Audiobus: Use your music apps together.
What is Audiobus? — Audiobus is an award-winning music app for iPhone and iPad which lets you use your other music apps together. Chain effects on your favourite synth, run the output of apps or Audio Units into an app like GarageBand or Loopy, or select a different audio interface output for each app. Route MIDI between apps — drive a synth from a MIDI sequencer, or add an arpeggiator to your MIDI keyboard — or sync with your external MIDI gear. And control your entire setup from a MIDI controller.
Download on the App StoreAudiobus is the app that makes the rest of your setup better.
Schrodinger's Cat Takes A Look At Amplitude And Spin/why music isn't there until you hear it!
This fascinating animation attempts to explain to us morons how things work on a quantum level, but not why (physicists do not know... Yet). Heisenberg's famous principle that mere observation changes the course of probability takes shape in the quantum environment. Imagine music production at this level. Talk about randomizing!
Comments
Observations may be shared, but your perspective of the observation is unique to you.
I think Schroedinger's cat skipped into a parallel universe and was replaced by a clone. In fact, I suspect most of our cat's are swapped out on a regular schedule.
Why do you think a cat was used as the observer? Mine watches me closely. Maybe too closely.
I actually think it was a misunderstanding. DorothY Katz was Schoedinger's girlfriend, I believe.
That's actually not true :-)
Heisenberg's uncertainty principe speaks just about physical limit of measuring 2 connected properties of particle - more accurate you measure one, less accurate you can measure other, in extreme situation (like with superfluids) if you can measure one totaly precise, other is totally blured and you can get just range of propabilities if it's value, never ever exact value..
Like momentum and position. More precise you measure momentum, less precise you know position and vice versa.
This have nothing to do with how advanced technology for measurement you have, it's deep underlying principe how nature works..
Heisenberg's cat was just thought experiment which primary reason was to show how unintuitive is quantum physics, to be more exact so called "copenhagen interpretation" of quantum mechanics
My favourite quantum paradox:
I stand corrected @dendy. At least I didn't say Heidigger's principle.
@LinearLineman
And
Then
+
Maths
Has more to do with relativity:
Light travels at about 1 foot per nanosecond.
*(Relative to us. According to itself light is everywhere at once)
Hold your hand up 12 inches from your face: you’re seeing your hand as it was a nanosecond ago. Everything you look at is, to one degree or another, in the past. The farther away in space, the more ancient in time.
You can’t see the Sun as it is now, but you can see it as it was about 8 minutes ago. You can’t see Alpha Centauri now, but you can see it 4.4 years ago. You can see the Andromeda Galaxy as it was 2.5 million years in the past. And so on.
With powerful telescopes, we can see galaxies whose light has been traveling to us for more than 13 billion years. We see them shining in a universe that’s still young, where gravity has just begun to pull matter together into stars and galaxies.
We can see something even more distant, and more ancient, than the first galaxies. If we peer out far enough, in between the galaxies, we can see parts of the Universe that are so far away, it has taken the light from that distance almost the entire age of the cosmos to reach us.
When we look at the most distant parts of the cosmos, in every direction, we see parts of the Universe that are so far in the past, they’re still in the final stages of the Big Bang. So far away, so far back, the space is filled with a dense, roiling plasma, the fire of creation.
We are not the center of the Universe. But we are the center of our own perception as light reaches us from afar; we lie embedded in nesting-doll layers of cosmic time. Each concentric sphere is an era. We can see the structure of matter changing, like geological strata around us
The most distant layer of time that we can see is the light that has been traveling since the moment the primordial fire began to cool. The cosmic microwave background surrounds us at every edge of our vision. We are embedded in shells of cosmic time, and the final one is fire.
–– Katie Mack
@LinearLineman It’s even weirder when you look into the “delayed choice quantum experiment”
Although I find the Copenhagen interpretation quite unsatisfying. I hold my breath for the Many worlds theory of Hugh Everett III, until somebody proves otherwise. In the meantime I play Eels
You should watch this. It’s Hugh Everett’s son, Mark, the lead singer of the Eels.
