File: 3463547227.png (1.89 MB, 1408x768)

1.89 MB PNG

>>17081827

Well if two particles are entangled then they are linked in space time of the universe. Like a branch off.

>>17079200
>coin is now quantumly entangled
actually no. That’s not an example where quantum entanglement matters. You are basically making the first part of an argument called “Bertlmann’s Socks” that John Bell wrote about. One of the first things to understand is that things like this happen in classical physics where nothing is “entangled” and the issues introduced by Quantum theory have to do with more complicated scenarios. Not this one though

>>17079200
Your friends half will be the same as yours. Retard

>>17079200
Thanks to John Bell, we now know experimentally that it's more like take two identical coins, give one to friend who goes to alpha centauri, keep one for yourself. Flip your coin, get tails. Now your friend's coin only has two heads.

>>17079233
Actually the coin got melted down and turned to scrap, looks like bell was wrong.

>>17079200
>its both heads and tails at the same
time
>no not like that!

>>17079200
>instantly becomes
I never understood the big deal about this.
If nobody observed them, who's to say the states weren't already decided when the particles became entangled?
It's not the act of observation that creates these states, it is just uncovering what's already there.
In fact, many years ago there was a computer scientist working at Google who posited that entanglement is the same as waveform collapse due to external interaction. So it's like all the particles observe each other, which sets their quantum states, and no "spooky action" is needed.

>>17079200
they have a corelation but it's collapsed.
it's like measuring the collapse of two particles, after you measured them.
they collapsed when they got measured. but if you didn't look at the result it doesn't mean they are still in superposition. they are already collapsed, you just didn't yet find out how. the measurement itself is what colapses it, it's the interaction, not you knowing about it. it's the posibility of extracting the information from the system that colapses it, not when a fucking consciousness finds out about it lol.

>>17079351
>it's like measuring the collapse of two particles, after you measured them.
it's like *finding out, after measuring.

I have always thought of quantum as some stupid crap some devious people invented to trick people away from the real explanation. take the famous schizophrenic cat. well no shit before we open the box we wouldnt know its death or alive, but thats "the knowledge of the cat" inside our head that is undetermined, not the actual cat. the actual cat has a point in time when it fucking falls sideway and dies. I feel like people are trying to steer the discussion of quantum into the vague crap of "we can control reality with our mind" when the real phenomeno that should be looked into is "some people has some sort of 4th dimension invisible limb that can do cool stuffs" because the latter is a real concrete thing that can be tried and error while the former is some voodoo gibberish that demotivated people from studying it. its a clever wool over our eyes

>>17079668
the cat experiment is not feasible. it's a thought experiment, not an actual experiment you can perform. you cannot put a cat in superposition, it's too large, it would interact with stuff and would collapse the superposition.
so in the thought experiment the cat isn't actually dead or alive you just don't know yet. the cat literally is both dead and alive at the same time, and you collapse the state when you interact with it.
so it's an example, for you to get the gist of the idea. it's not something you can actually make, at that scale.

>>17079200
Look up a good explanation of John Bells experiment. It proves either nonlocality, super determinism, or non-realiity. So probably non locality because the other options are retarded

I’d just like to reiterate that cutting a coin in half after you flipped it but didn’t look at it is NOT an example of quantum entanglement. That is a classical system and nothing about it has quantum “coherence”. This is a crucial point.

For a quantum system, like for example a electron flying through a vacuum tube, it is crucial to maintain its coherent quantum state that it not be hitting other particles or dissipating radiation off into space or having some detector interposed on its path to measure it. It only remains coherent and in one of these delicate quantum superposition states so long as it stays very isolated and unaffected by outside interactions. That’s why in the double-slit experiment, if you put some measurement device in the middle, it destroys the quantum interference effects .

A coin on the other hand is constantly interacting with the air, the light, and certainly with the hand you catch it with. It is easy to imagine a very sensitive hand, or some hand-like detector, that can tell whether the coin surface contacting the hand-like detector has a heads shaped embossing or a tails-like embossing. That is because when it hits the hand (-like detector) it instantly exchanges a lot of information one could detect. This is known in Quantum Theory as decoherence. Genuine quantum effects only exist in truly isolated systems where these information-leaking decoherent processes are carefully eliminated from the experimental setup.

QM is not an extension of common sense, and QM does not apply directly back onto common sense ideas. It is different and you can’t just apply quantum principles outside the domain of their applicability

>>17079695
Yup. This example isn’t an example of Quantum superposition. Thank you for the clarifying reply.

>>17079200
>multiplying by 0

More like John bellend lol

Why do 80 IQ faggots post so much on a science board? Go back to pol

>>17079200
Particles are much smaller than a coin and thus have vastly different behaviours, ergo OP is a midwit and a faggot

>>17079695
isnt this just another iteration of that "would a tree makes sound if it falls in a forest with no one around to hear it" crap? i think you guys just invent up a bunch of big words like "superposition", "quantum entanglement" to legitimize more goverment fundings like how the bankers invented CDO and other financial mumbo jumbos just to steal taxpayer money eventually.
>my grandma might or might not have eaten her cookies. her cookies both exists and doesnt exist until i come to her house to observe them and break their superposition
that sounds like an incredibly stupid thing to ponder about. lets assume whats you think about is true, that an atom in complete isolation with everything around it will has some super duper unthinkable properties. how do you study those properties if you arent allowed to observe them? how do you even isolated an atom from every atom around it in the first place? all in all this shit sounds like a man chasing his own shadow. trying to study the shadow, to isolate the shadow. "oh the shadow does what i command it to do. it waves its hand when i wave and stands still when i stand. i wonder what is the real intention of the shadow? what would it do if i stop command it?" its bullshit. it doesnt exists. its fugazi garbage

