New efforts!

[Taceus Jiwede]

It's time for the weakly (not weekly) update,

We here at NCSoft have been in constant contact with a group wanting to buy City of Heroes from us.  We want to sell, but we don't want to sell.  It's complicated.  You see, it's like that cat in the box.  As long as we don't sell then the game is a success and a failure.  The moment we sell and it fails, we caused it to fail.  We are better off not knowing.  You can't blame us that way.  So, keep calm and play GW2 or something.

Schrödinger just hated cats.  His position on them isn't very super.

[Nyx Nought Nothing]

Schrödinger just hated cats.  His position on them isn't very super.

The entire point of Schrödinger's hypothetical cat experiment was to ridicule quantum mechanics. Sadly for him quantum physics continue to be a far more accurate description of the subatomic level of the universe than anything else.

Unless you're Joshex of course, in which case he has a far superior theory that he wishes he could share because it allows infinite fuel cells and complete control of matter down the level of his newly discovered squintions (1045 squintions make up a quark), but the world isn't ready yet and would misuse his discovery. Also, the discrepancy in lithium isotope ratios as observed throughout the universe compared to the projections of the standard model is due to a retroactive side effect of his secret experiments to confirm his Squintion Theory.

[Brigadine]

It's time for the weakly (not weekly) update,

We here at NCSoft have been in constant contact with a group wanting to buy City of Heroes from us.  We want to sell, but we don't want to sell.  It's complicated.  You see, it's like that cat in the box.  As long as we don't sell then the game is a success and a failure.  The moment we sell and it fails, we caused it to fail.  We are better off not knowing.  You can't blame us that way.  So, keep calm and play GW2 or something.

lol

[Risha]

Re: Weakly update.  It's been a long time since I've logged in.  I still miss CoX, I still dream of CoX, I still search out games that might work for me, to little avail.  I really need the first person keyboard navigation with arrow keys, etc.

Thanks for keeping us updated (and eventually I'll figure out the bug that keeps me from the most recent Paragon Chat...).

[LadyVamp]

It's time for the weakly (not weekly) update,

We here at NCSoft have been in constant contact with a group wanting to buy City of Heroes from us.  We want to sell, but we don't want to sell.  It's complicated.  You see, it's like that cat in the box.  As long as we don't sell then the game is a success and a failure.  The moment we sell and it fails, we caused it to fail.  We are better off not knowing.  You can't blame us that way.  So, keep calm and play GW2 or something.

That's what they said.  What they meant was, "We sell it.  The new owners turn it into an even bigger success.  We now have egg on our faces because we could have done that but didn't."

On the other hand, they could partner with the new owners and benefit from it being a success claiming it was due to their (NCSoft's)brilliant leadership.  Or blame the partners claiming their (the partner's) incompetence killed it thus saving themselves (NCSoft) of all wrong doing.  Beyond taking down the game in the first place of course.

2nd action sounds like a win-win-win to me.  And I'm just the customer who plays it.  :)

[LadyVamp]

Unless you're Joshex of course, in which case he has a far superior theory that he wishes he could share because it allows infinite fuel cells and complete control of matter down the level of his newly discovered squintions (1045 squintions make up a quark), but the world isn't ready yet and would misuse his discovery. Also, the discrepancy in lithium isotope ratios as observed throughout the universe compared to the projections of the standard model is due to a retroactive side effect of his secret experiments to confirm his Squintion Theory.

He's transdimentional and the laws of (you fill in the blank) do not apply.

[LadyVamp]

Would this be an immobilize, or a hold:

https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.wendoverterriers.com%2Fsitebuilder%2Fimages%2FLaneandpuppies-486x492.jpg

Proposed new power to add to the Beast Mastery Powerset?

[LadyVamp]

Paragon Avenger,  you should add to your tag line "---survivors will be shot again"  Otherwise, cool tagline.

[Taceus Jiwede]

The entire point of Schrödinger's hypothetical cat experiment was to ridicule quantum mechanics. Sadly for him quantum physics continue to be a far more accurate description of the subatomic level of the universe than anything else.

Unless you're Joshex of course, in which case he has a far superior theory that he wishes he could share because it allows infinite fuel cells and complete control of matter down the level of his newly discovered squintions (1045 squintions make up a quark), but the world isn't ready yet and would misuse his discovery. Also, the discrepancy in lithium isotope ratios as observed throughout the universe compared to the projections of the standard model is due to a retroactive side effect of his secret experiments to confirm his Squintion Theory.

