/sci/ - Science & Math

Why did you delete your thread OP

>>11297302
quantum waves changed

>>11297302
change affect to effect and I have ocd

>>11297305
>>11297314
I'm afraid i can't let you do that OP

>>11297295
>is consciousness itself having effect on the quantum wave function
But it doesn't.

If I see one more dumbass think that wavefunction collapse is some kind of esoteric thing that has to do with consciousness I really will scream.

>>11297325
>If I see one more dumbass think that wavefunction collapse is some kind of esoteric thing that has to do with consciousness I really will scream.
but it's liek it knows when we're watching /b/ro

>>11297325
>But it doesn't.
Great my dude. All the more reason to see this happen, myself.

>>11297329
>but it's liek it knows when we're watching /b/ro
No shit? You mean when I interact with a system the system changes? Holy fuck

>>11297332
I genuinely don't know what you mean by this

>>11297333

>>11297333
No shit? You mean some scientists have interpreted the results as having something to do with conscious observation when the real answer is so simple, just to fuck with you.

Allowing that your atheism insinuate itself on your interpretation that it's just interaction with the system and everyone who thinks otherwise is thus simply retarded, is exactly why I'd like a real-time video of this phenomenon if possible.

>>11297337
Your opinion is just that. They hold no weight, here.

>>11297295
It does not. Fucks sake I hate this meme. It does not know that it is being observed. It is the observer effect. I am tired of retards saying this. Observing something necessarily requires interacting with it, and there is no way to do this in a way that magically does not affect the thing that you are observing. This is a profound statement. Please think about it. The classic example is that when you measure a tire's air pressure, a small amount of air escapes.

>>11297355
>atheism
Not an atheist. You don't know anything about quantum mechanics, by the way.

>>11297364
If you don't have a video link to share, stfu.

>>11297368
quality bait. read a fucking book.

>>11297370
Kill yourself. Not memeing.

>>11297371
nah, I'm good. what even brings you here if you don't know anything about science or math?

>>11297374
I'm a genius.

>>11297375
NEETs are scum

>>11297295
>is consciousness itself having effect on the quantum wave function
No scientist says this. This is a popular misconception. You're outing yourself as an idiot by saying you believed something some New Age naturopath told you.

>>11297295
>The best example of how one can't merely trust what scientists say about everything is consciousness itself having effect on the quantum wave function.

Scientists don’t say that. At least living ones.

>>11297325
>If I see one more dumbass think that wavefunction collapse is some kind of esoteric thing that has to do with consciousness I really will scream.
There are physics students who still think this way

>>11297462
Damn physics students are fuckin dumb

>>11297462
I don't know why it's such a common misconception, the reality of why it happens is pretty straightforward and easily explained.

>>11297361
>>11297448
>>11297459
>>11297462
>This is a profound statement
less this and more possibly consequential. Two questions remain:
1. Why, then, do some scientists think it has something to do with consciousness itself, when any brainlet can decide it's merely interaction with the system? 1b. Did they just overlook the possibility because they're all retarded?
2. How does "letting a little air out of the tires" change light's entire apparent behavior?
Bonus: Dost thou think it possible that you've decided it's merely an effect of interaction because you're too brainlet to fathom the implicit questions otherwise?
>>11297448
What then is the cause? What kind of interaction and how so? My post doesn't imply I believe in anything.

>>11297475
>Why, then, do some scientists think it has something to do with consciousness itself
They don't, only wikipedia tier retards think this. Your beliefs are anthrocentric.
>How does "letting a little air out of the tires" change light's entire apparent behavior?
I'm going to tell you something that apparently your parents, peers, and teachers failed to let you know. You are dumb. You are not smart. You are dumb, very very dumb. You will not contribute to or have any profound thoughts on the subjects you are discussing. Go to a trade school or get an accounting degree or something.

>>11297475
>some scientists
Which scientists?
Does any scientist of any note actually believe this?

>>11297325
universe is one big quantum system that evolves according to the Schrödinger equation
at wich point does it wave function collapses?

>>11297500
No, the schrodinger equation doesn't apply to macrosystems like that. They're a reason why GR and QM aren't reconciled

>>11297500
Do you even understand what you're saying?
Because it really sounds like you're just throwing words you read online around.

>>11297475
>1. Why, then, do some scientists think it has something to do with consciousness itself

Which ones?

> Did they just overlook the possibility because they're all retarded?

Maybe. Scientists are generally less religious but some still hold various beliefs in the supernatural and are vulnerable to bias.

> How does "letting a little air out of the tires" change light's entire apparent behavior?

