walzav29 Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Scoring 41 points and still losing to the San Diego Chargers! After a 41 - 44 loss to the Chargers in 1985 they beat the Steeler the next week. It's a lock! You can't argue with science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaxonFord87 Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Pretty much nothing is a lock in the NFL, so we will just have to see what happens this weekend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 I'd agree because everyone said patriots coulden't lose 2 in a row! but then they had to go lose 2 in a row. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShulaSteakhouse Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Leave it to the Bengals' to defy logic, records that involve improbable losing, and records for futility. If anyone can do it, our beloved Bungals can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Antonio Bengal Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Scoring 41 points and still losing to the San Diego Chargers! After a 41 - 44 loss to the Chargers in 1985 they beat the Steeler the next week. It's a lock! You can't argue with science.Anyone who knows anything about science knows that most of science is just probabilities. There are no locks, only events that are more probable than others. This Sunday, we will see science at work! You see, the Bengals will be locked in a box for three hours. During those three hours, there is a probability that the offense and defense decay. The decay of the offense and defense will set off a Geiger counter which through a relay will break a small flask of ill-humor, anger and frustration. If we let this system go for the 3 hours, we won't know the state of the Bengals until we observe the system. In this time before we observe the system, the Bengals are neither alive or dead. The Bengals will be a mixture of both the dead and alive states, but the state won't resolve itself until someone observes the alive cats or the dead cats in the box. However, I imagine that there will be many observing the cats in the box, so the state should resolve itself quite quickly. Nevertheless, there is no "lock" ... only more and less probable that the cats are alive or dead.* Congratulations to those of you (probably skyline and a couple others) who actually understand the science allusion here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edogger Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 There are always exceptions to the rules....And The 210...what in the world are you talking about????? You weren't kidding that only a few will understand this. I unfortunately am not one of them! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Antonio Bengal Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 It's a classic thought experiment in physics which was meant to demonstrate the absurdity of an early interpretation of quantum mechanics. The experiment is called "Schrödinger's Cat." In the thought experiment, a cat is put into a box and there's a 50% probability that an event will occur within an hour. If the event occurs, a toxic gas is released and the cat is dead. If not, the cat is still alive. However, according to early quantum mechanics, the cat remains a mixture of being alive and dead until the box is opened and the cat is observed. At that point the quantum state would snap to either the alive or dead state. Obviously, this is quite absurd for something macroscopic to exist in a mixure of alive and dead states like this, which was the incompleteness in quantum mechanics that Schrödinger was pointing out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalPimp Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Scoring 41 points and still losing to the San Diego Chargers! After a 41 - 44 loss to the Chargers in 1985 they beat the Steeler the next week. It's a lock! You can't argue with science.I like your optimism, I believe they will beat the Saints, but not because of your theory. Your theory is FLAWED. There are too many Variables, for instance, the '06 team has completely different players than the '85 team, so you cant say "this or that" will happen because it happened 21 years ago. Also, the quality of the opposition the following week also differs, for instance the steelers in '85 finished the season 7-9, whereas the Saints are currently 6-3, so the Bengals are facing a "tougher" opponent following this loss as opposed to the one from 21 years ago. The only similarity is the points that they scored...everything else is different....You're really reaching on that one......But I like your Optimism....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Obviously, this is quite absurd for something macroscopic to exist in a mixure of alive and dead states like this, which was the incompleteness in quantum mechanics that Schrödinger was pointing out.Actually, I think it was Einstein pointing that out (he never liked quantum mechanics much) but why quibble when you've reminded me of a favorite poem...http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_122.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BengalPimp Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Obviously, this is quite absurd for something macroscopic to exist in a mixure of alive and dead states like this, which was the incompleteness in quantum mechanics that Schrödinger was pointing out.Actually, I think it was Einstein pointing that out (he never liked quantum mechanics much) but why quibble when you've reminded me of a favorite poem...http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_122.html I didnt know Chuck Cecil(former Packers and Cards Safety) wrote poetry he only made the Pro Bowl once, and kept gettin in trouble for helmet to helmet hits, so why would I want to "ASK CECIL" anything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Antonio Bengal Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Actually, I think it was Einstein pointing that out (he never liked quantum mechanics much) but why quibble when you've reminded me of a favorite poem...Einstein and Schrödinger were both in the same camp which viewed quantum mechanics as incomplete and leaving much to be desired. Einstein had pointed out something similar, and Schrödinger extended Einstein's original idea into the cat experiment.P.S. Nice poem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.