Actually I was just making a joke lol.  Because its a thought experiment on the state of Quantum Superposition I thought I would make a joke about his position not being to super on them.

I never let a bad joke stop me from...well telling it.

[Arcana]

Actually I was just making a joke lol.  Because its a thought experiment on the state of Quantum Superposition I thought I would make a joke about his position not being to super on them.

I never let a bad joke stop me from...well telling it.

You know, for the record I've never been comfortable with the Copenhagen interpretation that Schrödinger uses in his thought experiment, because there are really serious problems with it.  First, for quantum superposition to even happen the "box" has to be completely isolated from the rest of the universe.  It is not enough that it is just opaque and you can't see inside of it.  Any state change inside the box is going to interact with the walls of the box which are theoretically observable.  Put more simply, the fact that you're looking at the walls means the cat must be alive or dead because the walls would look different if the cat was alive verses dead: its an observation that the Copenhagen interpretation could reasonably assume collapses superposition.  The fact that your eyes aren't sensitive enough to detect the difference is irrelevant.

This means for all intents and purposes the contents of the box are presumed to be in a kind of black hole: a container that nothing can presumably radiate out of.  But that then calls into question whether you can make *any* statements about the contents of the box.

The paradox also presumes that "alive-cat" and "dead-cat" are the only two possible quantum superposition states, but that's not true either.  For individual particles there might be only a very limited number of states that a single particle can be superpositioned between.  But for a huge collection of them, like a cat, the number of states is uncountable.  "Alive-cat" isn't just superposed with "Dead-cat" both of those states are superposed with an enormous number of other states.  There's the state where an atom at the end of the cat's claw quantum tunnels away from the cat's paw and is no longer part of the cat.  There's the state where just by chance all the radioactive potassium atoms in the cat's blood simultaneously decay, causing the cat to become radioactive.  There's the state where all the mass of the cat quantum tunnels into a microscopic black hole that then detonates with Hawking radiation.

That's what happens when you try to think about quantum superposition in the context of objects composed of trillions of trillions of trillions of quantum particles.  You don't have a clear demarcation of a couple of clear states.  You have an almost unlimited "blur" of different states smeared out across an enormously complex probability wave.  And that happens even if it is just a cat in a box, period.  Until you can properly conceptualize the notion of the almost infinite superpositions of all possible quantum states of just a plain old cat, any ideas you have about how to resolve Schrödinger's paradox are putting the cart before the horse.

Also, the Copenhagen interpretation (in my opinion) doesn't say the cat is alive *and* dead.  It doesn't say the cat is *neither* alive nor dead.  It actually says there is no cat until you observe it, whereupon you will (with very high probability) either observe a live cat or a dead cat (as previously mentioned, with extremely low probability you might observe a detonating cat, although I suppose it will be technically dead).


... I never let a bad joke stop me from sciencing the hell out of it.

[System Bridger]

The entire point of Schrödinger's hypothetical cat experiment was to ridicule quantum mechanics. Sadly for him quantum physics continue to be a far more accurate description of the subatomic level of the universe than anything else.

Hey, if we're discussing physics anyway, I have an issue with this statement. Schrödinger was basically a founding father of quantum mechanics. The Schrödinger equation is probably THE most significant and successful result of all of modern quantum mechanics. Why would it be "sadly for him" that his own equation of quantum mechanics is still one of the most successful equations physics have ever produced? And why would he ridicule his own creation? It was mostly Einstein who ridiculed quantum mechanics, not Schrödinger. At most, Schrödinger only wanted to ridicule the Copenhagen interpretation, not quantum mechanics itself.

[Fireheart]

In how many states would the cat appear to be alive?  Or dead?  Would the cat be 'alive' or 'dead' with its particles transposed to Mars?

Obviously, the problem with this proposition is a lack of details.

Be Well!
Fireheart

[Nyx Nought Nothing]

Hey, if we're discussing physics anyway, I have an issue with this statement. Schrödinger was basically a founding father of quantum mechanics. The Schrödinger equation is probably THE most significant and successful result of all of modern quantum mechanics. Why would it be "sadly for him" that his own equation of quantum mechanics is still one of the most successful equations physics have ever produced? And why would he ridicule his own creation? It was mostly Einstein who ridiculed quantum mechanics, not Schrödinger. At most, Schrödinger only wanted to ridicule the Copenhagen interpretation, not quantum mechanics itself.

