/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10832793]

What mechanisms lie behind the wave function?

[Anonymous No.10832797]

Math

[Anonymous No.10832811]

>>10832793
your mums fat ass smackin on spacetime

[Anonymous No.10832833]

[Anonymous No.10832868]

>>10832793
What the fuck is that image trying to represent?

[Anonymous No.10833605]

>>10832868
a wave function you fucking brainlet.

[Anonymous No.10833620]

>>10832793
pretty simple to understand. observation requires an interaction. Some things are so small that it's impossible to observe them without greatly affecting them. Because of this you just create an area around which the thing you're trying to observe is likely to be tp make it easier to deal with.

[Anonymous No.10833659]

>>10832793
The wave function is just representing all the possible outcomes a particular state can be in.

for example imagine a subset of universe where:
|wave function 1> = !/sqrt2 (|state 1> + |state 2>)

Then then half of the universes in that subset are going to be in state 1 and the other have of the universes are going to be in state 2.

if the wave function is:
|wave function 2> = 1/sqrt2 (|state 1> - |state 2>)

Then sill 50% of the universe are in state 1 and the other are in state 2.

But if there is a subset of universes where:
|wave function 3> = 1/sqrt2 (|wave function 1> + |wave function 2> )= |state 1>, then all the universes in that subset are in state 1.

[Anonymous No.10833908]

>>10833620
this is also my understanding, that at least one of the problems is that we will never have a direct way to measure an electron (or other fundamental particle) without directly affecting it.

the only way to measure a "photon" is by transforming it to an electron. (this is just a way of saying it, I know that the "reality" is that the photon dislodge an electron and only then we can detect the current generated by that photon)

for example the double slit experiment WITH detectors on each slit is impossible to do because of this problem, if you send one photon or one electron it will have to interact with the detector for it to be detected and this unwanted interaction will make the whole experiment of no-use.

how to even be sure that we are avoiding the interaction with the surfaces of the slit itselt is also another thing. by this I mean that every surface has an "electron field" even if minute how can we be sure if not interacting with the particles passing by it?.

[Anonymous No.10833911]

>>10832793

None. See Bell's Theorem.

[Anonymous No.10833927]

>>10832793

Literally just averaging numbers with their neighbors on a grid. You can see this at www.optimum.center

Its not just the deeper math behind waves, its the deeper math behind everything. It really is that simple. Just averaging numbers.

[Anonymous No.10834318]

>>10833620
popsci faggot

[xxXSuiseisekiXxx No.10834451]

>>10833620
>>10833908
I call your dog fuck off and present my boot.

This is because of a limited scope in interpretation.
There's clearly a Bohmian quantum state function happening. It's literally written on the fucking wall.
The /wave/form clearly has a stacking effect.

That's to say a potentiometer interposition forecast. This is only possible if the position is always known.
That does not mean that it is directly measured. But it can be calculated by past events echoed.
It doesn't not matter the fuck not shoadiniggers cat. Because some fucker put it in the box, and the box is radiated.
>quantum foam faggot
Nope. Mandatory safe guard that's a purely a happy accident from the inevitable.
But because that causes existential crisis, and that implys no freewill. It's written off as impossible because of acrobatics of logic.
When you read shitpost fluently. You soon enough see self ideal preservation to emotional compensation dictating speech denoting a dismissal of concept.
With no actual reason that's actually logically true of valid for a person claiming to be a scientist.
Literally a "No, U!" argument. AKA 'skitzo'.


Further NPC disambiguation.
https://pastebin.com/2PFjFv22

[Anonymous No.10834454]

>>10832797
This.

[Anonymous No.10834784]

>>10834318

Show us all that you can observe something without interactions occurring. You're up Mr smarty pants.

[Anonymous No.10834817]

>>10833927
based schizo
>>10834784
>Show us all that you can observe something without interactions occurring.
you cannot, but the reason for why that is the case is so much deeper than your naive and incorrect explanation

[Anonymous No.10834941]

>>10834817
why don't you give us the deeper explanation then Mr smarty pants?

