/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11547302]

>quantum theory
am i just too stupid or this is some fucked up mental gymnastics that scientist came up to?
i read a lot about it and how experiments and math led to it but it still feels like it just made things even worse and more unreal
it created more problems that it tried to solve
>wave-partice duality
>virtual particles
>infinite space-time curvature at black holes
>singularities
>quantum fluctuations
i mean i respect the math that led to it right but what if our math is fundamentally wrong somewhere long before quantum theory

i dont want to say it but wtf this theory is like leading towards some God entity or some kind of pehnomenon that we manipulate the reality with our consciousness

[Anonymous No.11547308]

>>11547302
Gravity sounds like a joke when you actually think about it.

[Anonymous No.11547315]

>>11547308
how the hell does something even curves infinitely around black hole? if something is curved infinitely is it just a circle? fuck man

Also how did high IQ scientist cope with such reality that they were finding out about for the first time
I mean imagine realizing that everything is a particle and a wave at the same time hehe whoops

And this is all about "dead" particles and stuff around us, let us not even begin to somehow introduce quantum stuff into live organisms as in why the fuck did they organize and start being alive

If i was high IQ scienist i would commit suicide after all this since i cant go down on low IQ and just go around fuckin bitches not thinking about anything like a dog

[Anonymous No.11547321]

>>11547302
It turns out science was a lie, but scientists are too arrogant to change their ways of thinking about the universe as then they would be admitting to spending centuries learning nothing

[Anonymous No.11547345]

>>11547302
Indeterminism is fundamentally escapism. I don't get why people are trying to deny something that you can observe on a daily basis just becauce some stuff has a cause that's beyond our capacity to figure out. Instead of trying to escape determinism, adapt to it. That's what humanity has always done. We encounter a problem, we adapt to it. That's how we evolve. That's how every species on this planet evolves.

[Anonymous No.11547347]

>>11547345
I should add that if we go by the theory that our consciousness is what is shaping reality, that reality itself exists because we observe it, there's no need to search for some kind of "god" anymore. We already found him. It's us. Humanity is the god.
Serial Experiments Lain is a good take on that.

[Anonymous No.11547355]

>>11547302

quantum theory is a purely algebraic/mathematical invention

that is, people made the theories first and saw that it makes mathematical sense, and then experiments followed which confirmed them
usually it is the other way around in physics , you just dont know this because you are a young fag

there were btw also other models that make mathematical sense but never gained popularity , you can google it

[Anonymous No.11547369]

>>11547355
but if our math is truly correct and experiments confirm it then our reality is borderline new age dude weed lmao stuff right?
like we are all connected and there is some metaphysical mysterious stuff going on
like our emotions and will matter in this universe etc.

[Anonymous No.11547391]

>>11547369

you are bringing way too many emotions into this lol its really not anything special like that, its just that if you assume that certain assumptions and equalities are true, you can derive more mathematical truths from it, which you can assume to have real implications (and try to find experiments for them)

you can for example in linear algebra, write the linear operator of the differentiation as a matrix, and you can evaluate that matrix if you apply a norm
that's essentially what you can do with all operators in quantum mechanics , and you can also do it with functions (the wave function f.e.)

then you can think about what space these objects are in (hilbert spaces etc.) and what further objects exist

this is all mathematically sound because its basically a trivial application of linear algebra and analysis (more or less) and you can do it even if you haven't fully understood these 2 subjects because to evaluate an operator you don't need to have taken a linear algebra course actually

im not an expert in physics or quantum mechanics, i have just taken it long time ago and then i studied mathematics and i realized this is what we were doing in these courses

[Anonymous No.11547414]

>>11547391
i appreciate your explanation

[Anonymous No.11547612]

>>11547355
This did not happen wtf are you talking about

[Anonymous No.11547620]

>>11547302
Yes, it is all absolutely retarded. But that just seems to be how reality is.

Einstein couldn’t cope either...

[Anonymous No.11547827]

>>11547620
imagine being Einstein after all you did you cant cope with how and what reality is
by definition he should've been the most depressed person ever with an excuse

[Anonymous No.11547844]

>>11547302
It was overcomplicated on purpose (high-priests never liked plebs understanding things and thinking too much of themselves)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N44DZJW4LSw

[Anonymous No.11547860]

>>11547302

Black holes aren't a consequence of quantum mechanics. And they and singularities are pretty weird, but not that much of a brain-fuck as quantum mechanics.

Quantum fluctuations aren't too hard to cope with, it's just that if the total energy stays pretty much the same, there's no reason why particle and anti-particle shouldn't be able to just appear. This also makes sense as it's time-symmetric to the process of annihilation.

The thing that absolutely demolishes my brain is the idea that observation has an effect on an experiment, especially because it's so poorly defined. Aren't the gravitational waves of our bodies not already enough to trigger an interaction of some kind in the electron double slit experiment?

