[ 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   
>> No.1729212

There is nothing to discuss / debate.

This is like linking to a picture of water boiling and saying "DISCUSS"

If you are going to start a shitty thread, at least post your own ideas about the subject rather than just ordering others to do so.

>> No.1729209

boring. overdone. practically cliche.

>> No.1729237

>>1729212

>There is nothing to discuss / debate.

except for all of the videos i just posted. how about something along the lines of "such and such is wrong because x reasons"?

>at least post your own ideas

i did. agree with the long haired fellow.

now fuck off, and enjoy your butthurt.

and bump

>> No.1729247

>>1729209

>still widely debated, relevant, important

fix'd

>> No.1729265

>>1729247

especially if we still have threads like:
>>1728111

with a shitstorm of faggots going "but quantum randomness..."

>> No.1729274

At least it's not a troll/religion thread.

>> No.1729289

>>1729274
Oh, it's definitely one of those things.

>> No.1729301

>>1729289

that's some good irony, sir.

>> No.1729314

this thread is made of samefag and fail

>> No.1729332

>>1729314

the only samefag is the troll saging, otherwise i'm using a trip

science probably isn't for you, buddy.

>> No.1729542

light is a bubble not a particle

>> No.1729552

>>1729542
also, the only people who dislike these threads are the left-brain CUNTS who refuse to accept light is not a particle or are left brain wieners who just accept the duality principle at face value.

>> No.1729982

tl;dr photons are a geuss

>> No.1730353

tl;dw
What's there to discuss? I'm interested and all, but I don't even know what could I ask about.

>> No.1732313

You know the skeptic does have a point about the disclosure of these experiments not being conveyed well enough for what their implications and controversy are worth. Nobody on /sci/ provides any good material either regarding the whole 'phenomena'. There is however a MIT World video lecture with Mark Lewin where towards the end he actually preforms the experiment by shooting a red beam through a special slide with 2 crystallized slits but the finer details are not discussed.

Overall though, I think the videos do point-out that the public at large is being (mis)led by the implications and summaries alone rather than being utilized with the bare-bone specifics.

Forget those cunts (somehow they are always the first to respond with some kind of condescending shit) towards the top of this thread, /sci/ needs to make discussing this a top priority so we can better harmonize from top spare the always present trolls and shills.

>> No.1732325

>>1729204
discuss/debate what?
It is an experiment that makes perfect sense.

\Thread

>> No.1732343

>>1732325
>>1730353

discuss the collector issue to start with -- I'm sure we can find more from there.

>> No.1732358
File: 70 KB, 392x300, 1283350746060.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1732358

>>1732325
That's a load of shit! Yeah, particles shot one at a time interfering with each other makes perfect sense, de facto rhetoric even.

>> No.1732495

bumping

>> No.1732497

Are photons perhaps so small that they're intruding into the smaller dimensions which we're unable to percieve?

When one object behaves like two others, it indicates to me that we're not fully seeing it's form, only facets, which implies to me that we're only seeing the parts the protrude into our three dimensions.

>> No.1732543

>>1732358

It is what happens. You can hate it all you want.

>> No.1732548

>>1732497
No, they're teeny-tiny football fans doing "the wave".

>> No.1732555

This is probably one of the few experiments that every person with a physics degree has done. Or at least should have.

>> No.1732574

>>1732548
And yet one tiny football fan can do two waves at once which will interfere with itself.

Actually, that's starting to make a lot of sense. If they're moving through directions we're unable to percieve, it stands to reason it could hold a wave motion in such a way as to intefere with itself.

>> No.1734033

>>1732543
the only problem is they aren't particles at that point and I don't think he was hating on the explanation instead of hating that person for being so dismissive with so little words.

>> No.1734043

>>1732358
The universe doesn't care what you think.

>> No.1734050

>>1732574
Interesting, solve "what is gravity" now.

>> No.1734078

>>1734043
...true but certain parts of it really, really care what you say.

>> No.1734083

>>1734043
also, btw
>rhetoric

>> No.1734104

>>1732497
I like your thinking, and such skepticism+creativity. The specific idea of 'facets' sounds to me, however, like you've worked out an idea for a theory of what is commonly called 'hidden variables', ie. values of an object that are beyond our possibility of ever measuring, in your case due to their existence in other dimensions. For example the 'length' of a particle in the 587th time dimension, or something equally unfathomable. However, I think you may enjoy reading this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem which takes such an idea, applies it to Quantum Theory and runs with it. You may be surprised at the result which is proved!

Spoiler: The Universe doesn't make things that easy for us ;)