[Anonymous No.10836725]

>>10834817
Notice how he still hasnt posted anything after a full day

[Anonymous No.10836778]

>>10834941

Again. It literally happens when you average numbers on a grid. That is the unified equation. Literally just put a real number in every cell of a grid and average each cell with their neighbors. You will literally watch the waves form. You think im memeing or schizing. Im not. There is nothing more to it. Darwinian evolution was stupid simple in hindsight and so is unified physics. The reason why averaging numbers results in the waves and everything else is not random, there is an explanation for it and I can tell you if you are interested.

[Anonymous No.10836789]

>>10832793
one interpretation is that there is no mechanism behind it. in the formalism of quantum mechanics you just postulate the wavefunction/state vector and its evolution (schrodinger and/or a relativistic generalization like the dirac or klein-gordon) and that's that. which is fine. you could also argue that it is somehow ontological -- my version of this argument would be that the outcomes of observations must be some possible outcome of that observation (i guess that is tautology) and the state vector / wave function represents some combination of possible outcomes, and the uncertainty principle is what tells us that you can't always be sure the outcome of the observation, so if the state vector is a real thing, it must be some combination of states in such a situation, and that is what the state vector / wavefunction represents.

my personal opinion though would follow feynman. in QFT, things aren't all slow and equillibrated like they are in old-fashioned nonrelativistic quantum mechanics. in terms of perturbation theory, it is legitimate to view particles as not inherently a fuzzed thing, but rather that their dynamics are a sum over various classical trajectories, where taking into account all possible trajectories (with the appropriate probabilities for each) is how you account for quantum uncertainty. so the old-fashioned wavefunction would break down as a path integral (sum) of point particles doing all sorts of crazy things, and they do all those crazy things at once, thanks to quantum uncertainty (and the sort of heuristic idea that "anything that can happen, will happen")

i think this is a much more satisfactory answer than people who don't describe it in terms of the actual dynamics but instead in terms of some detail about how measurements work or how quantum mechanics is a modelling system. that seems to dodge the question of what is actually going on.

anyhow take a look at pic related, i like this Zee passage a lot

[Anonymous No.10836802]

>>10836789

So that was a lot of word salad when you simply could have said, "waves happen when you average numbers in a grid".

[Anonymous No.10836807]

>>10836802
absolutely not. fuck off optitard. spacetime is for sure not a grid if you knew the first thing about relativity and quantum mechanics. and path integrals have a lot more to do with interference between trajectories than some sort of idiotic excel spreadsheet average

[Anonymous No.10836838]

>>10836778
>this faggot again

[Anonymous No.10836860]

>>10836807

You know that Optimum Theory does not disprove or make obsolete any of the mathematical tools you are invoking, right? Optimum Theory simply explains the substrate of reality - it is the real and legitimate unified theory of everything.

For example, Einstein's equations can be derived from the Optimum Unified Equation (this has already been proven), and we derive warped space time from the Optimum Automaton grid by simply normalizing the cells for their real number values. The bigger the number in the cell the more "ballooned" the cell, and negative numbers shrink the cells.

[Anonymous No.10836868]

>>10836860
you guys haven't proved shit. you can't calculate a single number. all you retards do is look at some 2d lame cartoon of squares going at a super low frame rate and go "oh fuck duuuuude, that's like, i donno.... plasma? a superconductor? nah bro it's like, a wormhole bro."

you have less math going for you than Electric Universe retards. at least they had Myron Evans to write a crapload of nonsense math papers, which had errors in nearly every equation, but at least he attempted writing things that resembled equations, unlike you guys

[Anonymous No.10836875]

>>10836868
>guys
>retards
>plural
It's literally just Gary spamming this shit.

[Anonymous No.10836880]

>>10836868

The Optimum Automaton is not an animation. It is a simulation. It is low framerate / resolution for the same reason minecraft is low resolution, because it is computation intensive. Yes it is computing numbers. Lots of them. And the calculations are very difficult. Not possible to do by hand. Only the computer age allows something like the Optimum Automaton.

