Off Topic - Schrodinger's Cat

Last weekend while enjoying one of my favorite pastimes studying particle physics watching a loop of replays of Big Bang Theory, I ran across a reference to the famous (in scientific circles anyway), illustration of an aspect fo quantum theory called Schrodinger's Cat. Ed. Note - the 'o' in the name Schrodinger should have the two tiny little dots over it, but I don't know how to render that in this text editor. Which is also another indication I probably should not be attempting to post on particle physics or quantum mechanics. But let's press on anyway.SCIENCE!

So here's the basic idea of the Schrodinger's Cat illustration, (text lifted heavily from the What is? definition page, (apologies and thanks in advance):

We place a living cat into a steel chamber, along with a device containing a vial of hydrocyanic acid. Note: he did not actually DO this, it is just an illustration. There is, in the chamber, a very small amount of hydrocyanic acid, a radioactive substance. If even a single atom of the substance decays during the test period, a relay mechanism will trip a hammer, which will, in turn, break the vial and kill the cat. 

The observer cannot know whether or not an atom of the substance has decayed, and consequently, cannot know whether the vial has been broken, the hydrocyanic acid released, and the cat killed. Since we cannot know, according to quantum law, the cat is both dead and alive, in what is called a superposition of states.

It is only when we break open the box and learn the condition of the cat that the superposition is lost, and the cat becomes one or the other (dead or alive). This situation is sometimes called quantum indeterminacy or the observer's paradox: the observation or measurement itself affects an outcome, so that the outcome as such does not exist unless the measurement is made. (That is, there is no single outcome unless it is observed.)

Did you follow all that? Until you open the box the cat is not either dead or alive, it is both dead and alive, and only by opening the box and observing the contents does the cat actually become one or the other.

When I first looked this illustration up and read through the description of the (fake) experiment it really seemed kind of silly, I mean it may be a valid explanation of the quantum theory of superposition, but beyond that it really could not have any possible implication to anything I care about in the real world, i.e. the NBA, barbecue, Pawn Stars, right? We know the cat can't really be BOTH dead AND alive at the same time. It is one or the other, but not both. It just doesn't make sense.

But then I thought about it just a little bit more, and then in the context of many of the projects, roll-outs, system deployments, and other change management kinds of things I'd either been involved with or at least observed in the workplace and it started to make a little more sense to me.

Truly, how the project or change was presented and maybe even more importantly, to whom the new shiny tool and improved process was pitched to first did indeed impact the actual result. If we made our pitch to the right leader or executive first, and couched our pitch in terms that allowed Ms. Executive to see how they would benefit from whatever goods we were hawking, then we had a much better chance for success. 

And if we did not make the case early, and convincingly, and to the right folks, well then we pretty much were ensured of failure, or at least, lack of impact, i.e. eventually the box gets opened and the cat is dead.

The thing is both outcomes, project success or failure, well they definitely both existed the entire time. It was only revealed which outcome actually became real until the impacted organization opened the box as it were and had a look inside.

That's it from me on this. And after having a quick scan though before hitting the 'publish' button, I too realize this very post is both dead and alive at the same time. It's only now, as you read this final sentence, that the actual state is determined.

I hope the little post survived...

Below is a short clip explaining the Schrodinger's Cat illustration, have a look if you are still intrigued, (email and RSS subscribers please click through)

 Have a Great Weekend!

Off Topic - For the Corporate Jungle - The Ballistic Briefcase

Wrapping up a weird, short, but felt like is was long week here in the USA with a mid-week holiday with this item, that folks in Human Resources, who always have tales of employees gone wild in their files, might appreciate.More than meets the eye

Ladies and Gentlemen I give you - The Ballistic Briefcase.

Made by the fine folks over at Leison Tactical Supply, the Ballistic Briefcase can meet or exceed all your needs for laptop transport, document management, and high projectile protection. Check the feature list and tell me if you don't agree:

• Superior Cowhide leather with functions of waterproofness, high abrasion resistance, and high tensile strength.

• Suitable for government officers and businessmen.

• Used to carry documents.

• Flip opening system with quick release.