Read the Wikipedia page, or a book. There’s a lot of maths involved.

>>11297479
>You are dumb. You are not smart. You are dumb, very very dumb
How about you just answer the question there, champ?
This is why I don't normally stick around. Only someone who holds their words in high regard and mistakenly believes this means their words hold some kind of objective weight speaks this way, i.e. with no reasons given to support anything they say and just appeals to assertion, like it's meaningful just because you said it. That said, kill yourself. This isn't a joke and I'm not "memeing." Kill yourself before you cause anymore harm and suffering with, God forbid, people being convinced by your stupidity.
>>11297481
Try google.

>>11297513
You have shown yourself to be completely uneducated in the realm of physics. I am not a high school physics teacher, so I'm not trained to deal with this level of ineptitude on this topic.
Try pic related if you're actually interested in learning about physics.
https://www.amazon.com/Manga-Guide-Physics-Hideo-Nitta/dp/1593271964

>>11297513
>How about you just answer the question there, champ?
>try google

>>11297513
>Try google.
YOU'RE the one making the claim this is something many legitimate scientists think, y'all have the burden of proof here bucko.
If you don't know any it implies you never actually know of any and that you just heard it somewhere and believed it to be true without checking for yourself, or perhaps made the assumption baselessly and now are too afraid to confront the fact that you might be wrong.

>>11297475
>Dost thou think it possible that you've decided it's merely an effect of interaction
We KNOW it's an effect of interaction because the wave function only collapses WHEN IT'S INTERACTED WITH.
The only thing we're not sure of is in which way does this interaction change it precisely.
I think you might have some confusion as to what an "observation" means in the area of this sort of thing, it's a measurement, but you can only measure something by interacting with it.
But all our measurement tools are too chonky to not change what they're measuring.

>>11297510
>Read the Wikipedia page, or a book
Go ahead and summarize instead.
>>11297518
[nothing: the post]
I accept that you're just too advanced to communicate. A pleb can only marvel as you ascend to your planar form. I'll either find your pictured holy book, or wait in naivety for a comment of substance.
>>11297526
>YOU'RE the one making the claim this is something many legitimate scientists think
No, I don't.
>believed it to be true
Nothing I've said implies anything whatsoever about what I believe. Is your life suddenly more difficult?
>checking for yourself
That's what I'm doing.
>>11297534
>We KNOW it's an effect of interaction because the wave function only collapses WHEN IT'S INTERACTED WITH.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_the_single_cause I don't feel like thinking of any examples for someone who thinks capitalizing random words gives weight to what they're saying.
Until you know how merely touching it affects the behavior of the whole damn thing such that it apparently switches the entire state of its being from wave to particle and vice versa, it is not rational to conclude beforehand that only the interaction, e.g. not some property of the interaction or some third variable that correlates, does it.

>>11297534
>But all our measurement tools are too chonky to not change what they're measuring.
it’s not the tools, by detecting anything you change the energy of the system.
Take the double slit for example: To measure an electron a photon has to be absorbed, forcing a phase shift onto the otherwise coherent wave function. If you don’t absorb or add energy of any form you cannot in principle do a measurement.

>>11297563
>[nothing: the post]
>I accept that you're just too advanced to communicate. A pleb can only marvel as you ascend to your planar form. I'll either find your pictured holy book, or wait in naivety for a comment of substance.
I gave you a resource to learn basic physics, I don't know why you're so upset

>>11297567
Upset?

>>11297568
Yes, mass-reply-kun, upset.

>>11297568
>lel umad???
Simply epic my bruh.

>>11297572
Why are you lying? Left-leaning atheist, amirite?

>>11297579
I'm actually a right leaning agnostic

>>11297318

Bet you dont open the pod bay doors either, you bastard.

>>11297563
>I don't feel like thinking of any examples
IE: "I don't have any examples"
Listen man the point is nobody who actually knows what they're talking about is saying that phenomena like these have anything to do with consciousness.

>>11297589
My mom was agnostic. Man, she was one crazy lady.

>>11297595
crazy good in bed amirite?

>>11297593
example: why did I stop at the red light?
because I pressed down on the break
because I saw the light
because the law
etc..

All of these are equivalent to your "it's the interaction bro" explanation.

If you are posting in this thread and have not seen this thread
>>11297400
you are actually retarded

>>11297605
In which way?

>>11297620
"Interaction" has many possible parts.

>>11297589
No, you're not. You're too stupid even to know what "agnostic" really implies, or to be "right-leaning" for any reason not superficial.

>>11297624
all of which involve a break of coherency.

>>11297626
I'm agnostic because I don't see enough evidence to lead myself to subscribe to any sort of metaphysical belief system, but I'm open to the existence of such evidence. I'm right leaning insofar as I prefer free market economics and I'm socially conservative.
Stop projecting your stupidity upon others.

>>11297302
He didn't, it was observed and got spooped

>>11297624
Literally, the tools being used effect the state because they have to actually interact, as in come in contact in some way, and in that contact because quantum shit is so sensitive, it changes.
That is what observation/interaction means in this context.
What you seem to be claiming is that deciding to do something counts as an interaction and so that justifies the claim that the effect is caused by consciousness, in which case you could claim ANY scientific finding is "caused" by consciousness because someone decided to look for something.

>>11297627
>break of coherency.
irrelevant. The question is which one involves changing the fundamental behavior of light?
>>11297631
>I'm right leaning insofar as I prefer free market economics and I'm socially conservative.
ah well, plenty of stupid people on /pol/ Perhaps 4chan isn't the best place to infer leftism from stupidity
>I'm agnostic because I don't see enough evidence
As I said. You're not agnostic. Agnosticism implies no knowledge, including what you might call your feelings, of a probability. Idiots like you probably think absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

>>11297649
>>I'm right leaning insofar as I prefer free market economics and I'm socially conservative.
>ah well, plenty of stupid people on /pol/ Perhaps 4chan isn't the best place to infer leftism from stupidity
>>I'm agnostic because I don't see enough evidence
>As I said. You're not agnostic. Agnosticism implies no knowledge, including what you might call your feelings, of a probability. Idiots like you probably think absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
>this entire post
I want to believe that you're not trolling. The idea of somebody like you living your meaningless life and being unable to process the world around you to any useful degree while also posessing this sense of superiority fills me with mirth

>>11297655
>not acknowledging a single thing
>instead more of ur dumb actually
>believes he sufficiently defending himself
Why are you still here?

>>11297658
Because I'm laughing at you dude, I don't need to defend myself because everyone else ITT can see how fucking stupid you are

>>11297649
>irrelevant
>changes the fundamental behavior
the point is that the fundamental behavior of particles is consistent. The only way particles can form an interference pattern is by being coherent, in other words 2 waves have to be created with the same phase difference.
By changing the energy of one of these 2 waves its wavelength is changed and the system loses that coherency.

>>11297662
>an see how fucking stupid you are
Doubt. Cite me an example, for example, show me where I said anything stupid, e.g. show me where it was implied that I believe anything I've ever heard some mook claim about science or quantum wave functions or anything.
Why are you really still here?
>>11297664
ok

>>11297670
>Doubt. Cite me an example, for example, show me where I said anything stupid
>>11297658
>>11297649
>>11297624
>>11297605
>>11297579
>>11297568
>>11297563
>>11297513
>>11297475
>>11297500
>>11297295

>>11297673
Bruh, quote me an example. btw "imply" means necessitate by the ancedent, i.e. p->q means p cannot exist without q. So go ahead and quote me just one example.

>>11297673
Blown the fuck out

>schizo so BTFO he resorts to copying logical definitions without any meaningful context
Lmao

>>11297678
I shall not be online-bullied. I shall overcome!

>>11297681
>>11297678
Awaiting quote. Else:
>>>/discord/ youtube, wherever you loiter, kiddos

>>11297688
Every single utterance you've made in this thread has been nothing but the worst combination of arrogant and idiotic

>>11297691
Show me just one example so we can all point and laugh

>>11297694
>universe is one big quantum system that evolves according to the Schrödinger equation
at wich point does it wave function collapses?

>>11297698
Got me. Also, Schrödinger's cat was meant to mock the notion of two or more dichotomous things being the case at the same time, not to be taken seriously by a bunch of brainlets.

>>11297681
>without any meaningful context
>wanting an example of where i said or implied even one thing you say i implied and thus explaining what an implication is because you're a brainlet
Don't just leave. Tell your mom just two more minutes.

>arguing with a schizo

>>11297793
Who said they believe this shit, so that I might laugh with you, brother. I have true hatred for stupid people.

If this thread dies, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.

>>11297295
your pick related is literally just basic wave interference patterns
you can get something similar with a bathtub and cardboard

>>11297673
/thread
OP is a confirmed retard, not just for believing popsci without checking, but for actually pretending to have scientific support and being too afraid to admit his stupidity when shown this isnt the case

>>11298059
You goddamned idiots. I, OP, do not believe consciousness affects the wave function. Show me where I implied otherwise.