[Anonymous No.11547872]

>>11547302
Take the electric universe pill Op

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AUA7XS0TvA

[Anonymous No.11547878]

>>11547872
imagine unironically believing this

[Anonymous No.11547886]

>>11547878
Nice arguement timmy. It's not like i came up with the theory, engineers and mathematicians did.

[Anonymous No.11547893]

Found it

[Anonymous No.11547894]

>>11547886
EU doesn't make an argument in the first place

[Anonymous No.11547895]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformal_cyclic_cosmology

[Anonymous No.11547898]

>>11547894
It actually does tho

[Anonymous No.11547901]

>>11547302
the problem is that there is no law of the universe that states all properties are knowable by human intelligence. It's entirely possible that there are things that operate beyond our ability to understand or cannot be tested and understood in their full capacity.

[Anonymous No.11547928]

>>11547315
The event horizon is a meme. It's just a coordinate specific singularity.

[Anonymous No.11547972]

>>11547302
don't think about it as you would call logical.
just follow the rules of mathematics.
"shut up and calculate" -David Mermin

[Anonymous No.11548442]

Could DMT be a cosmic messenger molecule?
Biochem and neurofags, what's the verdict?

[Anonymous No.11548554]

>>11547827
Schrodinger's cat was a thought experiment to demonstrate quantum mechanics must be bunk and became to go to analogy for explaining superposition.

[Anonymous No.11548587]

>>11547893
Does it me, the higher the IQ you have the more chance you get attracted to a child?

[Anonymous No.11548638]

>>11547302
>>infinite space-time curvature at black holes
This is pseudoscience
>i mean i respect the math that led to it right but what if our math is fundamentally wrong somewhere long before quantum theory
I believe in quantum theory (but not all of the associated claims), but the math being correct does not necessarily mean that quantum theory is correct.
>r some kind of pehnomenon that we manipulate the reality with our consciousness
That's literally what we do every time we act. When we move our bodies, we are using our consciousness to will matter to move.

[Anonymous No.11548641]

>>11547355
>there were btw also other models that make mathematical sense but never gained popularity , you can google it
Like what? That's a pretty broad thing to google. What theories are you referring to?

[Anonymous No.11548650]

>>11547369
Yes. Why is that problematic to you?

[Anonymous No.11548678]

>>11548641

i dont remember the name , but there are different models as well which simply didnt get continued because they were lacking or there was a lack of interest
just check out the history of atomic model and read from there on wikipedia

think one of the models was from bohr or heisenberg idremeber

[Anonymous No.11548680]

>>11547369
Yes. Your point?

[Anonymous No.11548685]

>>11548650
I...just... well i always thought science was this super serious no humor rational view on the world
and now it turns out it was DMT+LSD 24/7 trip

[Anonymous No.11548694]

>>11547302
>what if our math is fundamentally wrong somewhere long before quantum theory
then we wouldn't have semiconductor electronics and this conversation would be impossible. i'm not saying it's 100% right, nor am i giving the intermediate math an interpretation, but it does model reality quite well

[Anonymous No.11548709]

>>11548694
>but it does model reality quite well
so does newtonian mechanics retard
that doesnt prove fuckall

[Anonymous No.11548715]

>>11547355
>people made the theories first
WRONG. Quantum theory was made AFTER our classical theories couldn't explain the results of experiments. We had a theory that didn't make sense. That was classical mechanics. People still cling to classical mechanics view as if that's the "real" view. They mostly consider QM today to be "extra" baggage on top of classical view. This is an absurdly flawed view, but that's the general consensus right now.

[Anonymous No.11548739]

> Gravity:
If there is no conductive surface or convective medium, your watch ticking is medium enough for thermal transfer.

The fastest path changes your clock. Slow down your watch, move, then wind it back up.

Those spacetime grooves you see in general relativity gravity diagram represent your clock will be changing.

>infinite space-time curvature at black holes

Think of making a globe out of concentric rings or hulu hoops of different sizes. It's easier to move up to a smaller hoop, move, and then go back to a bigger one. A singularity would be like one big hoop between two dots. Move up to the dot, move anywhere back down on the big hoop.

> Quantum theory

Science in Planck's time said turning the lights out in a room of cast iron pots would cause one to burn bright white and all other ones to turn super dark. Planck said you need to build up energy to get to the next wavelength.

Einstein said you have a start, you have a end, you have a particle. From that we got a lot, photovoltaic effect, discrete speed and relativity to explain gravity.

Other scientists came along and said if you only have discrete particles for electromagnetic radiation, thus the thermal transfer of changing clocks, nothing knows what's what. Either you're hitting rocks with beach balls or beach balls with rocks.

If you want to quantize something, and say this is the common building block of everything, you can't. You need a frequency in a medium, dots and dashes, not just bricks building a house.

