[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 23 KB, 710x209, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15496930 No.15496930 [Reply] [Original]

well /sci/? this redditor is onto something...

>> No.15497043

>>15496930
The absolute state of physics education.

>> No.15497258

He's right and based. I hate to say this about a redditor.

>> No.15497282

>>15496930
wouldn't it be you watching the experiment through the AI machine?

>> No.15497289

Why are sensors assumed to not mess with the outcome? Especially with particles that small.

>> No.15497290

>armchair philosophize
Sorry redditor but "philosophy" is a joke of a field. Any layman can philosophize, it's not something for which you need real training and education because all of it for a smart person is comprehendible.

>> No.15497300
File: 70 KB, 288x201, sens.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15497300

>>15497289
which sensor?

>> No.15497740

>>15497043
>no arguments

>> No.15497809
File: 954 KB, 852x1361, 1685173625453787.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15497809

>>15497300
>coincidence counter

>> No.15497857

>>15497740
What does observing a experiment even mean for a llm? Are you going to feed it with the probability densities? I'm surrounded by idiots apparently?
goodbye

>> No.15498577

>>15497857
obviously llms are retarded, but couldn't this be an easy way to measure "consciousness" of an AGI?

>> No.15498589

>>15498577
>"consciousness" of an AGI
and thus begins the era of hard to swallow pills. religions will start frothing their mouths

>> No.15498591

>>15498577
You can't measure something without interfering with it. That's where the issue lies. Consciousness has nothing to do with it.

>> No.15498592

>>15497857
>What does observing a experiment even mean for a llm?
Looking. Measuring. Empiricism. Why do you even have to ask? Are you retarded?
>Are you going to feed it with the probability densities?
No. Taking a measurement doesn't require any theoretical knowledge.
>I'm surrounded by idiots apparently?
You are the idiot.
>goodbye
Please never come back, retard.

>> No.15498594

>>15498591
Retard. The delayed choice experiments show that a lot of interactions do not cause a collapse of the wave functions. The only certainly known cause of collapse is an observer.

>> No.15498626

>>15498594
an AGI with a webcam should work then

>> No.15498636

>>15498626
A human reviews the outputs, confounding the experiment.

>> No.15498640

>>15498636
lmao no

>> No.15498642

>>15497300
anything that causes a boson

>> No.15498656
File: 413 KB, 1800x700, Postulate.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15498656

>>15498594
>hurr durr retard
idiot
Observers/observing/observations are a frequently used euphemism in physics for other specific things. It's something that's crept its way into the language and literature over the decades and centuries as physicists have tried (to varying degrees of success or failure) to find good analogies for complex ideas. Observation in relativity is a euphemism for coordinate transformation - taking a motion, momentum, energy, etc. as described in one frame of references and mapping it to another. Observation in quantum physics is a euphemism for interaction between particles/fields.

Interactions between particles/fields and macroscopic objects are generally non-perturbatory - shining a light at a car to measure its position doesn't meaningfully affect the position of the car.
Interactions between particles/fields and other particles/fields occur on comparable scales of momentum, energy, etc. and significantly alter the system after the interaction occurs - shining a light at an electron to determine its position may be comparable enough to significantly change where the electron is going and where it will be the next time an interaction with the light occurs.

Because of this - physical properties on the quantum scale are probabilistic - discrete values with some probability of the particle being at a particular position with a particular momentum, energy, etc. when an interaction occurs, and these probabilities appear to follow wave-like distributions. A photon of light in free space can be treated as having wave-like properties while a photon absorbed or reflecting off a target can be treated as having particle-like properties.