• Used as ballistic shield.

• Case includes NIJ level IIIA panels that protect against all handguns up to 0.44 magnums.

• Provides full body protection.

• Opens to 180 degrees, protection area is increased by double

Sounds awesome, right? Flip open the briefcase to its full length and make a quick getaway from all manner of mayhem coming your way.

You might be asking, 'Who needs a bulletproof briefcase anyway? From a BusinessWeek interview about the product we learn it might have more applicability than you think. According to a ballistic briefcase expert:

This bag would be used by businessmen and women working in austere environments—think parts of Mexico, Afghanistan, etc., where there is a chance they could come under attack or get caught in the crossfire. I would think people working for the government, doing clandestine operations, could have a use for this briefcase.

Austere environments? Getting caught up in the crossfire?

Heck, you don't need to go to Mexico or Afghanistan to run into that kind of chaos.

Have a great weekend! 

Off Topic - The Flames of Discontent

Spotted from the always inspiring 'If Charlie Parker Was a Gunslinger, There'd Be a Whole Lot of Dead Copycats' blog:

Are you fanning the flames of disconent today?

Contributing to them?

Will you win?

Have a Great Weekend!

Off Topic: Generic Equivalents

You've probably seen or heard of the phrase, 'It doesn't need to be perfect, it just needs to be good enough', or if you read a lot of popular business or productivity books or follow the tech start-up space, you'll be familiar with the common mantra to 'just ship', shorthand for 'Don't endlessly obsess on every last detail in a pursuit of a kind of elusive and ultimately unreachable perfection that will only result in you never actually producing anything and giving up in frustration, i.e. it's better to 'ship' or release too soon than too late.'I have never had this. Probably.

I generally tend to agree with those sentiments, even if sometimes I think the 'just ship' people start to drift dangerously close to the 'Just be fantastic if you want to be fantastic' types. Like the kinds of tautological statements found in many self-help books, inspirational tweets, and inside fortune cookies. Oh really, if I want to be incredibly successful, I just have to start doing things that will make me incredibly successful? Wow, thanks for the tip.

But in our professional lives these kinds of decisions have to be made all the time, whether to chase the bigger and better solution, to invest time and money in the latest technology to support a particular organizational process, or whether we need to extend our normal salary ranges and budgets in order to land that person or two that might be formerly out of our reach and likely to get snapped up by our better known and better funded competitor. Even in our personal lives we come up against this all the time. How many folks reading this have already had a mental conversation with yourselves about ditching the iPhone 4s you just got for the upcoming iPhone 5 will be the right move?

So here is my question for you on a Friday - how do you know when 'good enough' is really 'good enough' and perfect isn't needed? What criteria do you use? Do you ever get comfortable accepting less when better or faster or more capable is still out there, just a little bit out of reach?

When might you decide, for example, that generic beer will do the trick?

I'm curious.

Have a Great Weekend!

Timesheets, Incentives, and Five O'Clock Beers

Timesheets. Despite incredible advances in biometrics, smart time clocks, and increasing availability of mobile and tablet solutions to make easier employee time tracking and time reporting, many organizations still have to deal with a weekly or bi-weekly struggle of collecting, verifying, or processing employee time sheets. Filling out timesheets stink, and chances are you might have been on both sides of the timesheet pendulum in your career, as someone who was horrible at turning in a timesheet by the deadline, or as someone that had to deal with chasing down slackers that can never seem to get it together by the deadline.

One organization has come up with what might be the most clever solution yet for incenting staff to get their timesheets filled out and turned in on time - the digital 'Drink Time Sheet'.  The idea? Set up in the office a refrigerator full of free beer, but have it electronically locked, and linked to the office's timesheet system. Once all the week's timesheets are submitted, a siren sounds, the refrigerator unlocks, and the staff can celebrate the end of the week with a few Friday beers.

Check the video below, (email and RSS subscribers need to click through), to see the Drink Time Sheet in action.

What do you think? Could this kind of idea work in your organization? Maybe if not for time sheets but for some other kind of administrative, boring, and entirely necessary process that always seems like a struggle to complete?

Have a great weekend!