>> |
Sage for lack of pic, plus tl;dr
Anonymous
>>726824
>>725550 >long story short, scientist killed a cat with science. Maybe.
The details simplified here are that the scientific experiment in the theory might have killed a cat. The only inaccuracy is that they forgot to mention it was theory, not practical.
Of course, they were suggesting to Google it to find the details. If someone suggests going to read a book or see a film they usually don't tell you the entire contents of that book or film.
What you should be griping about is the angle they're approaching from. It would be easier to give the 'glove in a bag' example to explain the theory itself, but they were trying to prove Schrodinger is a cat, not that something in a box doesn't know what it is or is doing until you go look at it.
|