>>13316364>Holy shit brainlet this is literally what the problem is aboutSo "stop quantifying" then. There's no actual quantity. I've described the problem and why the answer to OP's question is simply "yes".
>At what point does an electron, that is in a superposition of spin up and spin down states, assume a single state?"Yes". Why? Because you're making it up as you go along in the first place!
>Before you say, "when a measurement is made", what is a measurement exactly?"YES". A measurement is indeed "made". As in "made the fuck up". It's a measurement, not what's measured. What the fuck else would you expect? Self geomancing rulers? Electron microscopes that work with no power and no sputter coated gold specimens? The absurdity of expecting wood to cut itself to 55 inches after reading it on a tape measure?
>At what point does quantum become classical? It doesn't? Then what is a measurement made by a classical device?How do you measure quantity when there is no actual quantity? "You make it up". So make up another belief system that "more accurately describes" and that's what you'll end up with.