My apologies, you're absolutely right. i misspoke. Miswrote? Anyway, i misrepresented his actual disagreement and its context.

[Taceus Jiwede]

You know, for the record I've never been comfortable with the Copenhagen interpretation that Schrödinger uses in his thought experiment, because there are really serious problems with it.  First, for quantum superposition to even happen the "box" has to be completely isolated from the rest of the universe.  It is not enough that it is just opaque and you can't see inside of it.  Any state change inside the box is going to interact with the walls of the box which are theoretically observable.  Put more simply, the fact that you're looking at the walls means the cat must be alive or dead because the walls would look different if the cat was alive verses dead: its an observation that the Copenhagen interpretation could reasonably assume collapses superposition.  The fact that your eyes aren't sensitive enough to detect the difference is irrelevant.

This means for all intents and purposes the contents of the box are presumed to be in a kind of black hole: a container that nothing can presumably radiate out of.  But that then calls into question whether you can make *any* statements about the contents of the box.

The paradox also presumes that "alive-cat" and "dead-cat" are the only two possible quantum superposition states, but that's not true either.  For individual particles there might be only a very limited number of states that a single particle can be superpositioned between.  But for a huge collection of them, like a cat, the number of states is uncountable.  "Alive-cat" isn't just superposed with "Dead-cat" both of those states are superposed with an enormous number of other states.  There's the state where an atom at the end of the cat's claw quantum tunnels away from the cat's paw and is no longer part of the cat.  There's the state where just by chance all the radioactive potassium atoms in the cat's blood simultaneously decay, causing the cat to become radioactive.  There's the state where all the mass of the cat quantum tunnels into a microscopic black hole that then detonates with Hawking radiation.

That's what happens when you try to think about quantum superposition in the context of objects composed of trillions of trillions of trillions of quantum particles.  You don't have a clear demarcation of a couple of clear states.  You have an almost unlimited "blur" of different states smeared out across an enormously complex probability wave.  And that happens even if it is just a cat in a box, period.  Until you can properly conceptualize the notion of the almost infinite superpositions of all possible quantum states of just a plain old cat, any ideas you have about how to resolve Schrödinger's paradox are putting the cart before the horse.

Also, the Copenhagen interpretation (in my opinion) doesn't say the cat is alive *and* dead.  It doesn't say the cat is *neither* alive nor dead.  It actually says there is no cat until you observe it, whereupon you will (with very high probability) either observe a live cat or a dead cat (as previously mentioned, with extremely low probability you might observe a detonating cat, although I suppose it will be technically dead).


... I never let a bad joke stop me from sciencing the hell out of it.

* slowly nods in uncertain agreement* Yeah that's totally what I thought too.....I just wanted to make sure its what YOU thought too.

Actually that is a very good take on it, I had seen some video where someone stated some issues they had with the whole Schrödinger's cat thought experiment that mirrors your's quite a bit. However for the sake of intellectual honesty I actually know very little about the whole thought experiment besides its existence and its argument.   The points you make seem to make more sense to me then what I do understand about the thought experiment, the whole thing always did seem a little off to me or at the very least too black and white.  But it would be inaccurate to say I know enough about the topic to really form my own opinion about it.  I am merely a tourist of things like this, I like to look and hear about it from more knowledgeable sources like your self, but my personal knowledge on the material is rather shallow.

Doesn't stop me from making bad jokes though!

[Arcana]

Hey, if we're discussing physics anyway, I have an issue with this statement. Schrödinger was basically a founding father of quantum mechanics. The Schrödinger equation is probably THE most significant and successful result of all of modern quantum mechanics. Why would it be "sadly for him" that his own equation of quantum mechanics is still one of the most successful equations physics have ever produced? And why would he ridicule his own creation? It was mostly Einstein who ridiculed quantum mechanics, not Schrödinger. At most, Schrödinger only wanted to ridicule the Copenhagen interpretation, not quantum mechanics itself.

You're kind of both half right and half wrong.  Schrodinger's thought experiment wasn't intended to ridicule quantum mechanics itself, but rather the physical interpretation of the wave functions that described quantum mechanics.  Schrodinger wasn't specifically targeting the Copenhagen interpretation alone, he was targeting the very notion that there was no physical analog to the components of the wave function beyond probabilities.

