Observer Effect

[Anonymous No.15128014]

>observation can affect reality
Why is quantum physics such bullshit?

[Anonymous No.15128028]

>>15128014
Physicists thinking philosophy is something one can "dabble" in innocently.
What's created is a nebulous fog of misapprehension we're struggling to clear daily. Its like STEMtards thinking they understand the arts because they can make a brighter red tempera or comprehend string frequency. They know the nuts and bolts and yet never hope to generate a beautiful image or song.

Shakespeare erred. First, we kill all the scientists.

[Anonymous No.15128045]

>>15128014
No one thinks it actually works like that though

[Anonymous No.15128052]

>>15128014

Quantum Physics is a plentiful bulk of boredom combined with unattended curiosity plus the inability to receive thing as is.

[Anonymous No.15128058]

>>15128045
So how does it work then?
I know people don't think that but anytime I hear some one try to explain it I get a convoluted line of bullshit not far behind them.

[Anonymous No.15128060]

>>15128014
If Everett is right it’s because what’s probabilistic is which of the infinite simultaneous histories you happen to find yourself experiencing. It’s the “SOMA coin toss” writ large. The probability is inherently tied to human observation because the wavefunction proceeds through the entire imaginary time axis (or however you choose to think of it, I guess) and the “collapse” is you only being aware of one of an infinite number of equally valid co-timelines or another.

[Anonymous No.15128064]

>>15128058
Since you can't see subatomic particles with your eyeballs, you need to use intrusive measuring devices to measure the different aspects of a particle. When people say that "observation" changes the outcome, what they mean is that interfering with the particles changes the outcome.

[Anonymous No.15128066]

>>15128064
The fact that the particle is defined as a position wave also means that “uncertainty” is inherent because it’s impossible to know both the duration and frequency of a wave with simultaneously perfect clarity, even with theoretically idealized “invisible” measurements. Because the shorter a duration of wave there is, the less information is inherently present about its frequency. Since frequency = momentum and wave intensity = particle position, knowing both is fundamentally, theoretically impossible/meaningless, regardless of the fact that you have to slap atoms or photons into the thing you’re measuring in order to measure it.

[Anonymous No.15128072]

>>15128064
Yes. And besides:
Observation in question itself is beyond witnessing or measuring the aspects of a particle but how an aspect changes as an interference is committed.
The essence lies in interpreting the result of the measurements, which, then provides the basis for creating a conclusion.

[Anonymous No.15128077]

>>15128072
So for short, reality is what we make of it and the moon disappears when we don't see it.

[Anonymous No.15128079]

>>15128077
Not even a little. I mean, outside of the sort of reasoning that also says reality as it exists right now is nothing but an aberrant fluctuation of a homogenous universe to a temporary low-entropy state that happened less than a second ago, including all of your (false, just-now-generated) memories.

[Anonymous No.15128086]

>>15128077
Not really, because interference and observation doesn't need a sapient creature.

[Anonymous No.15128098]

>>15128077
Yes, what we termed "reality" is our understanding of our perception of the current universe.

Reality is what we make of something we perceive, through spontaneous perceiving or an observation, a manipulated perceiving.

And since it's our understanding of our perception, we can choose to say the truth or not, to spit our perception unmodified or not.

You can say that this would be an imagination instead of a reality, but aren't the dimensions studied in quantum physics themselves imaginative?

What is the boundary between imaginative and pseudo-reality?

[Anonymous No.15128099]

>>15128086
Some results kind of dispute this. I mean you can find ways around it but it’s tricky.

>fire photons at a double slit
>at each branch of the double slit, add SPDCs, which send entangled idler photons off while sending copies of the original photons forward to a detection screen
>send the idler photons back toward a coincidence counter much farther away than the forward detector screen
>include a prism for combining idler photons so that which-path information is not recoverable

Do this and the photons on the detector screen produce an interference pattern

>remove the prism, so that instead idler photons hit one of two counters, allowing you to determine which path they travelled
Interference pattern disappears

>make the choice whether or not to include the combining prism AFTER the first photons have hit the detector screen, but before the idlers have completed their trip

Your post-measurement choice retroactively affects whether or not you see an interference pattern

That seems suspiciously tied to what you, as a conscious observer, can do to interpret the data, not simply to the “clumsy bludgeoning” of a pristine wavefunction experiencing decoherence when it bounces off a large, quantum-messy measurement apparatus

[Anonymous No.15128102]

>>15128099
Is your point 'interference is possible without sapient creature but the essence lies in the existence of an observer to create an interpretation'?

