Charles Xavier | Professor X (
excessivehubris) wrote in
ataraxion2012-07-23 03:16 pm
Entry tags:
Video 003
[When the video flicks on, there is an awkward moment where the device is turned around into position until it is set up against something to put the feed on the possibly familiar countenance of Charles Xavier. Before it settles, it shows off what looks to be one of the ship libraries and perhaps a mug of tea and also the inside of Xavier’s forearm.
SCI-007-047, in case anyone was wondering which Xavier was speaking today.
He is sitting in the library, shirt sleeves rolled up to the elbows, obviously deep into some sort of work with a notebook, his expression pensive as he reaches for the mug of tea.]
Many of us, who share a history of Earth, may be familiar with the ‘thought experiment’ or paradox of Schrodinger’s Cat. Schrodinger’s Cat came about from the physicist Erwin Schrodinger as an illustration of what he saw as a problem with the Copenhagen interpretation of the theory of quantum mechanics.
There is a great deal that could be discussed and even debated on this ‘thought experiment’ but at the moment I have been thinking on the superposition property that is tested by Schrodinger’s paradox.
[Pushing himself to his feet, Charles walked from his chair to a whiteboard he had found and drawn upon.]
Superposition property states that ‘for all linear systems, the net response at a given place and time caused by two or more stimuli is the sum of the responses which would have been caused by each stimulus individually.’
Or in other words. [He takes up a marker and begins to write out a mathematical formula] If input A produces response X and input B produces response Y then input (A+B) produces response (X+Y).
Further, mathematically, for a linear system, F, defined by F(x) = y, where x is some sort of stimulus or input and y is some sort of response or output, the superposition (i.e. sum) of stimuli yields a superposition of the respective responses:
F(x1+x2+…) = F(x1) + F(x2)…
[Finishing with the math, he sets the pen down and walks back to his desk.]
I promise, this is not an impromptu math or physics lesson. My point is that, using these models we can come back to the prediction, using quantum mechanics, absent a collapse postulate, that an observer observing a quantum superposition will turn into a superposition of different observers seeing different things. Just like Schrödinger's cat, the observer will have a wavefunction which describes all the possible outcomes. Still, in actual experience, an observer never feels a superposition, but always feels that one of the outcomes has occurred with certainty.
[Has he confused you yet Tranquility? Charles pauses to take a drink of tea, leaning his hip on the table as he looks at his whiteboard.]
I believe it could be argued, that each and every one of us has been placed in the dual position of observer and the cat. We are taken from our linear origins and suspended in the superposition of an infinite number of potentials. We are all also observers to the superposition of the system and our conclusions can collapse the indefinitely suspended wavefunction into a finite possibility of options.
[Stopping himself, Charles finishes off his mug of tea and mentally kicks himself off the urge to keep rambling.]
In other words, to linear lines of origin, or home if you will, we are suspended like the cat, between the superposition of there and not there. To those who would observe us, our friends and loved ones, their observation determines our interpretative state.
They see us, interact with us there and so the wavefunction option determines us as there for those who know us at home. However here, on this ship, it is our state of observation that defines our interaction with this quantum system of superposition.
Or to boil it down further, there are theoretical physics that support the idea that though we are trapped here, experiencing a timeline that may feel like months of separation from our points of origin, we are truly not gone from those points or from the people who would look for us upon them.
This theoretical also addresses the question of why there can be different versions of the same individual on this one convergence of linear lines but that would be a lesson for another day.
Alex? Erik? There is the answer to your question.
[ooc: Holy crap but I am nowhere NEAR Charles Xavier’s level of intelligence. Most of this has been riffed off Wikipedia, interpreted and filtered through my long suffering science nerd of an RP partner.]
SCI-007-047, in case anyone was wondering which Xavier was speaking today.
He is sitting in the library, shirt sleeves rolled up to the elbows, obviously deep into some sort of work with a notebook, his expression pensive as he reaches for the mug of tea.]
Many of us, who share a history of Earth, may be familiar with the ‘thought experiment’ or paradox of Schrodinger’s Cat. Schrodinger’s Cat came about from the physicist Erwin Schrodinger as an illustration of what he saw as a problem with the Copenhagen interpretation of the theory of quantum mechanics.