It is worth noting, however, that while Schrodinger is often referred to as the "father" of quantum mechanics, quantum mechanics actually has a number of critically important fathers and one of them was Einstein himself.  Einstein did critical work on interpreting the photoelectric effect and it is from this work specifically that the entire notion that energy is "quantized" comes from (it is also for this work that Einstein was awarded the Nobel prize, not his work on Relativity, which is an interesting story unto itself).  Both Schrodinger and Einstein were deeply troubled by the consequences of their work on quantum mechanics, and both expressed regret at having contributed to a theory that while mathematically successful appeared to generate interpretations of reality that conflicted with their fundamental beliefs of logical physics.

You can be the father of a child you don't want to take credit for.  That applies to both Schrodinger and Einstein when it comes to quantum mechanics.  Einstein, it should be noted, is mostly remembered for Relativity but in fact he is *the* seminal figure in physics of the twentieth century because of three works: Brownian motion (which is considered one of the capstones of 19th century atomic theory as it pertains to the kinetic theory of heat), the photoelectric effect (one of the originating works of quantum mechanics) and special and general relativity (the foundational works of, of course, relativistic physics).

[Arcana]

My apologies, you're absolutely right. i misspoke. Miswrote? Anyway, i misrepresented his actual disagreement and its context.

Actually, while Schrodinger didn't set out to ridicule quantum mechanics, he did set out to ridicule how people interpreted quantum mechanics.  So while you were technically wrong about Schrodinger trying to ridicule quantum mechanics itself, I'm not sure you were wrong about Schrodinger being sad about quantum mechanics not being displaced by a theory that would have conformed to his sense of the universe.  There is a strong minority of physicists who believe that physics has gotten too abstract, that even if scientific theories are extremely accurate in their predictions they do not serve the cause of Science if their descriptions of reality have no reasonable physical foundation.  That when we talk about "probability waves" we're talking about things we fundamentally have no idea about except their mathematical descriptions.  They believe science is about understanding not describing and quantum mechanics describes but doesn't explain.  I think if Schrodinger were alive today he would find good company here.

I happen to believe that understanding is something Science can inform, but it is not what Science does.  In other words, the Scientific Method doesn't churn out understanding.  And the reasons are lengthy to describe, but fundamentally I believe it has to do with why Science works at all.  I believe Science doesn't work because it causes people to have a better understanding of the world.  In fact, that can be counter-productive.  If people get too convinced they "understand" the world they might start to reject evidence to the contrary, to the detriment of Science.

I see Science as a gambler who bets on everything.  Will the Sun rise tomorrow?  Do hammers fall just as fast in Australia?  Will an atomic clock in orbit around the Earth declare the same time as one on the ground?  Science tries to win those bets.  It does so by seeing which bets it wins and which ones it loses, and learns to lose less often.  Fundamentally, that's all Science does.  Everything else is what people decide to create from the products of Science.  "Understanding" and models and the hows and whys of the world are what people decide to create from the products of Science.  Science ultimately cares nothing for them, although it can indirectly benefit from them because Science is driven by people: to the extent that the toys created by people using Science help them generate better Science, Science benefits.  But Science doesn't *care* if those people "understand" anything.  Science only cares if those people give it better rules to make better bets it can win more often.

Because that's ultimately how we all *judge* understanding, Science works.   I cannot actually tell if you or anyone else "understands" anything.  I can't see inside your head and see if your mental comprehensions match mine.  But I can test you, and you can test me.  If we make predictions, and our predictions agree, and they come true, we assume we both understand the same thing, and we are correct.  That's all we can do.  And because Science is driven by that one goal - make predictions that come true - it gets better by the only measure we have for judging anyone's understanding of anything: prove it: place a bet.  Let's see if you win.

Quantum Mechanics, General Relativity, Special Relativity: you think these things are "wrong?"  Bet against them.  You'll probably lose every time.

Newtonian gravity wins *a lot*.  It wins almost every time anyone tries to bet against it.  General Relativity ties Newton most of the time, and beats it every other time.  And that's why we believe in it.  Until something even better comes along. 