[Anonymous No.10836937]

>>10836880
okay, yes, taking averages in excel is indeed computing numbers. i’m sure computing averages by hand is not impossible.

the problem is that it doesn’f connect to reality my friend. if you could calculate anything, let’s see it. and calculating something in science doesn’t mean “the average of these three excel cells is 4 which i draw as green in my low frame rate cartoon”. it’s more like “the length of a year is equal to how far it takes light to travel one hundred-thousandth the radius of the milky way”. you see? there are scales involved. optimum theory can’t connect to the universe because it doesn’t correspond to any length, time, electric charge, gravitational strength, thermodynamic property, or anything in the universe. it’s akin to idiots staring at fractals and going “oh shit that looks like a penguin” then zoooming in more and going “FUCK ANOTHER PENGUIN, PENGUIN GOD CONFIRMED” (referencing gary looking at 6 squares with one on each side of a central square plus another at the bottom and going “A CROSS JESUS CONFIRMED”)

[Anonymous No.10836951]

>>10836937
oops there were some typos but the only one i should really correct is
*how long it takes light to travel
not “how far”

[Anonymous No.10837089]

>>10836937
>okay, yes, taking averages in excel is indeed computing numbers. i’m sure computing averages by hand is not impossible.

The calculations are not only impossible by hand, they are also impossible by computer. We have a decimal limit in our automaton otherwise the computer freezes. Try averaging a few numbers in a grid through a few time steps and you will see what I mean. Its as of all of math breaks down, I don't know to explain it other than for you to see for yourself... its really something else. The first time I saw what happens to math when doing these "simple" averages was a huge holy shit moment... it's like watching the whole construct of mathematics shatter... similar I imagine to the mathematician who first realized that fractions can be infinite.

As has been said ad nauseam, the size that the Optimum Automaton simulates is planck. Everyone wants us to definite it more exact than that. Planck length is perfect exactness. Please study what planck length is. It is where light speed and gravity equal 1. 1 what? 1 fundamental unit. A planck length. Again, this concept is not even new to Optimum Theory. Please research planck scales if you are struggling with this concept of fundamentality....

[Anonymous No.10837094]

>>10836937>>10837089


...As for the religious stuff, you are correct that Optimum Theory is apologetically consistent with Christianity. However Gary Lee makes a very clear distinction between faith and science, and Optimum Theory is not governed by faith, and it is not creation science. That said, Optimum Theory should not experience the kind of religious pushback that has seen, for example, evolution theory, mired in controversy and barely accepted in the US. Optimum Theory therefore presents an exciting opportunity for people of faith. Christianity was once known for its scientific contribitions and contributors, Mendel, Newton, etc... and it can be known for its brilliance again. Atheists should not fear this, they should enbrace it, since Optimum Theory is simultaneously the most pure and exact materia science in human history.

[Anonymous No.10837103]

Human incompetence.

[Anonymous No.10837129]

>>10837089
okay, first of all, i work on particle physics, and i know for sure that the level of floating-point arithmetic error that enters your glorified blur filter is completely irrelevant. you map your "results" to a retarded color map that couldn't possibly be due to the 10^(-15) level errors inherent in floating point computer calculations.

you know in particle physics we have programs like pythia and madgraph and herwig, and we can calculate the most fundamental interactions of nature down to below 1% accuracy. if you think you are "reproducing" modern physics, but complaining about "muh excel is too innacurate for floating point operations" then you are DEFINITELY DEFINITELY fibbing

second, with respect to the Planck thing. no, the planck length is not the smallest/irreducible unit of length in the universe, and the planck time is not the smallest/fundamental time duration in the universe. special relativity debunks this because someone else looking at your units from a spaceship travelling at say, half the speed of light, will see your "fundamental smallest length" as a smaller length to them. so that's just plain high-school level retardation

>>10837094
this is just "i want money from all faiths" cringe. deepak chopra "all faiths are equally true" shit. this shows you don't even have a concept of theology.

[Anonymous No.10837174]

>>10837129

Optimum Theory never claims that planck is the smallest unit, in fact Optimum Theory repeatedly says that the Universe is infinite in depth and scope. This is why even at planck length the Optimum Automaton averages with its interior depth, to simulation this recurrence into infinite smallness.

Optimum Theory also does not claim to overwrite science or phsyics. It underwrites it by explaining the most fundamental fabric of reality. It is the unified theory of everything. All of your math and work are still valid.