There is a great deal that could be discussed and even debated on this ‘thought experiment’ but at the moment I have been thinking on the superposition property that is tested by Schrodinger’s paradox.
[Pushing himself to his feet, Charles walked from his chair to a whiteboard he had found and drawn upon.]
Superposition property states that ‘for all linear systems, the net response at a given place and time caused by two or more stimuli is the sum of the responses which would have been caused by each stimulus individually.’
Or in other words. [He takes up a marker and begins to write out a mathematical formula] If input A produces response X and input B produces response Y then input (A+B) produces response (X+Y).
Further, mathematically, for a linear system, F, defined by F(x) = y, where x is some sort of stimulus or input and y is some sort of response or output, the superposition (i.e. sum) of stimuli yields a superposition of the respective responses:
F(x1+x2+…) = F(x1) + F(x2)…
[Finishing with the math, he sets the pen down and walks back to his desk.]
I promise, this is not an impromptu math or physics lesson. My point is that, using these models we can come back to the prediction, using quantum mechanics, absent a collapse postulate, that an observer observing a quantum superposition will turn into a superposition of different observers seeing different things. Just like Schrödinger's cat, the observer will have a wavefunction which describes all the possible outcomes. Still, in actual experience, an observer never feels a superposition, but always feels that one of the outcomes has occurred with certainty.
[Has he confused you yet Tranquility? Charles pauses to take a drink of tea, leaning his hip on the table as he looks at his whiteboard.]
I believe it could be argued, that each and every one of us has been placed in the dual position of observer and the cat. We are taken from our linear origins and suspended in the superposition of an infinite number of potentials. We are all also observers to the superposition of the system and our conclusions can collapse the indefinitely suspended wavefunction into a finite possibility of options.
[Stopping himself, Charles finishes off his mug of tea and mentally kicks himself off the urge to keep rambling.]
In other words, to linear lines of origin, or home if you will, we are suspended like the cat, between the superposition of there and not there. To those who would observe us, our friends and loved ones, their observation determines our interpretative state.
They see us, interact with us there and so the wavefunction option determines us as there for those who know us at home. However here, on this ship, it is our state of observation that defines our interaction with this quantum system of superposition.
Or to boil it down further, there are theoretical physics that support the idea that though we are trapped here, experiencing a timeline that may feel like months of separation from our points of origin, we are truly not gone from those points or from the people who would look for us upon them.
This theoretical also addresses the question of why there can be different versions of the same individual on this one convergence of linear lines but that would be a lesson for another day.
Alex? Erik? There is the answer to your question.
[ooc: Holy crap but I am nowhere NEAR Charles Xavier’s level of intelligence. Most of this has been riffed off Wikipedia, interpreted and filtered through my long suffering science nerd of an RP partner.]

[audio]
Which means at home apparently I'm making massive life changes and Roxanne's timeline is valid, and even if another me appears, it is equally as likely to be me as I am now.
Hrmph.
There's further support for this in those who have gone 'home' and returned. Tali'zorah vas Normandy, for instance. Experienced no time dilation and no confusion. Merely woke up, went about her life, came back, and went about things here anew.
[He's itching for paper and string, to remake the cloud -- to visualize, work, but-- no. Not anymore.]
Thank you. For that.
Now if we could only answer the question of 'if we're dead here, has the person at home died as well'. Or maybe that's one best left unanswered... lest people start trying to kill themselves to escape the quantum box.
[audio]
As for your question, that would be an entire set of theories and 'thought experiments' in and of itself!
[He pauses thoughtfully for a moment before he continues.]
Though, I suppose it could simply be that one of the infinite options from your original superposition simply collapses and ceases to be viable.
[audio]
Anyway, PSA done: That's both bizarre and heartening, still. I hadn't really -- thought of putting the math to it. Makes me feel a little better.
[audio]
Charles gave a soft chuckle at Megamind's last bit and shrugged, though of course MegaMind could not see the action.]
I actually hadn't considered doing such myself until a couple of friends asked me for my thoughts. I got started and well, it does keep one busy, even if it is all little more than fixed speculation.
[audio]
When you get something for women, let me know. I'm still fairly sure they're the unsolvable equation, but-- maybe my method is wrong.
[Minor lovelife kvetching done, he asks, instead]: What's your background disciplines, anyway?
