Opportunity only knocks once, it’s said. If the opportunity ever invites you to see a movie directed by Roger Corman, do not answer the door. Shut and lock every possible aperture through which the opportunity could theoretically be offered and pretend you aren’t at home.

But you can’t close all the gaps. At the molecular level, electrons orbit around protons and neutrons, leaving gaps through which the opportunity could sneak. Worse that this, while the opportunity stands at your door, you are in danger. In the field of quantum physics, Erwin Schroedinger described a hypothetical experiment to illustrate what he thought was the absurdity of indeterminacy (if I’m getting my terms correct). That is, until an event is observed, all outcomes are possible. Schroedinger devised a hypothetical experiment to show how indeterminacy stood against common sense. Essentially, there is a cat in a closed box. There is no way to look inside the box. Within a certain time, the cat has a 50-50 chance of being alive or dead. But we can’t know what the reality is until we open the box. We think that the cat is either alive or dead before we open the box and observe the cat. Indeterminacy says that until the cat is observed, it is both alive and dead. When it is observed, the possibilities resolve into one or the other (depending on what? I don’t know). Now, how does this affect the opportunity knocking at your door.

Until you look to see whether or not the opportunity is still there, indeterminacy says that you both do and don’t watch the Roger Corman movie. Which it actually is can only known when you face the opportunity. This is not to be borne: there may be temptations that collude with the opportunity to drag you into a viewing. However, the potential events must be resolved into reality. Is the only way to do this to look into the box; to deal with the opportunity?

No. If Schroedinger’s cat experiment were somehow to take place, a simple solution would be to seal off the area and dynamite the box. That way, there will be almost no chance that the cat is alive. Nonetheless, the potential realities still exist: the cat is alive and the cat is dead. However, the fire and emergency services will deal with the decimated laboratory, so they will observe the inconvenient (and inconvenienced) cat, collapsing its waveform so that any references to it will now be either in the present tense or the past, not both.

What this boils down to is that you no longer have to cope with the cat of opportunity: you’re hustled away, a blanket around your shoulders, to sip on a mug of hot tea. You naturally disavow any involvement in the event, but suggest it was a quantum fluctuation that occurred when science was press-ganged into this experiment, which it knew was beyond its portfolio. Besides, it preferred to work with mice.

Apropos of the application of Schroedinger’s Cat to a film by Roger Corman, treat such a film like you’d treat undercooked chicken or the ebola virus: avoid it. Did you think George Lucas should be chained to Jar-Jar Binks as punishment for ‘The Phantom Menace’? Sublime Shakespeare compared to ‘The Creature from the Haunted Sea’, which assaulted my eyes last night. I believe that the only word that can fully describe the film is ‘egregious’. I wouldn’t even watch it to relieve insomnia, effective though it might be for the purpose: I might find it in my dreams and be unable to escape until I wake up. May sentient beings never be exposed to such dross.