Recent content by Kairos

No, I just wanted to know how radioactivity is viewed theoretically in orthodox quantum physics. DrClaude's post #4 is very instructive for me: decayed/undecayed superposition very quickly destroyed by the environment under ordinary conditions. In my old (classical) physics classes...

Yes, that's it. I'm looking for an interpretation of single atom decay in the same way as the Malus polarization experiment with single photons. The purely probabilistic 1/2,1/2 description is similar to that of classical physics.

After the inevitable decoherence, there are two possibilities: either the atom is disintegrated and the story ends there, or it is not disintegrated. In the latter case, does it immediately re-enter a nondecayed/disintegrated superposition state? This would mean that an unstable atom is...

Thank you, so it's a question of the number of atoms. In this case, could a single atom be the superposition of an infinite number of decay states following the exponential decay curve? For example, in the case of slow beta- radioactivity, the emission of an electron would be spread out over...

In a block of 1 kg of radioactive material that has reached its half-life, are the atoms in a superposed disintegrated/undecayed state (50-50), or are they all individually determined (50% disintegrated and 50% undecayed) before observation ?

yes, that's why I spoke of expansion in this post, and not acceleration. dark energy favors expansion contrary to gravity

Thank you. I understand that the densities decrease and lambda is left alone at the end. What I don't understand is why rho and lambda affect H in the same direction. I would have thought - and + signs since lambda increases expansion while rho slows it down.

If H will approaches a constant value given by the cosmological constant, there will still be a continuous acceleration ?(exponential).

Orodruin, Reading other threads on the same topic, I read in one of your posts, "In fact, in a dark energy dominated universe, H is constant. I get it!

If k is not constant, this changes everything (but can we still talk about proportionality?). So how does the Hubble constant evolve over time according to the 1998 discovery?

OK, if k is a constant of proportionality, then the expansion is exponential and therefore accelerated.

Hubble's law certainly describes well de Sitter's universe, but beyond the details, I'm just saying that this law describes an acceleration of expansion. You seem to agree?

This is certainly very important, but I pointed out that even if k had been constant, the expansion would still have accelerated.

of course, but that's not relevant to my question.

Velocity dx(t)/dt is proportional to distance x(t), so dx(t)/dt=k*x(t), so x(t)=exp(k*t), which accelerates with time? without the need to increase k