File: OIP (51).jpg (8 KB, 474x235)

8 KB JPG

>>17079933

>>17079924
>i think

>>17079931
cool reply faggot. get off this site until you turn 18

>>17079933
but the shadow government is paying me to harass you on here

>>17079924
>i think you guys just invent up a bunch of big words like "superposition", "quantum entanglement" to legitimize more goverment fundings like how the bankers invented CDO and other financial mumbo jumbos just to steal taxpayer money eventually.
redpill is that your taxes go to canibal pedophiles anyway, so anything that funds some science is a net gain anyway.
that being said, what exactly are you able to digest so you get some peace of mind "these things are real"? is there a way for you to accept it? as in do you think you are able to comprehend any of it? if you get some sources, papers, hell even youtube videos on the matter? or like you'll flat out refuse to accept anything no matter what? if that's the case, that should clue you in that you are a brainlet you cannot form an objective opinion on the matter

>>17079924
So the solid-state physicists and liquid crystal physicists and LED physicists who used QM to design all the important components of your phone and your computer—they are all just getting the right answers with their QM calculations by accident? Or what, there is a secret theory they use instead? Or all of their jobs are fake and instead some engineer tinkerer just comes up with it through trial and error, the whole Shockley + Bardeen + Schaffer team that founded the first major semiconductor company and sparked Silicon Valley went to school for QM and did years of research in QM were actually not using that? and they just lied the whole time about how semiconductors were actually working?

>>17079978
Sorry I ment Brattain, not Schaffer

>>17079670
I’ve read that they’ve had success repeating the double slit with large molecules. But when they get too large, it doesn’t work. Why is that? What’s the reason for the size limit? And let’s say it’s interaction with other material, could we create a situation where we make a ‘clean and clear’ space and fire, I don’t know, a golf ball and get an interference pattern? The size issue never made much sense to me. Like why does a large molecule that becomes visible to the naked eye collapse the wave behavior?

>>17080072
de broglie wavelength

>>17080072
because large molecules are hard to keep isolated from the environment. there are things like light and radio waves and the hum of your microwave oven that begin to have non-negligible effects on any system of sufficient size

in any case you seem to be the kind of contrarian who just cedes a lot of ground with every iteration of your argument without acknowledging that you were defeated repeatedly and never even reckoned with the points on which you got defeated. you are clearly backing down over and over and you should acknowledge that there is a clear pattern of you being factually misinformed and intellectually wrongheaded.

>>17079207
Einstein was a fraud.

>>17080072
focus on "a way to get information about the system" idea. as long as *anything* interacts with it, it can extract information about it. the fact that information leaks is what collapses it.
larger objects are hard to keep fully isolated. imagine how hard it is to keep a ball from interacting with literally anything, no air molecules, no photons. hell, even space particles can interact with it and collapse it.
people bury their experiments deep under ground just to remove a lot of shit from space that can interact with their experiments. let alone completely and fully isolating a golf ball, from everything. and even if, it won't last long. even an IR photon would fuck it. so you'd need to cool everything down, all the system, it's...just too complicated, not even feasible.

>>17079233
the coin was already flipped you fucking retard

>>17079720
>Complaining about le /pol/ menace
Go to reddit

>>17081847
Do you know what you are talking about? A measurement on a thing specifically doesnt entail information about it because of measurement/measured entanglement. Elevating the entangled state summary to information about the measuring devices does not follow either.
Also the relation between energy and information capture is dependent on system design. It is possible to put insufficient energy into some systems to extract the specified information.

>>17079200
Mine landed on its edge

>>17079200
Why did people start to take mathematical uncertainty or probabilities(predictive, not determinitive) as actual?
>ITS LE BOTH STATES AT ONCE BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT IT UH TOTALLY BECOMES JUST ONE
>WHYS THAT YOU ASK? UH CUZ YOU LOOKED, FAGGOT

>>17083509
It’s because hippies from the 70s (not original hippies, the posers) decided that quantum physics was a cool thing they thought was “esoteric” . This was spurred on by the charlatan David Bohm and his guru Krishnamurti, and the followed up by other charlatans who were Berkeley physics PhD students but never made it in physics who called themselves the “Fundamental Fysiks Group” including woo-woo conartists like Richard Wolff (who was part of a bizarre cult)

Boomers really infected the early internet with a bunch of woo-woo pseudophysics because of their eclectic 1970s stupid cult beliefs. Only thanks to institutional science do we have real science left over. Granted the institutions are corrupt too but at least it’s not ridiculous Boomer-America-Does-Buddhism LARPing

>>17083534
sorry I said Richard Wolff but I meant Fred Alan Wolf

File: Siggybellstheorem4.png (32 KB, 648x408)

32 KB PNG

>>17079200
wow that would be a really good point if it wasn't for this

>>17079695
Why does the electron beam stay coherent when it hits the wall that has the two slits in it? What if a "detector" has two slits in it?

hypothetio-deduction? what's the meme?
>Noooo it's super funny. if you flip 1000 coins 1000 times you have a theory of types