• Schrodinger's Box, and why you should scare people with too much time on their hands.
    226 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32185515]Yes but our perception boils down to simply more particles. Perception is just more particles interacting.[/QUOTE] Edited the post. Google the Double Slit Experiment and read up on it. It always boils down to Human Observation. We don't know why. There have been hypotheses by all kinds of groups, including a characteristically convoluted hypothesis by String Theorists that would just make the matter even more confusing. Point is, while we have no idea why the fuck matter behaves like this, we know it does. We have seen it happen.
[QUOTE=Lankist;32185441] The experiment has been repeated ad-nauseum and it always boils down to whether or not we, the humans, observed it.[/QUOTE] If another sentient being observed it concurrently with a human would the outcome appear the same for both or could it be different between the two
[QUOTE=Lankist;32185190]It's about quantum-mechanics. It's not about what you know, it's about how the things that you know directly affect the physical world. It's not a "ha ha oh that's weird" kind of puzzle. It's an "Oh shit this cat is literally both alive and dead at the same time" kind of puzzle. Your ignorance of the cat's condition means the cat is in a superposition, which is *not* some philosophical term for an unknown state but a proven state in which all possible outcomes occur simultaneously. Google the Double Slit Experiment. It's less to do with you and more to do with how the laws of physics don't give a fuck when you aren't around.[/QUOTE]Oh wow, thanks for referring me to the video, I just got done watching it...Holy shit that's crazy. I need to learn more quantum-mechanics, interesting shit.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32185575]If another sentient being observed it concurrently with a human would the outcome appear the same for both or could it be different between the two[/QUOTE] Fuck if I know. Buy a dolphin and find out.
And to add to the question I just asked, is it possible that we're not affecting the outcome at all but rather there's a flaw with our ability to interpret what's happening
[QUOTE=Lankist;32185573]Edited the post. Google the Double Slit Experiment and read up on it. It always boils down to Human Observation. We don't know why. There have been hypotheses by all kinds of groups, including a characteristically convoluted hypothesis by String Theorists that would just make the matter even more confusing. Point is, while we have no idea why the fuck matter behaves like this, we know it does. We have seen it happen.[/QUOTE] Sorry but this is more bullshit than the bible. [editline]8th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Zeke129;32185601]And to add to the question I just asked, is it possible that we're not affecting the outcome at all but rather there's a flaw with our ability to interpret what's happening[/QUOTE] This is what I am saying, we're interpreting things wrong and coming up with extreme convolutions to explain it.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32185612]Sorry but this is more bullshit than the bible.[/QUOTE] That's cool. Have you googled the Double Slit Experiment yet?
[QUOTE=Lankist;32185629]That's cool. Have you googled the Double Slit Experiment yet?[/QUOTE] I watched the video but it doesn't really mean anything, it's someone seeing a phenomena and going "well derp it's because <insert more or less nonsensical theory here involving strings, human observation, and martha stewart>."
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32185612] This is what I am saying, we're interpreting things wrong and coming up with extreme convolutions to explain it.[/QUOTE] I'm not saying anything like what you're saying, you're saying the double slit experiment is bullshit and I'm asking about why the outcome was what it was You seem to want less information, I want more
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32185673]I watched the video but it doesn't really mean anything, it's someone seeing a phenomena and going "well derp it's because <insert more or less nonsensical theory here involving strings, human observation, and martha stewart>."[/QUOTE] "I don't understand" =/= "It doesn't mean anything." Just because this shit is over your head doesn't mean you discount it. It's over *everyone's* head, that doesn't mean it's wrong. Why the fuck would anyone fake this? What is there to be gained? There is no political motive for faking an experiment like this, no financial gain for pretending to have discovered something that violates all known physical laws. Nobody is being elected dictator of the world for saying "Hey quantum physics is fuckin weird." Why on Earth would anyone lie about this? [editline]8th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Zeke129;32185601]And to add to the question I just asked, is it possible that we're not affecting the outcome at all but rather there's a flaw with our ability to interpret what's happening[/QUOTE] The only hypothesis I'm familiar with is the String Theory hypothesis, which postulates that we (you, I and the little sector of the Universe we occupy) are simply one aspect of one giant superposition, in which all possible variations of the universe happen at once. We can only perceive the one, and sometimes there's a bit of bleed-through when we aren't looking. Again: That's String Theory talking. If you give a String Theorist a pen and some paper he'll give you five thousand explanations for how weird the paper is.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32185715]I'm not saying anything like what you're saying, you're saying the double slit experiment is bullshit and I'm asking about why the outcome was what it was You seem to want less information, I want more[/QUOTE] I'm not claiming the experiment is bullshit, I'm claiming the explanation is bullshit.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32185757]I'm not claiming the experiment is bullshit, I'm claiming the explanation is bullshit.[/QUOTE] Schrodinger's cat isn't an explanation, you realize that right
Knowticed sure is a scary word.
