[ 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: 90 KB, 600x596, 6843657685463421.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5595393 No.5595393 [Reply] [Original]

Quantum mechanics or gtfo.

>> No.5595399
File: 47 KB, 635x476, tumblr_mgxk491pt61s3nxv9o1_1280.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5595399

How do we know the probability of the cat being dead or alive is 50%? Shouldn't it be a game of luck (33.34%)?

>> No.5595400
File: 238 KB, 1550x1137, Double slit bullshit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5595400

obligatory

>> No.5595406

>>5595400
But that's what you do get with a single slit, moron.

>> No.5595408

>>5595406
No you don't

>> No.5595421

>>5595408
Yes you do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UANVMIajqlA

>> No.5595435
File: 51 KB, 440x345, quantum_entanglement.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5595435

I'm currently writing a screenplay that's based on the idea that quantum entanglement is the scientific proof that there is a connection between every living thing (and non-living for that matter) and explains why so many world religions believe in a "god". That somehow we feel this connection on an abstract level, and we've been trying to explain this feeling since we've been able to communicate with each other. Kinda a sloppy sum up but, any thoughts?

>> No.5595439

>>5595435

we aren't all entangled if that's what you mean

but if the universe is deterministic, then you'd essentially be right

>> No.5595442

>>5595439
One Big bang and everything's entangled, if you go back far enough...

>> No.5595453

>>5595442

no, particles formed a long time after the big bang, if things were entangled, they're not anymore

>> No.5595459

>>5595453
They formed during the cool down phase, after expansion. Correct?

>> No.5595566

>>5595459
yes
and very few if any of them would be entangled, or stay in an entangled state for very long

your screenplay is based off quantum mysticism bullshit, so don't expect much friendly advice from around here aside from "make it not bullshit"

>> No.5595581

>>5595408
lol fuckhead

>> No.5595598

>>5595453
>>5595459
>we don't understand what a "particle" is.

>> No.5595601

>>5595399
This. There's 4 choices: you're right and it's alive, you're right and it's dead, you're wrong and it's dead, you're wrong and it's alive. Only one is correct, so it's 33.34% of probability.

>> No.5595603

>>5595601
stop samefagging pls. nobody fell for it the first time, now back to troll school you go.

>> No.5595604

>>5595598

by particle, i meant stable atoms

and we know enough about them to know there's only one way they could all be entangled

but even if that was the case, our theory can't predict how they'd behave, which means the theory is wrong which means our understanding of quantum entanglement would also be wrong.....

>> No.5595624

>>5595435
This is retarded and you should feel retarded.

>> No.5595649

>>5595624

I am not ashamed.

Problem?

>> No.5595650

I hate all these stupid misunderstandings that ensue when quantum mechanics is dumbed down, like particles having a wavefunction in space from which the probability is derived.
Every distinct configuration of a system has a different complex ampilitude. That means that if you have 2 particles in space there aren't 2 functions that describe the ampilitude for every point in 3D space, but 1 function that describes it for every point in 6D space. Schrödinger's equations describes the evolution of ampilitude in this configuration space, and one can derive that the absolute square of the ampilitude is the probability. The whole thing can also be done using path integrals instead.
Wavefunction collapse, entaglement and other "mysterious" effects can then be explained without any metaphysical bullshit.

>> No.5595656

>>5595650

i doubt most people know what you're even talking about

now that you've mentally masturbated in this thread filled with people that clearly don't know what's going on, please leave them to let them wallow in their own ignorance

>> No.5595658

>>5595656
k
/sci/ and /x/ should merge in the near future

>> No.5595662

>>5595658

i thought it pretty much already was

> visit /sci
> check threads
> is it homework?
> yes? ok
> no? is it psuedo-science bullshit? yes

>> No.5595664

>>5595566
Do you know what entanglement means? Entanglement is the general case. Factorizable systems are a special case which can be expected to never hold exactly IRL.

>> No.5595666
File: 4 KB, 401x192, Double-slit.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5595666

Just had a thought about the double slit experiment. They had optical sensors to measure photons entering the slits. When they had the optical sensors turned on and recorded the results, it showed a pattern you would expect from a particle. When they had the optical sensor tuned on but didn't record the data (like sensor turned on but didn't have it hooked up to a disk or magnetic tape drive to record) it showed a pattern that you would expect from a wave. They concluded that that it was pure probability until it was consciously observed at which point it collapsed the wave function and displayed the particle pattern. Consciousness observation changed the outcome of the experiment.

My thought, or question rather, is what happens when they leave the optical sensors on, measure the data, but don't look at the data. Like burn the date or something. Now the 2nd part of this. If it doesn't collapse the wave form and it shows a wave pattern. Can you then show the data, while not directly observing it yourself, to an animal of some kind. What would happen then? Because if the wave/particle pattern is determined by conscious observation, then having like a monkey observe the data would be an accurate test of weather or not animals possess consciousness.

tl;dr Can you use the double slit experiment to test life forms for consciousness?

if you don't know what double slit is watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

>> No.5595671

>>5595666
>When they had the optical sensor tuned on but didn't record the data (like sensor turned on but didn't have it hooked up to a disk or magnetic tape drive to record) it showed a pattern that you would expect from a wave.
nope

>> No.5595674

>>5595666

concious obersvation doesn't change shit

>> No.5595680

>>5595674

Correct. You can make the measurements while you are asleep.

>> No.5595688

>>5595658
Why not? It could actually end up being an interesting thing.
1- On one side, the most square headed scifags that deny their own humane nature and on the other side, the most trippy x retards that claim that gods and ghosts are real. Get me the crisps!!