[audio]
[audio]
Re: [audio]
Re: [audio]
video
[Alex believes this, firmly. And as usual, he says it in the most blunt, stupid way. He's been getting better, but at least when it comes to him, he knows he's got some strange capacity for alternative universes. It's just--]
I mean--maybe for some people, this makes sense. But not for me.
[A beat]
You might also want to speak english next time. Some of us don't have PhDs.
[Alex only understood half of what the Professor was saying.]
video
You merely asked for my opinion, Alex. You are, of course, free to do as you wish with the answer I provided.
[As for the speak English comment, Charles had thought he'd been fairly restrained in his summary.]
video
[Alex rolls his eyes. Well, it isn't like they don't clash sometimes.]
Like can you ever just stop? Like turn off things for a damn minute and breathe?
[It's almost like he's upset at Charles for working so hard. But it's frustrating, because Alex feels like his own research (which Charles, of course, knows nothing about), is being discounted. Which, is his fault, isn't it? Not the Professors.]
video
[Charles said gently bur firmly. At the question, however, he looks genuinely taken aback by Alex's aggressive tone.]
I am honestly not sure what you mean exactly, Alex?
video; encryption 95%
[Alex runs a hand through his hair, using his Stark encryption.]
Have you actually listened to yourself? This was like a damn lecture. I get that it's your thing and stuff, and I know you are like the super brain, but you're gonna burn yourself out.
[A beat.]
I talked to time Gods. Like genuine time gods, here. They said this shit is like a tree--with branches and--
[Damn it, he curses to himself.]
I'm not going to be able to explain it to you. I ain't smart enough for this shit.
[It is clear he's more frustrated at himself, than Charles. He just doesn't know how to articulate it--he is still learning from the Striders.]
video; encryption 95%
video; encryption 95%
video; encryption 95%
video; encryption 95%
video; encryption 95%
video; encryption 95%
video; encryption 95%
video; encryption 95%
audio
What do you believe time is?
audio
audio
So once again, I ask: what you believe time is. If you could define it - how would you?
audio
In the end, his response is brief, yet thoughtful.]
In the most simple of terms? Consciousness.
and now permavideo
Interesting. [ In those rare moments that someone has, and truly has, caught his interest. Even for a moment, and not for tricks and kicks but for stimulation. Good and well constructed conversation of theory, philosophical types, or political debates. These things.
Partially bringing him back to the thought he wants to believe, but is uncertain, a thought in which he would not even outright think just yet. ]
'Tis because we are conscious and our awareness of such passage makes time real?
[ A beat ]
Care to hear my thoughts?
permavideo
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
action;
You know, I never was that good of a student, Charles, but correct me if I'm wrong, you're saying there's nothing wrong with being here at all?
action;
Erik! Oh, well I would not say that exactly. There is quite a bit wrong in our being here, starting with the fact that most of us are here without our consent.
[Sitting back in the chair, Charles set his pen down and folded his fingers together across his stomach.]
However, from a strictly mathematical point of view, there is evidence to suggest that our being here is not causing death, destruction and annihilation of our linear points of origin.
action;
Destruction and death, Charles? [ Scoffing, he shakes his head. ] It seems like you're exaggerating on that front.
action;
It is all actually quite fascinating, though I do wish it was more academic and less practical application.
action;
I can't tell if that's a metaphor or if you truly are referring to an insect like that.
action;
action;
action;
action;
action;
action;
action;
action;
action;
action;
action;
voice; encrypted 100%
[ EEHEHEHEHE. the amusement is all there in her tone. ]
voice; encrypted 100%
[He takes the teasing in good order and returns it with a tone of affection.]
voice; encrypted 100%
[ a pause for thought ]
Though really, this alternate reality thing is so strange. I mean, even now. With two of you here, it's not something I've really actually wrapped my head around. I'm not sure I like the idea of there being another version of me somewhere, just waiting to show up here. What if- What if she's from a world where she doesn't have my abilities? Or she never met you? Or, worst case scenario, she did meet you and she actual understands all of your scientific rambling? Horrifying!
voice; encrypted 100%
Well there is still loving amusement in his tone, despite the eye rolling.]
The fact that you are awake and responding to me tells me I need to dial the scientific rambling up a notch.
voice; encrypted 100%
voice; encrypted 100%
voice; encrypted 100%
not here
And all the geeky science can only delight him.]