>>11298059
>pretending to have scientific support
Also, where did I seem like I was pretending this? My brain is bigger than yours. I've always found this sufficient support.

This is why I normally leave. because the dialectic inevitably devolves into nothing, and I become obsessed with snuffing out the lesser mind, as if they have committed some great sin against humanity merely by existing. Indeed, stupidity is the root of all evil. And the underage b& just up and leaves. Oh well, let's see if self-bumping is still a thing.

>This is why I normally leave. because the dialectic inevitably devolves into nothing, and I become obsessed with snuffing out the lesser mind, as if they have committed some great sin against humanity merely by existing. Indeed, stupidity is the root of all evil. And the underage b& just up and leaves. Oh well, let's see if self-bumping is still a thing.

>>11298826
quality banter

>quality banter

>/sci/ thinks they can explain the collapse of the wavefunction.
Funny stuff in here.

>>11298910
The whole thread is some idiot calling me dumb for something I thought was clear in the OP that it is not something I believe, and then just running away.

>>11298919
I wouldn't expect much reading comprehension around here anymore.

>>11297295
Laser obviously bounces off walls of slit, as it is thick compared to the time passing over a laser being reflected.

Maybe because it's more viscous in smaller quanta. AS ANYTHING.

>>11299331
Explain the Delayed choice quantum eraser experiment with this reasoning.

>>11298919
No it was calling you dumb because you started the thread off saying that some scientists actually believed the consciousness theory, which many were quick to point out no one that isn't a pseud believes.
But then you started talking like you defended the theory, which people got understandably muffed by.
Cut the ego, chief.

>>11299391
>talking like
You mean questioning the fallacious reasoning and lack there of, of idiots? People immediately reverting to "UR DUMB" because they're reasoning is questioned does not imply an ego, only that I fancy myself not so stupid.

>>11299391
>talking like
You mean questioning the fallacious reasoning and lack of reasoning, of idiots? People immediately reverting to "UR DUMB" because they're reasoning is questioned does not imply an ego, only that I fancy myself not so stupid.

>>11299391
>talking like
You mean questioning the fallacious reasoning and lack of reasoning altogether, of idiots? People immediately reverting to "UR DUMB" because their reasoning is questioned does not imply an ego, only that I fancy myself not so stupid.

>>11299428
Because it's stupid to continue to assert that a specific idea has validity when it was never on the table.
Get your narcissism in check.

>>11299356
This is going to be the last bit of “quantum weirdness” to be explained away. If it ever is at all. It seems rather impossible to do.

>>11299461
>it's stupid to continue to assert
Do you think 'assert' magically means something different from 'claim'? I've claimed nothing. We went over this. Objecting to a lack of sound reasoning does not imply I think anything is "valid."

>>11299476
Why not just assert that with what time actually is in accordance with the easiest way to mathematically explain time, that quantum weirdness has already been explained away?

>>11299481
In the thread you've continually argued for the validity of the consciousness argument, as if people shouldn't write it off.
For whatever personal reasons you've done it, other anons rightfully continued to tell you that it's not a valid theory.
If you don't believe it, how is it sound reasoning to continue to argue for something that you don't even believe is right?
How is it logical to continuously berate others for simply saying the theory is bogus and never something the people running these tests considered to have any effect?
You got fuckin' issues man.

>>11299476
Many worlds interpretation can explain it effortlessly. Its implications just make us uncomfortable.

>>11299493
>to continue to argue
If you'd have actually found a quote wherein this is implicit, you'd find there is no such quote. It's logical to berate idiots for stepping out of line.

>>11299504
>It's logical to berate idiots for stepping out of line.
For real, get that ego in line. It's classless and anti-intellectual.
Unless you're some dunning-kruger dingus, in which case this all makes sense.

>this whole thread

what is the most popular interpretation of QM?

>>11299524
There's nothing egotistical about hating stupid people and stupidity, and thinking that I am not among the former because I rid myself of the latter. Stupidity is the root cause of all evil, and should be treated as such. Every person you and I might agree was evil throughout history, tactician or otherwise, was evil because they were a dumbass.

A consequence of said stupidity is evaluating oneself based on the opinion of anyone, and just being here is bordering on that, so

>>11299524
There's nothing egotistical about hating stupid people and stupidity, or thinking that I am not among the former because I rid myself of the latter. Stupidity is the root cause of all evil, and should be treated as such. Every person you and I might agree was evil throughout history, tactician or otherwise, was evil because they were a dumbass.

A consequence of said stupidity is evaluating oneself based on the opinion of anyone, and just being here is bordering on that, so