Wave-particle duality has nothing to do with whether a person is looking at light passing through a slit or not

>> No.15498662
File: 3.14 MB, 640x360, 1658902777429016.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15498662

>>15498591
>You can't measure something without interfering with it.
true
The simple version is "particles" (like electrons) exist as a field of probable locations (think electron shells around an atom) until another particle interacts with it, then the field "collapses" and becomes a discrete particle.
Think of it like you are at a slot machine. You know the numbers are between 1-9 (the field or wave), but you don't know what the exact number will be until you pull the lever (interact with the particle).
pic rel is a bunch of particle interactions, revealing the shape of the field they create before the field collapses.
>Consciousness has nothing to do with it.
true

>> No.15498667

>>15498662
>>Consciousness has nothing to do with it.
you're wrong kid

>> No.15498670

>>15498667
>you're
My dearest infant I'm not the scientist doing these experiment, cutie pie. You go tell them your opinion sweetie

>> No.15498674

>>15498656
Why do you repeat the same inane pop sci highschool level crap when I already told you about an experiment that disproves this misconception? You dont even know the mathematical formalism of QM. You're in no position to talk about this topic. Retard.

>> No.15498680

>>15496930
Pls be bait

>> No.15498682

>>15498662
>until another particle interacts with it, then the field "collapses" and becomes a discrete particle.
I already told you the delayed choice experiment disproves this. Why are you denying well established scientific results? Do you get paid to spread anti-intellectual lies?

>> No.15498688

>>15498670
the field collapse only when observed/measured, not simply "interact with another particle".

>> No.15498701

>>15498674
>when I already told you
I told otherwise. If you want to debate properly then You don't tell, You show.
>You dont even know the mathematical formalism of QM. You're in no position to talk about this topic. Retard
Why would I believe your claims of understanding? We are on the same boat here. You should be coherent. Has anonymity blind you from the fact we all are barking here?
>>15498682
>I already told you the delayed choice experiment
Review it again. We are discussing about the role of consciousness.
>>15498688
>the field collapses when x happens, not when x happens
this is what you are saying

>> No.15498712

>>15498680
if AGI finds out if OP is bait or retarded, then does it collapse the wavefunction?

>> No.15498715

>>15498701
>this is what you are saying
no, this is what the most accepted version of qm is saying

>> No.15498718

>>15498701
You do not want to engage in discussion. You do not want to be convinced or educated. You just mindlessly repeat your assertions even though evidence has been posted disproving them. My role in this thread at this point is merely to point out once again that you're wrong.

>> No.15498724

>>15497289
people here are so egocentric they believe it's consciousness that causes a quantum collapse
they went as far as to say recording it with a camera and watching it later would cause a collapse in the past

>> No.15498730

>>15498724
>conflating "Wigner's friend" thought experiment with retrocausality
Why does /sci/ always go full retard when talking about QM?

>> No.15498740

>>15498730
oh im just repeating what people on this board said, im not convinced at all consciousness has anything to do with collapse
but you tell me, if consciousness causes a collapse why would it collapse on camera footage too?

>> No.15498742

>>15498740
The camera footage is in an indefinite superposition state until you watch it. Imagine for example you're browsing porn. You see a screenshot with a female face and tits but until you watched the video you cannot be certain whether it's maybe a tranny.

>> No.15498745

>>15496930
this has been done by dean radin

>> No.15498750

>>15498742
yes i like this much better
still not convinced consciousness plays a role on collapse but this is definitely much more believable

>> No.15498751

>>15498740
>this is the kind of people you talk with on /sci/
lmao, at least reader a qm primer before replying

>> No.15498754

>>15498718
>evidence
using a wrong conclusion to prove that a common thing that happens is false because of a philosophy is not science.
Read first how the pair of photons used in these experiments came to be. Alterations will alterate the results there is no doubt about it but there is no rewriting the past.
Remember Einstein's lightning bolt? It's the same problem but with information instead of speed because again we are measuring the path and the interference pattern. You are wrongly assuming only one past. They were simultaneus

>> No.15498756

>>15498750
certified armchair quantumist here:
your consciousness is the only one for who that information "matters". every event and every machine "watching" said event are all in superposition until you observe, the event or the machine "watching" the event.
for you this is true about anyone else as well. they all are in a superposition until you observe them.