[Anonymous No.15128104]

>>15128058
I don’t think anyone really knows for sure yet.

[Anonymous No.15128117]

>>15128079
The fundamental concept: Duality.
The universe we perceive as reality now exists and doesn't exist at once because it shall be replaced by another one in an instant thus othe previous one cease to exist and it remains as a new one.

[Anonymous No.15128127]

>>15128102
Sort of, see
>>15128060

It all makes sense if you adopt the interpretation that wavefunctions do not collapse. When a photon hits a detector screen, what actually happens is it hits EVERY possible location. Each “possible” outcome represents an alternate timeline, an “adjacent history”, and they are all equally real. But you and I, as beings capable of experiencing only one “temporal axis” and not having the ability to percieve multiple simultaneous realities, are always one “random” selection from among that infinite continuum. What we see, therefore, is over time a random sampling of what we COULD see. So the fact that the wavefunction seems to be influenced by our observation of it is an artifact of how our observations are the only places where we are aware of our inability to view the entire picture.

If I had a device that could copy you completely, each copy of you would remember everything UP to the duplication event, and at the moment of duplication would believe HE was the real you, and the other was the copy. Now, suppose this copying device worked by two rooms; one red, one blue. Go into the blue room, take a seat, and a copy is created in the red room.

If I do this 100,000 times, and pick any random handful of “you”s to ask, they could compare notes and agree that it seemed like their sequence of “ended up in the red room” and “stayed in the blue room” was purely random. But what we know is, in fact, EVERY time you appeared in BOTH rooms, and it’s merely the fractured, limited nature of your experience of those events that makes it seem probabilistic.

Welcome to the Many Worlds Interpretation.

[Anonymous No.15128128]

It's crazy that the change might go from as simple as:

"Unobserved" to "observed"

to:

'... there is a difference of 5.78e-34 and we cannot neglect it...'

[Anonymous No.15128811]

>>15128014
>Why is quantum physics such bullshit?
because it describes perfectly the real world

[Anonymous No.15128966]

>>15128811
Bingo

[Anonymous No.15128972]

>>15128014
You need to hit up /x/ for actual answers on this.

[Anonymous No.15129110]

>>15128014
consciousness is the basis of reality, the brain is not fully conscious

[Anonymous No.15129224]

>>15128014
Observation is just another word for interaction retard

[Anonymous No.15129352]

>>15128014
>Why is quantum physics such bullshit?
using the wrong emission model for light
+using the wrong model for electromagnetism
+bad statistics
+boomer mentality of denial
=enshrinement of bullshit physics

[Anonymous No.15129556]

>>15128098
Physics hasn't been about what reality is for decades. It's about models and observations. This why when physics people tend to make misleading descriptions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkSKq4B7hD0

[Anonymous No.15129564]

>>15128014
Because what a physicist means by observation is not the same as OP or everyday speech.

[Anonymous No.15129657]

>>15129556
Modern physics has effectively killed philosophy as well.

[Anonymous No.15129706]

>>15129556
I thought modern physics was about securing funding, denying common sense and rerolling on the 5 sigma roulette on public money.

[Anonymous No.15129726]

Copenhagen interpretation will die out before the end of the century and will be looked back on as a major misstep in physics.

[Anonymous No.15129747]

>>15129706
BIGGER
HADRON
COLLIDER

WHAT IF HADRON COLLIDER BIGGER THAN EARTH?!

[Anonymous No.15129751]

SAY WHAT? DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE COPENHAGEN INTERPRETATION?

