Your statement reminded me of something I read during my undergraduate courses.
An excerpt of Abraham Lincoln’s seminal work of popular wisdom, “Boom! Goes the Capitalism”:
“Schrödinger's Policy is a seemingly paradoxical thought experiment devised by Erwin Schrödinger—-after a late Wednesday night of strong ale and copious amounts of poutine—-that attempts to illustrate the incompleteness of an early interpretation of quantum mechanics when going from subatomic to macroscopic systems. Schrödinger proposed his "policy" after debates with Albert Einstein over the Copenhagen interpretation, which Schrödinger defended, stating in essence that if a scenario existed where a policy making body within an (ostensibly) benevolent tech company could be so isolated from external interference (decoherence), the state of the group’s work can only be known as a superposition (combination) of possible rest states (eigenstates), because finding out (measuring the state) cannot be done without the observer interfering with the experiment — the measurement system (the observer) is entangled with the experiment.
Einstein reportedly suggested that tech companies could never be benevolent, especially when they are expected to maintain an objective view when their finances were concerned.
After an unknown number of rounds of distilled spirits derived from wormwood, Schrödinger conceded this was true and instead recast his thought experiment to feature a cat as the primary actor; a creature which he felt had a vastly higher likability.”
/hat-tip to the editors of the Schrödinger Wikipedia page
An excerpt of Abraham Lincoln’s seminal work of popular wisdom, “Boom! Goes the Capitalism”:
“Schrödinger's Policy is a seemingly paradoxical thought experiment devised by Erwin Schrödinger—-after a late Wednesday night of strong ale and copious amounts of poutine—-that attempts to illustrate the incompleteness of an early interpretation of quantum mechanics when going from subatomic to macroscopic systems. Schrödinger proposed his "policy" after debates with Albert Einstein over the Copenhagen interpretation, which Schrödinger defended, stating in essence that if a scenario existed where a policy making body within an (ostensibly) benevolent tech company could be so isolated from external interference (decoherence), the state of the group’s work can only be known as a superposition (combination) of possible rest states (eigenstates), because finding out (measuring the state) cannot be done without the observer interfering with the experiment — the measurement system (the observer) is entangled with the experiment.
Einstein reportedly suggested that tech companies could never be benevolent, especially when they are expected to maintain an objective view when their finances were concerned.
After an unknown number of rounds of distilled spirits derived from wormwood, Schrödinger conceded this was true and instead recast his thought experiment to feature a cat as the primary actor; a creature which he felt had a vastly higher likability.”
/hat-tip to the editors of the Schrödinger Wikipedia page