot/nanosecond? Hey stooopid Schoenfeld, can you spell "adiabatic?"

Hey stooopid Schoenfeld, track the loss in weight of a cooling object
Planck time by Planck time. Idiot.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

Uncle Al wrote:
Schoenfeld wrote:

We fill a box with a radioactive material which randomly emits
radiation. The box has a shutter, which is opened and immediately
thereafter shut by a clock at a precise time, thereby allowing some
radiation to escape. So the time is already known with precision. We
still want to measure the conjugate variable energy precisely. We
measure the energy by weighing the box before and after. The
equivalence between mass and energy from special relativity will allow
us to
determine precisely how much energy was left in the box.

Schoenfeld, you are an idiot both on paper and in the lab.

The experiment allows us to determine the exact energy of the box at
the exact time, violating quantum uncertainty with extreme prejudice.
:-)

Idiot. How accurately can you weigh? How accurately can you tell
time? How fast can you drop a shutter - faster than a
foot/nanosecond? Hey stooopid Schoenfeld, can you spell "adiabatic?"

Hey stooopid Schoenfeld, track the loss in weight of a cooling object
Planck time by Planck time. Idiot.

Stupid Schwartz should realize I merely quoted Einstein. Do
wall-wailers get spanked when they insult their own brethren, stupid
Schwarz? Stick to stealing others work coz u ain't got nothing new.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

Schoenfeld wrote:

snip

Stupid Schwartz should realize I merely quoted Einstein.

I saw no quotes in your post. Where *should* they have been?

Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA

In article .com,
Schoenfeld wrote:


Uncle Al wrote:
Schoenfeld wrote:

We fill a box with a radioactive material which randomly emits
radiation. The box has a shutter, which is opened and immediately
thereafter shut by a clock at a precise time, thereby allowing some
radiation to escape. So the time is already known with precision. We
still want to measure the conjugate variable energy precisely. We
measure the energy by weighing the box before and after. The
equivalence between mass and energy from special relativity will allow
us to
determine precisely how much energy was left in the box.

Schoenfeld, you are an idiot both on paper and in the lab.

The experiment allows us to determine the exact energy of the box at
the exact time, violating quantum uncertainty with extreme prejudice.
:-)

Idiot. How accurately can you weigh? How accurately can you tell
time? How fast can you drop a shutter - faster than a
foot/nanosecond? Hey stooopid Schoenfeld, can you spell "adiabatic?"

Hey stooopid Schoenfeld, track the loss in weight of a cooling object
Planck time by Planck time. Idiot.

Stupid Schwartz should realize I merely quoted Einstein. Do
wall-wailers get spanked when they insult their own brethren, stupid
Schwarz? Stick to stealing others work coz u ain't got nothing new.

If you merely quoted Einstein, you should already know why the HUP still
has nothing wrong with it. Einstein tried that argument decades ago, did
you think it would work better today?


--
"We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters
will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to
the Internet, we know this is not true." -- Robert Wilensky