> virtual particles
If space was truly empty, it would be 100% certain a particle's not there. Millions of miles away, a particle on the sun might have 99.9999999% certainty it's not in that empty space.

Heat has to transfer through something between the Sun and Earth. The ticking clock medium is good enough. Nature doesn't care. What's there is consensus of everything really nothing is in the way.

[Anonymous No.11548768]

>>11547302
I would also add Gauge Theory:

There's math that calculates the fastest path from point a to point b.
There's math that adjusts for hills, barriers in the way, speed boosts from magnetic attraction, even slowing down your watch.
Make a region where all paths from a to b are the fastest path.
That region is a solid dot, a quanta of existence.

The fastest path would be the speed of light on it's circumference. Peak on the outside, you should get a valley on the other side.

This helps with Bell's Theorem. Some fundamental medium, everything out there saying that exists, can pop into existence far away in an instant.

That's why the electron interferes with itself, and changes path when a double slit is closed. It's really an agreement between the light bulb filament and a screen, and everything that exists.

My plan is if there's an incoming asteroid, do this with the Sun. Pop out a little bit of the Sun, pop it back in with graphene or something in far outer orbit.

Even if we are popping matter in and out of existence, we still are not certain what we are doing. Instead of not knowing one isolated particle, we're not knowing hitting EVERYTHING.

[Anonymous No.11548787]

>>11548709
that proves it's a useful model within its applicable domain. that's all any physicist can claim about any model.

[Anonymous No.11548796]

>>11548787
correct
so fuck the faggots that say relativity is the true nature of reality and not just some math model

[Anonymous No.11548820]

>>11548787
>>11548796
Not quite. Because ultimately, we will/may find that model that does describe everything, and at that point, there is no difference between the model and the territory. And most likely, relativity will still be part of it and be 'true'

[Anonymous No.11549488]

Models models we put a lot of faith in our models and our words but is it in the words themselves where meaning lies? Or do the words manifest meaning within ourselves? Perhaps they are an expression of meaning rather than meaning itself!

[Anonymous No.11549558]

>>11548820
>t. not a physicist

[Anonymous No.11549646]

>>11547302

Quantum mechanics a la Schrodinger is mathematically well defined, but fundamentally wrong because it can't handle relativity.

Quantum field theory is consistent with relativity but must be fundamentally wrong because none of the expansions involved can possibly converge; it's an okay approximation that we've gotten lucky with.

[Anonymous No.11549735]

>>11549488
not science or math

[Anonymous No.11549920]

>>11548820
Such a theory may accurately describe everything mathematically, but still not be factually correct.
>putting true in quotes
Oh, you're one of those kind of fucktards. Move along, faggot fuck.

[Anonymous No.11549923]

>>11549646
>but fundamentally wrong because it can't handle relativity.
>can't handle some jewish pseudoscience
...and?

[Anonymous No.11550428]

>>11549923
science doesn't have a nationality, denomination, gender identity, or race, fuckwit

[Anonymous No.11551362]

we literally need to talk more about this
this is the most important stuff in life, im sure of it
t. just fapped so i dont crave women

[Anonymous No.11551642]

>>11550428
...and? Relativity isn't science, so any claim you might make about science itself is wholly irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.11551686]

>>11547302
>it created more problems that it tried to solve
>>wave-partice duality
>>virtual particles
>>infinite space-time curvature at black holes
>>singularities
>>quantum fluctuations
With the exception of spacetime singularities, which you listed twice, and which are not from the domain of QM, none of those are problems. They're well-behaved.

[Anonymous No.11551691]

>>11551642
Relativity has held up to all scrutiny and is proven.

[Anonymous No.11552454]

>>11549646
It isn't "wrong" in itself, just incomplete.

>>11549923
You retards are no better than flatfags. Keep pretending things like relativity and causality aren't facts that anyone can observe and verify on a daily basis. I punch you you get hurt. I punch you harder you get hurt more.

[Anonymous No.11552604]

>>11547302
https://youtu.be/2LtT3sfbSXs
https://youtu.be/1-_IRbu1gAo
https://youtu.be/Hopd-gKB1Xc
https://youtu.be/r0plv_nIzsQ
https://youtu.be/rbRVnC92sMs

[Anonymous No.11553552]

>>11547315
You're misinterpreting some things. Everything is not a particle AND a wave, photons and electrons are always waves, full stop. It's a matter of certainty about it's position. When a photon interacts with an electron, it condenses the probability wave of the electron so that the position is more certain.

[Anonymous No.11553585]

we've had this thread everyday for like 100 years

[Anonymous No.11553596]

>>11547315
>If i was high IQ scienist i would commit suicide
You should do it anyway

[Anonymous No.11553604]

>>11547315
"If it curved infinitely, wouldn't it just be a circle?"

