16 May 2010

Quantum Mechanics for the Defense





Comes now the Defense and moves this honorable Court to dismiss these shoplifting charges on the following grounds:

It is well accepted that our universe is subject to the laws of physics.

A principal of quantum physics is that observables are indeterminate until they are observed. See e.g. Schrodigger's Cat.

Mr. Smith entered the WonderMart on 13 June, 2012.

Per quantum physics, whether Mr. Smith would commit the crime of shoplifting a portable computer was an indeterminate matter. It was possible that he would and possible that he would not.

The uncertainty was resolved when Officer Jones observed Mr. Smith pick up the Acer netbook and run out the door of WonderMart with it.

Therefore, it was Officer Jones' observation which caused the actual reality of the theft.

An agent of the government, a police officer, is the direct and sole cause of the theft, because his observations caused various indeterminate possibilities to congeal into a set reality wherein a theft occurred.

WHEREFORE, as observation by an officer of the government is the sole cause of the reality of the theft, the Defense moves for an immediate dismissal.

FURTHERMORE, Mr. Smith moves for a writ of prohibition forbidding police officers, bank agents, store employees, family members, and all others from taking any actions which would cause future potentialities to develop into actual crimes. These actions include, but are not limited to, surveillance, video taping, inventorying items, asking Mr. Smith if he stole an item, and any other action which would cause an observation that something illegal had occurred. Clearly, these acts would all coalesce indeterminate possibilities into a reality at Mr. Smith's expense and therefore must be prohibited.

I ask for this:

Robert Greene, Esq.
Wolfram & Hart, LLC


Anonymous said...

Wll how did it go?

Ken Lammers said...

Still in a state of potentiality because I've not observed anyone as they argued the case to a judge.

JB5 said...

Problem is a semi-literate judge, admittedly not too many of them, would know that in physics an observer need not be a conscience observer, let alone human.

The other atoms within the region of the proposed event qualify as observers to the event, such as the lessening of mass depressing upon the counter top. The counter top would also be an observer.

So should the prosecutor seek amending the charge to be a conspiracy since the clothes of the defendant were also observers of the act and the defendant did choose those particular pieces of apparel and bring them with them to participate in the crime.