>> No.15498757

>>15498742
>record the footage
>feed it to the llm
>ask the llm whether it's collapsed or not
easy

>inb4 "the llm is in superposition until it replied to you" cope

>> No.15498765

>>15498756
>consciousness
Aren't we jumping the shark, bruva? How do you know you have to be conscious, that is, be a calculator that is also calculating itself?
To observe this you use your eyes, right? Does it also collapse when we make a cat an observer? What if we implant eyes to a detector? what if we use a fly?
>>15498742
>The camera footage is in an indefinite superposition state until you watch it.
>that porn bit
kek
What if we make a detector watch the camera footage?

>> No.15498767

>>15498757
that's like wondering if the light is on in the other room, or not. and instead of you checking it out, you ask me to go check it out and tell you. it makes no difference if I tell you the result or if you go find out for yourself. you have the same chances of having the light on or off.
whenever and observer collapses the wavefunction, all that happens is that this observer will know how the wavefunction will collapse for other observers. eg you see light is off, and if others come to find out, you can be sure they will see the light is off. but until you tell them, or they come see for themselves, they won't know. your observation does not collapse the wavefunction for them. the light is not off because you observed it as off. it's off because someone turned it off at some point.
it doesn't matter if LLM collapses the wavefunction, for you. it's the same thing. it doesn't matter if LLM is conscious or not.
at least that's how I understand it to be.

>> No.15498768

>>15498750
>anon posts something about trannies
>"yes i like this much better"
We're not surprised.

>> No.15498770

>>15498765
>conscious, that is, be a calculator that is also calculating itself?
Actual NPC detected.

>> No.15498771

>>15498767
>you ask me to go check it out and tell you.
if you check it then you collapse it. if i check it then i collapse it.

the question is will it collapse if an llm checks it and tells you the answer, and then you check yourself

>> No.15498772

>>15498756
you could say you yourself are in a superposition to the other people as well though, so this wouldn't make machines different from humans
they event has collapsed for the machines as well, it's just that it hasn't propagated outward (irl probably debatable, because the machines send different electric signals depending on what they witnessed which in small amounts could provide clues and therefore collapse (to either the consciousness or any physical object around it); because just like the cat in the box in the real world you would never be able to isolate the box enough not to get clues (e.g. cat making noises)).
so i dont really see why our consciousness would be anything special, it's just another machine that is in a superposition to the other machines
if a camera could talk it would say the collapse happens because it's the camera that's special, it's just that it can't so we blame the camera and say it doesn't witness collapse

>> No.15498776

>>15497290
Redditors think you need a degree AKA license in order to think, if not leave the thinking to the experts. That's why midwits worship german pseud philosophers, if they want to say something they they need a verified smart person to say it first.

>> No.15498777

>>15498771
I'm trying to tell you it doesn't matter for you. If the LLM is conscious, it will collapse wavefunctions when it observes. if not, it won't. either way, it doesn't matter for you. as in it doesn't affect you either way. apart from the whole "wtf LLMs are conscious??" it doesn't matter for anything else in this subject.

>> No.15498779

>>15498777
>apart from the whole "wtf LLMs are conscious??"
but that's the whole point of this thread....

>> No.15498780

>>15498776
Do you have a source to back this up? Do you even have a degree in midwitology or why do you believe you're qualified to talk about midwits?

>> No.15498781

>>15498772
>so i dont really see why our consciousness would be anything special, it's just another machine that is in a superposition to the other machines
yes that is a big issue, people defaulting to "nah we have something special that must matter" only drags things along. it's literally an impediment in moving faster in these fields, because instead of exploring, they try to forcefully direct what is real in the directions they WISH were true.

>> No.15498785

>>15498772
>so i dont really see why our consciousness would be anything special, it's just another machine
Sounds like you never experienced consciousness.

>> No.15498787

>>15498770
This nigga disproving Advaita Vedanta

>> No.15498788

>>15498779
in this context you can think of the fact that if LLMs or Xs or whatevers were conscious, the only implication would be that they would collapse wavefunctions and they will know how those wavefunctions will collapse for other conscious observers.
do with this information what you wish.