2- When mysticism faces science it's either debunked or proven trough a logical and scientific explanation... or in the worst case scenario it becomes creationism.

>> No.5595707

This is funny because I get it

>> No.5595709
File: 124 KB, 600x600, 1340986398174.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5595709

>Quantum mechanics
>keep that nonsense over at>>>/x/

>> No.5595721

There is some theory for how big a slit and beam has to be before the double slit effect can be demonstrated?

>> No.5595725

>>5595709
No, fuck you. Science was born to explain this kind of nonsense and force all the mythsayers to find a real job.
You /sci/ you laugh at /lit/ for not knowing shit about physics while /lit/ laughs at you for not knowing shit about literature while /k/ laughs at you for not knowing what weapon they can shoot you ass with. If ignorance is an illness then let's fucking cure it.

>> No.5595729

>>5595604
>by particle, i meant stable atoms

Wow, way to really confirm what he said.

>> No.5595734

>>5595721
Just calculate how big the double-slit fringes should be and compare it to the variance in direction for the light you're shining on the slits. If that variance is too big, it's going to smear out the pattern and you won't be able to see anything. Other considerations I suppose are whether enough light gets through to see it, and whether your slits are narrow enough compared to their spacing that the double-slit interference pattern isn't screwed up by single-slit interference. It's fairly easy to do a double-slit experiment at home using a laser pointer.

>> No.5595736

>>5595725
>You /sci/ you laugh at /lit/ for not knowing shit about physics while /lit/ laughs at you for not knowing shit about literature

Except that phyiscs is useful knowledge while literature is worthless and a waste of time.

>> No.5595748
File: 71 KB, 567x580, double slit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5595748

1.Nothing is better than eternal happiness.
2.Eating a sandwich is better than nothing.

∴ eating a sandwich is better than eternal happiness.

>> No.5595762

>>5595748
What is that?

It can't be human, can it?

>> No.5595766

>>5595736
And here we have the example I was waiting for. Thanks for coming. Now someone beat the crap of this guy with a rock and yell: ''Science is worthless before power!'' so we can complete the circle.
Literature not only inspires science every now and then Jules Verne, anyone?) but also explores human nature from inside and teaches many lessons about life and history.
Ignorance is bad, assholes who think the world spins around their dicks just because they know something about something is even worse.

>> No.5595773
File: 35 KB, 478x269, dbv.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5595773

>>5595762

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/01/12/born-with-two-vaginas-not-so-rare/

>> No.5595792

Socrates.
I only know that I know nothing.
The right words to start learning everything.

>> No.5595825
File: 8 KB, 250x202, SM_neat.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5595825

>>5595748
>>5595773
<<<

>> No.5595831

>>5595825
>infantile cartoon

>> No.5595832

>>5595400

>that same sad faggot thinking spending time on 4chan means he can disprove anything

>>5595421

Told.

>> No.5595835

>>5595825
jellos that they can fit one more dicks?

>> No.5595846

>>5595792
>I only know that I know nothing.
At least you know one thing.

>> No.5595853

>>5595831
go fuck yourself

>> No.5595861

>>5595773
>and wonderered why her girlfriends were baffled when she asked “which hole” to use with tampons.

>> No.5595944

>>5595861
http:/ /answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AqI8eh3IPviPw0Rei723zkAjzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20111005195214AAWWOj6

>> No.5595971

>>5595944
She sounds like her hymen is nearly closing the opening of her vagina and should see a doctor to open it; not being confused by having 2.

>> No.5595997

I am designing an "astra" weapon for a story

a billiard stick and cueball

when you shoot the cue, it becomes a probability wave and can snap to any position where the opponent didn't block or is unarmored, but only if the opponent attempts to perceive the attack or block it

if they don't do that, it's harmless

is this retarded y/n

>> No.5596002

>>5595846
>>I only know that I know nothing.
>At least you know one thing.
And it's wrong.

>> No.5596021

>>5595421
I'm not sure what you two are even arguing about or what either of you think you're proving, but that single slit is certainly spreading the light out rather than just making a shadow.

>> No.5596024

>>5596002
But then he actually knows nothing, which makes him right. Liar paradox!

>> No.5596107

>>5595666
You misunderstand the experiment. Basically, depending on whats observing the particle, you can get mixed results. Why? Because of superpositions and what-not. No photon is at a single point, instead its more of a continuum where they are constantly moving, changing and moving again. Whether or not its a state of change or moving is irrelevant because there time between is so negligible that literally equal to being two different positions at once.

>> No.5596133
File: 5 KB, 230x180, 5408-is-this-real-life.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5596133

You have a coin which has 50percent chance of landing on head and 50 on tails, no land on side just 2 possible outcomes. Say you flip that coin an infinite amount of times. So at some point the coin will land on heads 100000 times in a row. But its 50/50 so how it could? But you flipping it an infinite amount of times so every possibility is possible, so it will, right?

>> No.5596148

>>5596133
It will, also eventually every finite 0-1 series will occur. Even your hdd's content.

>> No.5596155

>>5596148
buts its 50/50 so what are the chances it will happen?

>> No.5596191

>>5596155
1

>> No.5596204

>>5596155

isn't it something like 2^-100000

>> No.5596206

>>5595400
google single slit diffraction

>> No.5596426
File: 300 KB, 1438x1788, double slit and measurement.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5596426

>> No.5596445

>>5595666

The interference pattern is ruined when observed, because any kind of observation will cause its own interference.

>> No.5596453

>>5596426
mother fucking niggers everything is double slit & my eyes are fucking usb plugs to my fucking eyepod

Thanks OP niggers tounge in my anus