Bro, that line actually made me laugh. I know you're trying to understand some hard math and science, but that line is worth all the confusion you're going through.

[Anonymous No.11553809]

>>11553604
what is the point of your post?

[Anonymous No.11553880]

>>11547860
>The thing that absolutely demolishes my brain is the idea that observation has an effect on an experiment
t. brainlet
By observation it's meant interaction. In order to observe subatomic particles you fire photons against a surface and when they bounce back you measure the difference and map something you're observing. Of course the waveform collapses because you literally touch the particle in order to observe it. What I see is most people think by observation it's meant you look at a electron and it's due to your mind going through your eyes it's that the state changes which is nonsense.

[Anonymous No.11554159]

>>11547302
Let me through, I am a historian and a scientist. perhaps the rarest combination of disciplines. You faggots know nothing. Get out of my way, this Anon needs my help.

Right. History. You ever heard of "historical compression"? Its the natural tendency to see events compressed through the passage of time. For example people will tend to group events, like the Norman conquest, the Black Death, the Crusades, etc together, although many hundreds of years separated those events from each other. A similar but far less known phenomena is "Historical Presence" where people living in the present time tend to view their era as the most advanced and the events of their time to be more significant. Quite naturally they lose sight of the fact that sometime, hundreds of years into the future, they will be subjected to the same historical compression as they themselves apply to the past.

Anon, you suspect that the seemingly over complexity of present day science and math, and much of the vagueness which surrounds it indicates severe flaws in its fundamental premises and conceptions. It is highly likely you are right. For consider the beliefs held by people who lived hundreds of years ago and how ignorant and misguided we consider them today. As a prime example consider geocentricism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model

Let's assume Humanity continues its progress for many more centuries. Then, if the lessons of history continue to be consistent, one day our current ideas concerning maths and science will be historically compressed in relation to an advanced future civilization. To them there will be no significant technological difference between a nuclear reactor and a camp fire. Little innovative difference between a space shuttle and a fishing hook. Little intellectual difference between counting on our fingers and calculating the effects of relativistic velocities. Our ideas concerning maths and science will seem hopelessly antiquated and childish.

[Anonymous No.11554165]

>>11552604
Pilot wave is wrong

[Anonymous No.11554167]

>>11553552
>Everything is not a particle AND a wave, photons and electrons are always waves, full stop
False

[Anonymous No.11554168]

>>11553552
full stop, you're wrong.

[Anonymous No.11554176]

>>11547345
>deny something that you can observe on a daily basis
how can you observe determinism on a daily basis?

[Anonymous No.11554359]

>implying empirically unknowable phenomena is actually indeterminate just because we can’t observe it

It’s all a symptom of the scientific community’s obsession with logical positivism. Reject general relativity. Embrace Lawrence ether theory.

[Anonymous No.11554500]

>>11554159
hardly. Humans as a whole may be constantly advancing in understanding and technology, but individual human intelligence grows much more slowly, if at all. The modern human has no difficulty distinguishing the difference in technology between fire and an incandescent bulb, between stone and steel, between steam and ox. There are subject's in geometry explored by the ancient Greeks that might as well be Greek to the modern typical American.

Hard things are hard. That's never changed, and barring some impossible to predict transhumanist revolution, it will never change.

[Anonymous No.11554521]

>>11547302
It's just that humans are coming up on the limits of what the human mind is capable of understanding. Humans aren't intelligent enough to unlock the next steps, eventually humans will build large neural networks that solve the problems through simulating them, but these networks will only spit out answers without understanding them. Eventually physics will be waiting for the the computer to tell us what the answer is. But neither humans nor the computer will understand what it means. This has already happened with modern neural networks coming up with wildly bizarre solutions that work, yet humans could have never imagined them until the answer was spat out by these power pattern-seeking machines.

[Anonymous No.11554573]

>>11554521
ask me how I know you're not a data scientist.

[Anonymous No.11554587]

>>11554573
how? :D

[Anonymous No.11555157]

>>11554573
Never claimed to be.

[Anonymous No.11555669]

>>11547302
The math is only right because they are avoiding the dimensions that make a difference.

[Anonymous No.11555731]

>>11547302
>wave particle duality
Particle is quantification, it does not exist.
>virtual particles
Well, it's just particles that are not there but still serve as quantifications.
>Infinite curva...
I'll stop you there, in singularity, there is literally no space, how can it curve?
>Quantum fluctuations
Well, it wouldn't fluctuate if you counted events that are happening but not their probabilities.

[Anonymous No.11555736]

>>11547302
It's just that you have space, and space that is filled, filled space is no longer behaving like an empty space, that's all of it.

Conciusness?

This theory leads to conclusion we're brain in the jars researching the technology how to isolate brain from enviroment in eternal pursue to find a soul.

Wholeness cannot be isolated, it's not that hard to understand.

Read the thives of time by terry prachet, you'll understand.