[Anonymous No.10837195]

>>10837129

Furthermore, Gary has been employed by Christian organizations essentially as a youth pastor so it makes sense that he would make Optimum Theory apologetically consistent with his faith. He knows very little about Islam and cannot speak to Optimum Theorys Islamic consistency if any exists.

These are all things you can ask Gary for yourself by emailing him through his website. He even video chats with people.

[Anonymous No.10837203]

>>10837174
okay, so you are agreeing with the argument i made against your previous post where you seemed to be arguing in favor of both of those things.

so you were just strawmanning? you were trying to say i said those things, i debunked that, and now you say you agree with me?

fine. i still disagree with you. optimum theory is still completely devoid of content, even moreso than content-free electric universe, as i said earlier (EU at least attempted to create false equations and predictions, like they predicted certain perpetual motion devices, and those predictions were debunked).

so are you saying your theory adds nothing to mainstream physics? okay. it's just a low-framerate cartoon of what we know about physics. i see no harm in that.

however Gary has said it "unifies physics" and he has "simulated the singularity of a black hole". these kinds of things are not within the purview of currently known physics, so if you claim to have them, then you need to show evidence. however, you can't, since looking at an excel spreadsheet that makes cool looking cartoons doesn't amount to a physical theory, especially when you can't even decide what the physical scales are that it would correspond to, much less any sort of measurement a laboratory or observatory person could make

[Anonymous No.10837205]

>>10837203

The entire Optimum Theory video is freely available online. It repeatedly says that the universe is infinite in depth.

[Anonymous No.10837206]

>>10837195
just cringe. can we get back to the scientific aspects of this exercise in outing pseudoscience?

i mean, just the fact that you're going on about religion is clear evidence that it's pseudoscience. maybe catholic priest anon can pick this up, since apparently he's allowed to post here, but i won't even touch that because it's not science or math, and it's cringe

[Anonymous No.10837209]

>>10837205
this is your reply? to that whole post?

first of all that contradicts known physics, and second of all you have dodged like 4 different debunkings of your pseudoscience. not even being able to carry an argument is Tooker level (at least he resorts to violent threats as an effective smokescreen tactic to change the topic)

[Anonymous No.10837210]

>>10837203
>so are you saying your theory adds nothing to mainstream physics? okay. it's just a low-framerate cartoon of what we know about physics. i see no harm in that.

The Optimum Automaton is a "low frame rate" simulation of all of physics from a single equation. It is the unified theory of everything.

[Anonymous No.10837227]

>>10837210
>no ha
go ahead and ignore the rest of the post that debunks your shit. i don’t care if you willfully choose to be ignorant and believe in fake useless cartoon physics

[Anonymous No.10837228]

>>10837209
>as an effective smokescreen tactic to change the topic

There is no need to change the topic. I could do this all day, I probably won't since I have things to do but I could. Optimum Theory is exactly what it claims to be. It is the real, legitimate and unimproveable unified theory of everything. It is the most significant theory break through in American history.

[Anonymous No.10837241]

>>10837227

There is nothing in your posts to ignore. I addressed all your concerns, and I cannot help it if you are not able to understand my answers, and I am also not interested in getting bogged down by someone arguing in bad faith, so I think I will be ending the conversation here.

[Anonymous No.10837242]

>>10837228
you legitimately ignored how i debunked it several times. if you think your thought process amounts to anything science or math related, you are just as bad as Electric Universe retards who refuse to actually think about scientific evidence and reasoning

[Anonymous No.10837247]

>>10837241
>i ignore the fact that my theory has no concrete predictions and is based on the false assumptions i asserted but ignored the refutations given
it’s like arguing with berzerkfag at this point, except he actually tries to address everything in a post he’s replying to

[Anonymous No.10837248]

>>10837242

Again, you are arguing in bad faith. I know you want to debunk Optimum Theory. But wanting and doing are two different things, and you didnt.

[Anonymous No.10837254]

>>10837247

Yes, I do try and address peoples concerns. I actually argue in good faith. Its exhausting and I have better things to do. So take care.