Newton's "understanding" is that gravity is a force, and everything exerts it to attract everything else, and it is felt instantaneously.  General Relativity's "understanding" is that gravity doesn't exist at all.  Space and time are curved, and everything in motion follows geodesics along that curved reality unless acted upon by a force.  And gravity is not a force: gravity doesn't act on anything.  From the perspective of "understanding" that's a revolution.  From the perspective of predictions, GR is a refinement of Newton that is a little better in extreme cases: Science just got a little better at winning bets.

[Serena]

****...

They might have very little interest in finalising a deal, but that hardly means they've got some super secret campaign they've put they're best minds on so they could troll the community of a long dead MMO just so they get just a little less spam than they usually deal with.

Ed. Note: The word filter has been shut off.  Please avoid the use of severe profanity, yes, even in acronym form. -Tahquitz

It's pretty easy to see the writing on the wall. They were getting email spam, facebook spam, twitter spam, hate on gaming websites and and all the capes and masks people were sending in and that got old really fast. So they finally agreed to talk to someone just so we would stop harassing them and it worked. So now you're left wondering if whether anything will happen or not and they never have to give you the courtesy of a yes or no we'll sale it.

[Arcana]

It's pretty easy to see the writing on the wall. They were getting email spam, facebook spam, twitter spam, hate on gaming websites and and all the capes and masks people were sending in and that got old really fast. So they finally agreed to talk to someone just so we would stop harassing them and it worked. So now you're left wondering if whether anything will happen or not and they never have to give you the courtesy of a yes or no we'll sale it.

This theory keeps popping up, and I'm afraid I have to continue to collapse it accordingly.  The main problem with this theory is that the chronology is off by about a year.  That theory might have made sense had talks began in the months after shutdown, but no matter how loud you think protests about City of Heroes shutdown were here in the phone booth, almost no one was talking about it much by the beginning of 2013.  By the time talks began circa early 2014, there was literally no bad press to quash.  If anything, the buyout talks gave people something to talk about which didn't exist before.

In other words, the probability that anyone at NCSoft was starting negotiations with anyone for some publicity purpose is basically zero.  It is just as likely that right now someone is trying to upgrade their ticket on the Titanic to first class "just in case."

[Vee]

So are there states where the cat has a ticket for the Titanic? And if so does the class of the ticket affect the cat's chances of living? Just trying to keep up here.

[Mageman]

I'm tired.

Tired of coming here and finding nothing has changed since "The masks come off". It's been over 2 years, and we still have no information. Almost a year ago, Ironwolf said "YES, EFFORTS ARE STILL ONGOING."

I'm under the impression that talks have stalled. I can think of several scenarios as to why this has happened - none of them are good for those of us who want to see CoX return.

1. NCSoft has set so many hoops that the team trying to get the IP can't jump through them all. I see something like a portion of the gross of what they get from players. This may not make it financially feasible for someone trying to reboot the game. Especially if all the account data can't be recovered. They can't guarantee how many players will return so promising NCSoft so much money in the future is something tough to accept.

2. NCSoft doesn't have everything needed to reboot the game. Some things like the base servers, the auction houses, and/or the Architect Entertainment system is missing.

3. The team trying to get the IP have placed some requirements on NCSoft that they can't or won't meet. Something like NCSoft probably has the account information backed up somewhere, but aren't willing to grant the buyers access to it.

4. Nate Downes and his team have realized that if they restore CoX right now, this will seriously hurt the chances of "The Phoenix Project" becoming financial stable. Why should people pay for their new game when they can pay and play CoX?

5. Nate Downes and his team have received the IP to CoX, but are waiting for "The Phoenix Project" to come online and offer you the ability to play CoX with a subscription to their new game.

These are just some of my thoughts on the subject. I know I'm being pessimistic, but I've been following this thread since I found it (months before "The Masks Come Off". And I've become disheartened by the long wait with no additional information.

I've even bought some tickets for Megamillions and Powerball with the hope that I would win and then assist restoring CoX. I haven't won yet, but I keep hoping.

In any event, I believe that whoever gets the IP to CoX should try to get NCSoft agree to the following:

• Somehow get the ability to restore the account information. This will help get more players to return since they will at least have their veteran rewards and anything else they purchased for their accounts.
• Put in a clause that will allow them to use any information and/or tools for working on CoX, no matter the source. If, for example, a programmer for CoX happens to find a disk with some of this information and gives it to the new owners of CoX, they can use it without restrictions
• They can continue to update and improve CoX - including using what Atlas Park Revival has done in trying to recreate the game a different game engine.