/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8009552
>>>>/r/bigbangtheory

>>8009552
underage b&

>>8009552
>>>/tumblr/

>>8009552
We get "parallel universes" in a number of different ways.

Depending on the curvature of spacetime, the actual universe could be much bigger than what we observe and, since there are only so many ways to arrange matter in space, the "pattern" of our universe might play out somewhere else.

Depending on how quantum mechanics actually applies to macroscopic systems, it may turn out that our universe is one factor of a superposition of many (possibly infinite) solutions to a "universal wave function". If this is the case, there is probably no good reason to call out universe "real" and deny that distinction to the other possible solutions.

As we develop a better understanding of the origins of our universe by studying small things at high energy, we may discover that universe is necessarily embedded in a larger structure which, in turn, might contain more universes.

But all that being said, you're not asking the right questions. The idea of "accessing" other universes is magic skinned for a different litterary genre. All physics adds up to the life you're already living, which is why these anons are giving you such a hard time.

>>8009552
here's how the many world interpretation goes. i'll let you decide whether the current picture in your head is scifi pleb bullshit or not.

you flip a very tiny but fair coin. before you go check whether it landed heads or tails, it exists as a superposition of heads and tails. 50% chance heads, 50% tails. before you observe, it is for all practical purposes both. Once you observe the coin, you collapse the wavefunction and you get either heads or tails. but as far as we know there is nothing that determines which one you will get. Nothing except pure probability. we have proved that there aren't any hidden variables. the result literally does not exist between flipping and you looking. if you don't believe me, study quantum mechanics.

now for "parallel universes". one interpretaion of how the collapse of the wavefunction works is that the moment you observe the result of the coin toss, our current timeline splits into two, one where you see heads, and one where you see tails.

And that's where it ends. nothing in our current understanding gives remote possibility of "accessing" those parallel universes. also this interpretation only applies to quantum phenomena. if you believe quantum mechanics governs decisions in your brain, then maybe your picture is meaningful. it's not unlikely that action potentials in neurons do involve some quantum tunneling

>>8009552
This is the height of pop-sci cancer

>>8009593
Why does checking collapse the wave function? How does it "know" anybody checked?

>>8009593
>>8009603

"Collapse" in this interpretation is an illusion. The superposition still exists, only instead of |heads>+|tails> it's |heads ad you observed heads> + |tails and you observed tails>. As information leaks out away from the original flip a larger and larger system becomes entangled with the result. Within the entanglement the result is clear, without there are two equally likely states, neither one more "real" than the other. This is decoherence, and if there's no mechanism to stop it along the way, this is why we get "many worlds"

>>8009608
i took undergrad qm so i get what's going on outside the wavefunction. but once i see the coin landed heads, i'm in the wavefunction now? i'm the observer who observed heads. from the outside bob sees a wavefunction superposed of me seeing heads and me seeing tails, so both still exist? so there's a bob out there who couldve asked me and he's talking to the tails-me but i'll never be able to talk to the tails-bob because i'm the heads-me???? and the current bob i know is really just the heads-bob and the tails-bob is on another forever inaccessible timeline?

holy shit.

ok I need to know now. How much of our brain activity is due to quantum mechanical phenomenon? How often does quantum tunneling occur when neurons fire? Aren't the ions big molecules like calcium? i guess when neurons fire it's when the gate voltage reaches a certain point, and if only .01% of the ions tunnel it shouldn't make a big difference, but in aggregate that makes a big difference. holy shit i thought butterfly effect shit was bullshit. what the fuck. we aren't deterministic!!! does this imply souls?? Or is this just a continuation of what we already knew, that life is meaningless and random? fuck i just took the physics gre and i'm super baked and winding down rn, and this is blowing my mind.

>>8009651
>i'm super baked
DUDE
WEED AND QUANTUM BLACKHOLES
LMAO

>>8009651
Hi Alice

I know what you're thinking OP , forget about it. You're thinking you can cheat this horrible life and open a magic door and escape to a better life, right? You should make the best of it while you're here. Find something that makes you happy. If it could be done, I would have already done it. Maybe in some other life your a Presidential candidate right now! But I'm sorry to say that OP, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO BACK

>>8009655
please, you're just jealous that my high thoughts make sense and are reasonable. i don't take bullshit epiphanies from drugs. i wrote an entire tech report on computer vision while baked.

now help me answer what percent of neuron firings are due to quantum tunneling. and i'm not tryng brag, it should be a reasonable question to answer, i just don't know enough biology to understand dendrites and axons and shit. quantum tunneling is literally week 4 lower div qm tho

>>8009668
>le functional and achieving stoner sob story nobody asked about
sage goes in all fields

>>8009670
drop the memes and i'll drop the humblebrag. at least check my math.

wiki says the ions firing in our neurons are Na+ or bigger. i feel like that's too big to tunnel, since cell walls are like big-ass molecules right? and even so each ion only carries one electron's worth of charge so it's not enough to make a difference.

well say 1e-10% of the neurons fire due to quantum tunnelling. that might be a gross overestimate, but how many neurons fire a second? that could result in maybe one or two decisions in our lives being nondeterministic. it's not unreasonable.

>>8009651
arisu??