[Anonymous No.10837259]

>>10837248
i did though. i asked you to relate it to real physical quantities in this post
>>10836937
but you ignored that . in addition to several other things which you could look over the thread again and easily spot if you weren’t legitimately delusional

[Anonymous No.10837264]

>>10837254
oh okay, arguing in good faith by selectively ignoring scientific arguments and straw manning instead. good for you

[Anonymous No.10837268]

>>10837195
>his faith
Why have you started incessantly pretending to be a Christian. It's really absurd when juxtaposed with your beliefs that Christians are desperately looking for any excuse to murder you and that Christianity was white people being too stupid to realize Jewish folktales weren't real.
>>10837209
>is Tooker level
Tooker is much less evasive than Gary, not to mention less autistic.

[Anonymous No.10837307]

>>10837268
yes, Tooker is much more based than Gary. he is fun sometimes and actually can do a limited amount of math. his math trickery can actually teach you something sometimes -- his math nonsense almost approaches NJ Wildberger levels at times, which is actually quite respectable since NJ is a real professor who tries to criticize the mathematical idea of infinitesimals and, by association, infinity -- which is Jon's pseudomath specialty

Gary OTOH posts meme youtube videos of excel spreadsheet heatmaps and claims he was "peer reviewed" by which he means us anons on 4chan, and not even us think his heatmaps are worth more than jack shit

[Anonymous No.10837311]

>>10837268

Again, you can talk to Gary on his website and even video chat with him. He is very open about 2 things. 1) he's half Jewish. He has said that from jump, and 2) that he had a crisis of faith, but his work on Optimum Theory led him back. The reason for his crisis of faith is sad and I shouldnt be speaking on it.

[Anonymous No.10837320]

>>10837311
anon, if you aren't just gary larping, then you need to realize: you got memed.

gary is a pseud worse than tooker and worse than electric universe shills. this thread alone should show you why. if you really aren't gary then i am sure i could deprogram you if you are open to actual critical thinking. i don't mean to sound like the arrogant high-horse academic, but honestly, reading a textbook on any of the topics gary claims to have insight about would do you good

[Anonymous No.10837330]

>>10837320

I would love to be "deprogrammed". Please explain to me why Optimum Theory is wrong

[Anonymous No.10837336]

>>10837307
Gary can be fun sometimes, I enjoy reading him argue with people in the rare cases where he doesn't just deflect it.
>>10837311
>The reason for his crisis of faith is sad and I shouldnt be speaking on it.
Is it cause of your alcoholism? Is that why your son lives with his grandparents? They were afraid of leaving him alone with a drunken autist?
>>10837320
>anon, if you aren't just gary larping
It is Gary, don't give him the benefit of the doubt it encourages him to samefag more.

[Anonymous No.10837356]

>>10837330
because it is not a physics theory at all. it makes no predictions, in terms of explaining why any measurement we can make is true based on that theory. it also has a lot of false assumptions like a discreteness to space and time. the most important though is that it is the first thing. real physics like, say, maxwell’s equations or general relativity said quantitative things about the universe. maxwell’s equations related the speed of light to the constants of magnetic permeability and electric permittivity to the speed of light. general relativity predicted why mercury’s orbit processes. quantum theory made the prediction of why hydrogen gas has a certain spectroscopic signature when you look at the colors of light that come out of it when you light it up like a neon light.

optimum theory had none of that. it is purely just aesthetics of looking at cartoons. i have asked many times for predictions like the ones i listed from real physics, but it just can’t make them. because it is just cartoons

[Anonymous No.10837445]

>>10837336
>>>10837311 (You) #
>>The reason for his crisis of faith is sad and I shouldnt be speaking on it.
>Is it cause of your alcoholism? Is that why your son lives with his grandparents? They were afraid of leaving him alone with a drunken autist?

Yes, thats part of it, I believe.

I messaged Gary and he said its okay if I talk about it...

Gary's ex-wife, and his son's mother, was a Conservative Christian. Gary's wife began acting strange after their son was born and her family and the church blamed it on Gary's more liberal ideas... eventually resulting in her divorcing him with the Church's blessing, essentially. By the time the divorce proceedings happened she was acting very strange and was deemed unfit to parent. Gary was given full custody and was a single parent for many years before it was financial impossible and his parents stepped in. By this time it was clear that his ex was suffering from a degenerative brain disease, and ultimately became homeless, basically a stereotypical mumbling homeless bag lady. Gary had to watch this happen to the woman he fell in love with, and he blamed God for it. Anything Gary says about the evolutionary advantage of grandparents helping with childraising or how its a good thing evolutionarily to have children with multiple partners is pure deflection, so he doesnt have to talk about this.