[Anonymous No.15129967]

>>15129726
It will just be replaces by the Seethenhagen interpretation

[Anonymous No.15130112]

>>15128045
normies do

[bodhi No.15130179]

BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP

[Anonymous No.15131032]

>>15129747
won't happen, fatburger.
china will overtake you in that too

[Anonymous No.15131041]

>>15128014
Isn't "observation" just an interaction with the environment outside of defined system?
That doesn't need any sentient creature to occur

[Anonymous No.15131042]

i like how Quantum Physics make materialist pseudo-scientists seethe.

[Anonymous No.15131043]

>>15131041
its not an interaction, you need an observer or a device that records it.
This leads to funny conclusions like the universe is alive.

[Anonymous No.15131050]

>>15128014
>Throw jelly in straight line.
>Can't see shit.
>Throw thousands of basketballs at jelly
>measure force of bonced back basketballs
>use math to determine how jelly moves
>how come throwing balls at it effects it's behavior
>le magic universe
God i hate retards

[Anonymous No.15131186]

>>15131043
>or a device that records it.
Thats just a fucking interaction you retard
You

[Anonymous No.15131190]

>>15131186
slow down retard what are you trying to say? theres no interaction.

[Anonymous No.15131264]

>>15131190
How do you record without interacting???
Please enlighten me

[Anonymous No.15131473]

>>15131264
Look at the moon. Are you interacting with it? What effect did you looking at the moon have at it?

[Anonymous No.15131543]

>>15131473
My eyes are capturing photons reflected off the moons surface
Those photons became the part of the "moon" system once they got reflected and by the fact my eyes are capturing those photons I'm interacting with the system

[Anonymous No.15131565]

>>15128045
Ah yes you deny it now, there is no wave collapse, that is all. According to classic mechanics all forces act upon whole universe particles with reverse square factor. There is no magical point during which wave collapse would need to happen

[Anonymous No.15131569]

>>15128064
>>15128066
>>15128066
>>15128060
And this is why QM is child take at physics, newton never said apple can't fall from tree to ground because "you might catch it"
QM is useless statistical data science for soibois, stick to classical, even with protons

[Anonymous No.15131574]

>>15128028
>nebulous fog of misapprehension we're struggling to clear daily
Who is this "we"? You're not a scientist or a philosopher.

[Anonymous No.15131580]

>>15128099
you obviously dont understand prism, spdcs or what is "original photon" just bunch of misinterpreation of the experiment you and other scientists are spewing with their filthy mouths

[Anonymous No.15131588]

>>15128127
yeah and one "random" selection is just god throwing a dice because he's bored, back to /popsoi/ qm schizo

[Anonymous No.15131591]

>>15128811
ok calculate 3 atoms together using QM, show me their trajectory

[Anonymous No.15131601]

>>15131473
yeah moon gravity is pulling me up like oceans dipshit

[Anonymous No.15131608]

>>15131574
everyone is struggling from 100 years of incompetence due to QM psyop

[Anonymous No.15131757]

>>15128127
let this post be a threadly reminder to never use Griffiths for learning QM

[Anonymous No.15132199]

>>15131608
This. We could be exploring space if it hadn't been forced on us after WWII.

[Anonymous No.15132432]

>>15131543
>Those photons became the part of the "moon" system once they got reflected and by the fact my eyes are capturing those photons I'm interacting with the system
Interaction is a two way street buddy

[Anonymous No.15133967]

>>15128014
consciousness is the basis for reality
and i don't mean psycholocally
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRSBaq3vAeY

[Anonymous No.15133971]

>>15128064
that is incorrect
even if you put the measurement behind the screen (temporally speaking) by creating entagled pairs of particles, the observer effect is still present
see "quantum eraser"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgs
this >>15133967 might also interst you

[Anonymous No.15133984]

>>15133971
Kneel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQv5CVELG3U

[Anonymous No.15134046]

>>15133984
but then why do all the particles that hit one of the "eraser" detecors create an interference pattern
you are not just randomly picking data
and it even produces an interference pattern that is phase shifted to produce no pattern combined with the other dector of the eraser

[Anonymous No.15134068]

>>15128014
>If someone observes me while I'm having sex, the outcome changes
Makes sense

[Anonymous No.15134437]

>>15134046
You need a reason to omit data, if the reason is "because I need to create an interference pattern" that's not a valid reason, that's circular. You can see in the comments the guy admitting he got it wrong.