This video is one of the best music/science documentaries ever made. Please take a moment of your busy lives to watch it. Then you can consider quantum suicide, when the time comes 😝 Its a tragic story about a dysfunctional family with a distracted genius... and a prodigal son... musically
And if you watch TV when there is no transmission, just noise, significant aboumt noise is from cosmic background radiation (of course if you use classic antenna, not cable
) , which originates just 300.000 years after big bang 
Isn't that amazing ? Everybody have home device which can be used for watching almost to beginning of our universe 
yeah, my favourite
but you can experience weirdness of quantum world also at home, with just 3 polarized filters ... simple exeperiment which everybody can reproduce (for example with 3 polarized glasses)
Another thing wich completely amazes me is, that our entire bodies are made of start dust. Like literally, not metaphorically. All atoms in our body were created during explosions of supernovas. Ok except of hydrogen, which was created right after big bang, so approx 30% of our bodies is almost 13.5 billions years old ..
Yes to EELS
If a man is alone in the forest... and he speaks... is he still wrong? Ask my wife.
@Max23, the music part was just click bait. But I see it wasn't necessary. Plenty of psychophysicists here.
What was that song... it's a Small World After All? And who remembers the guy fighting a spider with a needle in The Incredible Shrinking Man? Some great post ww2 fearmongering.
The hero goes thru a cloud ( radioactive?) and starts getting smaller and smaller and smaller.
I'll watch all these videos, but none seem to have a cat in it. I like cats. Maybe a graphic novel? Quantum Qat.
You actually need theoretical physics is very needed when talk comes to scientific topics - because it helps people to stop telling unscientific newage nonsenses and misinterpretations
That thing about particles existing in certain state just during observation and without observation spreaded in probability waves works only at microscopic levels (atoms, subatomic particles, with exception of einsten-bose condensate), macroscopic world doesn't work that way, things like trees, sound waves, buildings does not disappear just because nobody is watching
ok, i though we are talking there about scientific topics, if discussion turns toward to pseudoscience newage nonsenses or philosophical crap based on lack of elementary knowledge, then i'm off ...
we're all holy parts of a holographic whole
i prefer the phrase con-science
for fear that some scientists may dismiss it too easy 
facts. lol. ok.
believe me, neuroscientis will agree with me
because that "scientist" in his profession name 
String theory amongst many theories was considered pseudo science, until it gathered support amongst mainstream scientists, this is the way of things.
Nope.
It did not get wide acceptance immediately, of course - and still some scientists are trying different approaches to merge relativity with quantum physics (like various quantum gravity theories) because of various issues in strings theory (there is really not sprace and i thing neither audience to explain them) but string theory was never ever considered as real pseudoscience.
.
Ah, the super-positional stance.
@dendy, your post at 1:24 is indeed the most eloquent, and I approve of the edit.
I am just kidding. You seem to know what you are talking about, but there are other pretty smart people here. How can you speak so decisively, though, about something so complex and controversial as quantum physics? It smacks of rigidity. Surely you understand new developments can overthrow your concretized point of view. You do yourself a disservice and lessen the impact of your insight. Just my opinion and respect for what others have to say.
You say "believe me, neuroscientists will agree with me". Using "believe me" is always a tell for uncertainty and need to bolster specious evidence with faith, or belief. I understand English is not your native language, so let us pass on that. Since when, however, does any group, such as neuroscientists (!), all agree on perception? Are you implying you can gather them all up and vote in favor of your strict interpretations of perception and physics?
Again, you have a lot to offer. Why pollute it with arrogance?
People really should get out more and experience a wider range of life. It helps put things into perspective. I love the predictability of this type of thread as supposedly intelligent people descend to trying to outdo each other and claim top dog status.