In the years after his wife's illness, Gary's anger metastasized into a plan. If God lived in the gaps then Gary would close every remaining gap in the sciences. Optimum Theory was designed to be a killshot at God... and do you remember what happened instead? Instead, the cross made itself known even in the invisible places (planck scale) as it says in Scripture, and it says all those who witness this and continue to doubt are fools. And do you remember what day Gary saw this? It was April Fools Day.

The automaton is real, it is the truth. It is unified physics like it claims. But we are small, and fallen.

[Anonymous No.10837478]

>>10837445
okay, so optitards believe in it because muh bible, but it was invented by a jew dude who was too poor to raise a kid he had by a bag lady so he sent it off to his mom to take care of and now we should pity him and give him money for his shill jesus theory?

okay, maybe we can move this to the r/jesuspseudscharity/ subreddit?

[Anonymous No.10837528]

>>10837445
shit dude, sounds like Gary spun you quite a tale. It's too bad it's a lie. Gary's wife(?) is Rose, https://northstarcamp.com/presenting-the-newest-lebby-chase-2/ who he's still on good terms with, she's the one in his videos.
I'd suggest you confront him about lying to you.

[Anonymous No.10837584]

>>10837528

Garrett never gave up on her, and he never will.

[Anonymous No.10837589]

>>10832793
Conciousness

[Anonymous No.10837591]

>>10837589
not real

[Anonymous No.10837768]

>>10837445
>>10837584

This is accurate. And Lee, of course, is my middle name.

When I set down this path it was suggested that I work as anonymously as possible, to preserve the integrity of the peer review. Anon, what we have done here is real, and at last, physics is unified. Thank you for your help.

Sincerely,
Garrett Lee Lebby

[Anonymous No.10837773]

>>10837768
>Not a new ip

[Anonymous No.10837813]

>>10834784
Indirect measurement, like in the EPR experiment.

[Anonymous No.10837816]

>>10833620
Retard. If you see a laser ray and become blind and don't see anything anymore, it doesn't mean that you destroyed the universe by observing it.

[Anonymous No.10839015]

>>10837768
GARREH

[Anonymous No.10839039]

Engine Physics and the introduction of the Radiator to create a function of the wave as creating a sin and then the rest is customization.

[Anonymous No.10840552]

>>10832793
MatLab

[Anonymous No.10840559]

>>10837816
I laughed

[Anonymous No.10840694]

>>10832811
thank you anon, I don't know what it is with that comment but I certainly let out a good laugh

[Anonymous No.10842229]

>>10837094
Go away, rich kid. People in your real life suck up to you and pretend this shit makes sense because of daddy's money. We don't give a fuck here.

[Anonymous No.10842257]

Lol it's funny because the word function can be conflated to mean both a function as defined in mathematics and a function in colloquial meaning the mechanism of (whatever) action, especially in regards to tools.
The wave function is not a mechanism of anything, it is a contrived mathematical representation of unobserved physical phenomena.
It should be taken as self evident that any phenomena taking place at any scale is causal.

[Anonymous No.10842262]

>>10842257
>It should be taken as self evident that any phenomena taking place at any scale is causal.
No, it shouldn't be.

[Anonymous No.10842295]

>>10842262
Why is that, exactly?
You are evoking a definition argument.

[Anonymous No.10842298]

>>10842295
Why should we take causality as an axiom if it doesn't jive with experimental evidence

[Anonymous No.10842299]

The world is waves. But wherefore waves? No one knows.

[Anonymous No.10842300]

>>10842298
Give me an example

[Anonymous No.10842306]

>>10842298
Let's have an example where experimental evidence directly contradicts causality.

[Anonymous No.10842310]

>>10842306
Causality is pretty much bunk for many centuries now. No "evidence" required.

[Anonymous No.10842312]

>>10842310
Yeah that's what I thought bitch, come back with an argument when you are over 18.

