Skip to comments.
Quantum theory is wrong.
A word in your ear ^
| March 7th 2013
| Mark
Posted on 03/07/2013 5:44:05 AM PST by ABrit
Particles do not retain "information", don't have "knowledge". It is not that the act of observation that alters reality. In fact the physical nature of the "observation" small though it may be is sufficient to alter the metrics of sub atomic particles.
(Excerpt) Read more at awordinyourear.blogspot.co.uk ...
TOPICS: Astronomy; Education; Reference; Science; Weird Stuff
KEYWORDS: quantum; quantummechanics; stringtheory; theory
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-63 next last
To: mnehring
No longer a requirement. All that’s needed is a “feeling”.
21
posted on
03/07/2013 7:33:46 AM PST
by
SgtHooper
(The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.)
To: ABrit
Hey! If youre gonna violate causality, take it outside!, says the bartender.
“Thanks,” it says, taking money from the bartender before giving him a beer and a shot.
It says to the bartender, If that’s my wife, tell her Im not here!”
The phone rings.
A tachyon enters a bar.
A physics joke.
To: Rebel_Ace
I observe a baseball being thrown. The photons bouncing off of this object are the same photons that would be bouncing off the ball regardless of if I was watching the ball or not. Hence my observation or lack of observation does not effect the ball.
If a tree falls in the woods the mass of the tree will strike the ground causing noise, regardless of their being an observer there or not.
23
posted on
03/07/2013 8:43:36 AM PST
by
Durus
(You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
To: Durus
But as you were moving into position with your camera you startled a bird who flew up into the tree and ever so slightly altered the direction that it fell.
To: Durus
"I observe a baseball being thrown. The photons bouncing off of this object are the same photons that would be bouncing off the ball regardless of if I was watching the ball or not. Hence my observation or lack of observation does not effect the ball.
If a tree falls in the woods the mass of the tree will strike the ground causing noise, regardless of their being an observer there or not "
You have no argument from me. Like I said in my post, I was NOT supporting his argument, just trying to understand what he was putting out there.
25
posted on
03/07/2013 9:00:34 AM PST
by
Rebel_Ace
(Tags?!? Tags?!? We don' neeeed no stinkin' Tags!)
To: yefragetuwrabrumuy
I laughed at the tachyon joke yesterday.
26
posted on
03/07/2013 9:01:54 AM PST
by
Rebel_Ace
(Tags?!? Tags?!? We don' neeeed no stinkin' Tags!)
To: Durus
Switch the baseball and the tree for subatomic particles, and things change.
27
posted on
03/07/2013 9:22:54 AM PST
by
ZX12R
To: Yardstick
It is unlikely that the asmostpheric disturbance of bird wings would overcome any other atmospheric conditions which already exist. Regardless it would seem that you are already changing the thought experiment with additional parameters. The simple fact is that not all observations change what is being observed.
28
posted on
03/07/2013 9:24:26 AM PST
by
Durus
(You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
To: ZX12R
Perhaps and perhaps not. Both a baseball and a tree are made up of subatomic particles after all.
29
posted on
03/07/2013 9:33:45 AM PST
by
Durus
(You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
To: Durus
Perhaps and perhaps not. Both a baseball and a tree are made up of subatomic particles after all.
Ultimately, yes, I suppose you could say they are, but subatomic particles behave nothing like our classical world of objects, like trees and baseballs.
30
posted on
03/07/2013 9:46:04 AM PST
by
ZX12R
To: ZX12R; Durus
So what are we? Figments of each others imagination? If so, how is it possible for figments to interact? Is imagination made up of sub-atomic particles? Are these stupid questions? If so, did I ask them?
31
posted on
03/07/2013 10:05:21 AM PST
by
Paco
To: Paco
So what are we? Figments of each others imagination? If so, how is it possible for figments to interact? Is imagination made up of sub-atomic particles? Are these stupid questions? If so, did I ask them?
Your questions are not so far out there, when talking about the strangeness of the quantum world. The truth is, no one really knows the answers, and most physicists don't think about them anymore. Most of them just jump on the copenhagan bandwagon, due to consensus, and plow forward with the theory that really does work, and has never failed.
32
posted on
03/07/2013 10:12:51 AM PST
by
ZX12R
To: ZX12R
Nothing like? I'm not sure that I would agree with that statement. Not that either of us could prove how sub-atomic particles really act.
33
posted on
03/07/2013 10:31:06 AM PST
by
Durus
(You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
To: Paco
No we are not products of thought or imagination. We are not spun out of some collective conscience. Physics don't work simply because we believe it. This is very a humanistic way to view creation. The universe existed before humans and the world would keep spinning around the sun if we were to kill our species. The laws of physics are independent of our and any observation.
Ironically this theory is made from the imagination of people trying to argue against the very concept of reason which is the only thing that allows us to meaningfully communicate.
34
posted on
03/07/2013 10:46:14 AM PST
by
Durus
(You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
To: Durus
Nothing like? I'm not sure that I would agree with that statement. Not that either of us could prove how sub-atomic particles really act.
If you fire electrons one at a time, at a screen which is able to record the impacts, and also has an intervening screen between the two, that has two appropriately sized slits, you would be able to see the individual impacts, and over time you would also begin to see an interference pattern in the impact locations, thereby seeing both the particle aspect of electrons, and the wave aspect of electrons. Its hard to imagine how the interference pattern can emerge when you are firing one electron at a time, unless each individual electron is somehow interfering with itself, but it does. Now, do you think you could produce the same pattern with the same screens (larger and stronger) but with a machine gun firing bullets one at a time? It's impossible, because the classical world that we live and experience in, is nothing like the quantum world.
35
posted on
03/07/2013 11:17:49 AM PST
by
ZX12R
To: ZX12R
I'm not sure that particle wave duality is an example of how "the quantum world is nothing like the classic world" as much as it is an example of a difference.
Regardless my point is that there are those that suggest that because observation changes the observed that there are things that are ultimately unknowable. I reject this concept and it related philosophies.
36
posted on
03/07/2013 12:41:42 PM PST
by
Durus
(You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
To: Durus
I’m waaaay out of my league on this topic, but a quick question. Is it possible that the answers to the unknown defy logic and our ability to even understand them?
37
posted on
03/07/2013 12:46:22 PM PST
by
Paco
To: Durus
I’m waaaay out of my league on this topic, but a quick question. Is it possible that the answers to the unknown defy logic and our ability to even understand them?
38
posted on
03/07/2013 12:50:40 PM PST
by
Paco
To: Paco
The answers to the unknown always defy logic and our understanding until we have enough information and apply reason. This is the way it always has been.
39
posted on
03/07/2013 2:13:01 PM PST
by
Durus
(You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Ayn Rand)
To: Durus
But if you weren’t there to watch the pitch those photons would have landed somewhere else, resulting possibly in something else.
It’s the photon wave particle experiment that actually proves observation changes results:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment
because the results change depending on how you chose to observe.
40
posted on
03/07/2013 2:24:28 PM PST
by
discostu
(Not just another moon faced assassin of joy.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-63 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson