wellwisher
Well-Known Member
Schrödinger's Cat is a famous thought experiment that demonstrates the idea in quantum physics that tiny particles can be in two states at once until they're observed. It asks you to imagine a cat in a box with a mechanism that might kill it. Until you look inside, the cat is both alive and dead at the same time.
The Harris Campaign is similar to Schrödinger's Cat in the sense both use a closed box. In the thought experiment Schrödinger's Cat there is vial of poison and a geiger counter. If the geiger counter senses any radio active decay, it triggers a mechanism that break the vial and the cat dies. But since we do know the half life of the radio active decay, as long as the black box remains closed, we do not know if the cat is alive or dead. In a sense it is both alive and dead.
The Harris Campaign is like the Schrödinger's Cat thought experiment. We do not know if she is Liberal or Moderate, but appears to be both at the same time. We cannot know for sure, until we open the box. In casino math, the black box has to stay shut, so even fantasy is a valid as reality; odds forever. The data does not even have to touch the curve that represents the theory. The DNC campaign now works the same way as black box science and math, via the black box and Schrödinger's Cat campaign strategy.
I do not believe there is any room for a black box in science, since politics has an impact on science funding, and the Harris campaign shows how this technique can be used for scams. As long as Harris does not have to answer anything, but she can giggle and say rehearsed answers, unquestioned, the black box stays shut and there are odds both ways, but no reality confirmation, either way.
The DNC team, that is Schrödinger's Catting the Harris Campaign, is also the pushing push the Climate Agenda that is based on black box science. We do not know for sure if that is dead or alive, since the black box math does not allow the box to be opened. Fear and risk, are used to inflate the alive option but dead is not out of the question.
I presented this in Psychology, but it was detoured to ethics and morals, which is may also be appropriate.