[QUOTE=Lankist;32185725]"I don't understand" =/= "It doesn't mean anything." Just because this shit is over your head doesn't mean you discount it. It's over *everyone's* head, that doesn't mean it's wrong. Why the fuck would anyone fake this? What is there to be gained? There is no political motive for faking an experiment like this, no financial gain for pretending to have discovered something that violates all known physical laws. Nobody is being elected dictator of the world for saying "Hey quantum physics is fuckin weird." Why on Earth would anyone lie about this? [editline]8th September 2011[/editline] The only hypothesis I'm familiar with is the String Theory hypothesis, which postulates that we (you, I and the little sector of the Universe we occupy) is simply one aspect of one giant superposition, in which all possible variations of the universe happen at once. We can just only perceive the one.[/QUOTE] I am not saying the experiments outcome is wrong I am saying the explanation is complete bullshit, and it's absurd to think that for whatever reason particles act a certain way when something sentient observed them. How do you even define sentient? Does the universe flag all sentient creatures? Are we made of special particles? Probably not.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32185757]I'm not claiming the experiment is bullshit, I'm claiming the explanation is bullshit.[/QUOTE] There is no explanation. What the experiment showed was a violation of all contemporary laws of physics. It has been repeated time and time again, and it always returns the same results. The universe goes off the rails when we aren't looking. We know that, we don't know why.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32185799]I am not saying the experiments outcome is wrong I am saying the explanation is complete bullshit, and it's absurd to think that for whatever reason particles act a certain way when something sentient observed them. How do you even define sentient? Does the universe flag all sentient creatures? Are we made of special particles? Probably not.[/QUOTE] No one said anything about sentience. Wave functions can be collapsed using a detector. And they are, in fact, in the double slit experiment.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32185799]I am not saying the experiments outcome is wrong I am saying the explanation is complete bullshit, and it's absurd to think that for whatever reason particles act a certain way when something sentient observed them. How do you even define sentient? Does the universe flag all sentient creatures? Are we made of special particles? Probably not.[/QUOTE] It's not about sentience, it's about observation. If nothing is observing then shit is really fucking weird.
[QUOTE=Lankist;32185812]There is no explanation.[/QUOTE] Except you've been spouting "observation changes the outcome!" that's an explanation. The experiment shows some phenomena, but unless there's a magic wizard deciding when something is officially 'observing' it doesn't make sense that this is causing it.
[img]http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2010-08-28/warning--erwin-schrdinger.png[/img]
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;32185838]No one said anything about sentience. Wave functions can be collapsed using a detector. And they are, in fact, in the double slit experiment.[/QUOTE] Then why would they not collapse when an interaction between particles happened? That's at the basis of every observation.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32185870]Except you've been spouting "observation changes the outcome!"[/QUOTE] No, that's what [I]happened[/I]. Nobody knows [I]why[/I] it happened. [editline]8th September 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Jawalt;32185879]Then why would they not collapse when an interaction between particles happened? That's at the basis of every observation.[/QUOTE] I don't think you understand the concept of a superposition. It can encompass more than one particle. It can, theoretically, encompass us. We just wouldn't be able to notice.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32185879]Then why would they not collapse when an interaction between particles happened? That's at the basis of every observation.[/QUOTE] They do. The "box" that the cat is in would have to be almost completely thermodynamically separated from the outside world.
[QUOTE=JeffAndersen;32176986]So this is more or less "I found a tree in the woods that was about to fall down and put a microphone near it transmitting to a recorder a mile away. The tree is nor upright nor fallen over until I listen to the recording to see if it has fallen" More or less?[/QUOTE] what if a deer witnesses the tree fall, why is it that the observer has to be a physicist or something
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;32185921]They do. The "box" that the cat is in would have to be almost completely thermodynamically separated from the outside world.[/QUOTE] Which is why we most frequently observe the phenomena in single subatomic particles.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;32185921]They do. The "box" that the cat is in would have to be almost completely thermodynamically separated from the outside world.[/QUOTE] So then why is it that the gieger counter wouldn't have broken the state of superposition?
[QUOTE=Jawalt;32185972]So then why is it that the gieger counter wouldn't have broken the state of superposition?[/QUOTE] It was inside the box, and it was cut off from the outside.
-Snip-
observation means, in this sense, interaction.
[QUOTE=MountainWatcher;32186006]observation means, in this sense, interaction.[/QUOTE] It means less that you do interact and more that you *can* interact. It is interaction in the sense that you are aware of the object. The cat in the box, on the other hand, is completely outside of your control until the box is open.
[QUOTE=Lankist;32185992]It was inside the box, and it was cut off from the outside.[/QUOTE] LOL, this would mean the entire universe is in superposition then, because we're a single container cut off from any outside influence, and us observing doesn't count. buuuullllllshiiiiit.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.