>> No.15498792

>>15498780
Qualified to fuck your mom

>> No.15498793

>>1549877
how does an LLM differ from a camera or from a human who witness the collapse?
they're all in a superposition *to you* until you find out
at which point you enter a superposition to everyone else as well

>> No.15498794

>>15498788
but in case they weren't conscious, they would tell us that there's no collapse, and then when we check it we would see a collapse. wouldn't that be an easy way to rule out consciousness?

>> No.15498795

>>15498793
meant for >>15498771

>> No.15498797

>>15498795
>>15498793
my point is, IF the llm is conscious then what you say is correct.
if not, then it wouldn't "see" the collapse. so it's not like it will be in superposition until you ask it about the collapse, it should "see" the uncollapsed wavelength

>> No.15498799

>>15498794
it doesn't matter for you, when YOU observe you collapse the whole chain, including LLMs, people, things. you can't observe the superposition itself, the act of observing is what collapses that superposition, you can't go past that point and observe the whole superposition at the same time, doesn't make sense to me.

>> No.15498800

>>15498785
undebatable
because we don't know how it works, im just trying to avoid humanocentrism since like anything to do with it has been proven wrong in the past

>> No.15498805

>>15497809
Fucking hell, is that a kike in the pic

>> No.15498809

>>15498799
>it doesn't matter for you, when YOU observe you collapse the whole chain, including LLMs, people, things.
you are assuming that every THING collapse the function and then it's propagated along the chain. this is simply a conjecture and there was no way to test it before. now it's finally possible

>> No.15498810

>>15498805
no, that's a nebula in her back yard

>> No.15498811

>>15498797
>so it's not like it will be in superposition
does that mean a camera wouldn't be on a superposition either?
"seeing the uncollapsed wavelength" is the same as entering a superposition with it because when you ask the LLM both it and the event would collapse from your point of view
>it's not like it will be in superposition until you ask it about the collapse
imma give it a shot:
when you ask it, you find out the true state of the event (meaning it collapses) so it wouldn't enter a superposition after asking
so, i guess you're suggesting the llm never enters a superposition
but if that's true, then it telling you wouldn't cause a collapse, because there's no collapse with no superposition, which in turn would mean you found out the state of things without collapsing them which is not possible

>> No.15498812

>>15498811
>so, i guess you're suggesting the llm never enters a superposition
>but if that's true, then it telling you wouldn't cause a collapse, because there's no collapse with no superposition, which in turn would mean you found out the state of things without collapsing them which is not possible
that's my point. it's not SUPPOSED to possible with the current framework, but who knows

>> No.15498813

>>15498805
>/pol/ chud hallucinating again

>> No.15498814

>>15498809
>you are assuming that every THING collapse the function
>there was no way to test it before
bro seeing the footage from a camera would cause a collapse, so *at least* you cause a collapse *through* every thing (in case consciousness matters, otherwise yes every thing collapses (which is more believable imo))

>> No.15498817

Since brains use Energy. Wouldn't it be easier if we measure how energy can affect observations?

>> No.15498819

qm is a gay psyop. waves aren't real

>> No.15498821

>>15498814
ok, so, in that case the llm would be in superposition and it WILL witness the collapse regardless of consciousness?

>> No.15498824

so then what, in summary all superpositions will collapse the very same for any conscious observer that's observing them. doesn't matter if it's one human, one conscious AGI, or all humans at once, if we observe something at the same time, it will collapse the same for any of the observers. that's all there is to it. all observers possess the very same special-power of peering into superpositions and collapsing them to what is.

>> No.15498825

>>15498821
that's what i believe yes
if it was like other anons here want so badly then it would still be in a superposition but it wouldn't "witness" (my idea of witnessing makes the witnessing of a human and a camera the same)
so in both cases, it would be the same as a camera recording

>> No.15498851
File: 74 KB, 697x695, 1662364063528718.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15498851

>>15496930
lol