[Anonymous No.10842314]

>>10842312
9_9
this is my reaction to you trying to argue with men many orders of magnitude more intelligent than you

[Anonymous No.10842320]

>>10842300
>>10842306
collapse of a wave function, the whole point of this thread

[Anonymous No.10842321]

>>10837203
>so you were just strawmanning?
No, he literally just has no understanding of the topics of which he tries to speak of.

[Anonymous No.10842327]

>>10832833
Electron observed unequally means there is something affecting it.

Well, I don't see reason why something should collapse to form this picture.

It was always like that.

[Anonymous No.10842330]

>>10833908
How are you sure, you're not sending bulk of something trough hole, and it is a single photon?

[Anonymous No.10842336]

>>10842320
>collapse of a wave function, the whole point of this thread
>experimental evidence

[Anonymous No.10842368]

>>10842320
You have been watching too much of the beloved american television sitcom, The Big Bang Theory. A wave function is not a thing, it is an equation. It would need to exist before it could collapse. It does not exist. Show me experimental evidence that is incontrovertible proof that the wave function exists.

[Anonymous No.10842373]

>>10832793
What do you think of this?:
>Fluctuations of the fields in each element of our universe's spacetime could be coherent throughout the universe by mesoscopic quantum entanglement.
>A fundamental particle arising out of its quantum field is always inescapably subject to this reality and is thus describable by an associated wave function.
>The wave function of a quantum particle represents the reality of the innate quantum fluctuations at the core of the universe and bestows the particle its counterintuitive quantum behavior.
>In the double slit experiment each particle makes an unpredictable choice between alternative possibilities, consistent with an interference pattern with the inherent fluctuations of the underlying quantum field rendering the electron to do so.[4]
>Such an underlying immutable quantum field by which quantum fluctuations are correlated in a universal scale may explain the non-locality of quantum entanglement as a natural process[5]

[Anonymous No.10842377]

>>10842368
>It's an equation
No retard. It's a fucking function. It's a solution to Shrödingers equation.

[Anonymous No.10842395]

>>10842310
>>10842298
just to chime in here: causality is a central feature in general relativity and quantum field theory. if you think there is evidence against causality, especially if you think such evidence has been around for "many centuries", then you are retarded. wavefunction collapse has nothing to do with acausality

[Anonymous No.10842433]

>>10842395
Okey, there are waves of charge which constantly oscillate around the core.

Nothing collapsed, it's there whole time, it's just you measured.

Your mathematics is wrong if you think people are pictures on the camera.

[Anonymous No.10842436]

>>10842377

Functions are a subset of equations.

>>10842395
>wavefunction collapse has nothing to do with causality

Excuse me what the fuck? It does absolutely, it's an essential axiom in the copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. According to it, causality is not preserved at the smallest scales.

[Anonymous No.10842440]

Where quantum physics is right:

If you have two identical atoms, with identical electrons, taking 3 measures on one will mean you don't have two identical atoms.

If you have two entangled atoms, you just teleported information and make Elon fucking funny again with 60ms being eternity and whole star-link bullshit.

[Anonymous No.10842472]

>what mechanisms lie behind the collapse of the wave function?

[Anonymous No.10842479]

>>10842436
>Excuse me what the fuck? It does absolutely, it's an essential axiom in the copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. According to it, causality is not preserved at the smallest scales.
what are you talking about? you're just making shit up bro. where do you get this idea from?

are you just confused about the fact that quantum physics says that the outcomes of measurements can be inherently probabilistic? that doesn't violate causality. you could say that's nondeterministic, but nondeterministic does not mean acausal

[Anonymous No.10842481]

>>10833605
To be fair, before I clicked the thumbnail, i thought it was a behind the scenes sneak peek at the new duck hunt

[Anonymous No.10842482]

>>10842472
Don't tell him, he'll try collapsing wave functions...

We have no idea what to do after gigantic wave collapse.

[Anonymous No.10842550]

>>10842436
Functions are not subsets of equations and causality has nothing to do with the axioms. Causality is literally understanding cause and effect. In classical QM you have in simple situations, a non cero probability of a particle to travel in a spacetime interval which is outside its lightcone.