ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags dark matter , quantum , quantum mechanics

Reply
Old 9th September 2019, 07:41 PM   #241
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,031
Obviously if you don't rely on the back panel for anything at all, then you could leave it out of the experiment altogether.

If you need the back panel to do the experiment then you are relying on it for something.

So please describe the experiment that you would do and give us your predictions.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 07:41 PM   #242
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
The particle itself isn't relying on it!

This is what everyone is overlooking. You are assuming uncertainty applies to physical particles from a flawed experiment. You want me to find an experiment to prove myself wrong?
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 07:50 PM   #243
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,031
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
The particle itself isn't relying on it!
I don't know of anyone who claims that the particle relies on the back panel, whatever that means. Can you give an example of someone saying this?

The experiment was designed to test a certain model, predictions were made according to the model and those predictions were confirmed.
Quote:
This is what everyone is overlooking. You are assuming uncertainty applies to physical particles from a flawed experiment. You want me to find an experiment to prove myself wrong?
No. But I don't know how to say this simpler.

You claim that the double slit experiment is 'flawed'.

If it is flawed then you should be able to describe a non-flawed experiment and then to make predictions based on your model using the non-flawed experiment.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 07:52 PM   #244
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,072
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
The particle itself isn't relying on it. ...
No one says that the particle relies on there being a screen to detect it. That is part of specification of the double slit experiment - a screen to see if there is an interference pattern or not. It would be insane to say the screen does not do anything in the double slit experiment when the screen is needed to detect the particles! It is abysmally ignorant to say the screen does anything to the particles in the double slit experiment because it is the "which path" detection at the slits or between the slits and screen that changes the observed pattern.

Last edited by Reality Check; 9th September 2019 at 07:55 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 07:55 PM   #245
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
The particle (before it exists) cares if spacetime (observation) will be assigned to it during its path.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 07:56 PM   #246
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,031
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
The particle itself isn't relying on it!
OK, so all this time you have been under the misapprehension that there is a claim in the double slit experiment that the particle "relies" on the back panel.

Now we have cleared this up and agree that the particle does not "rely" on the back panel and that it is just there to see if there is an interference pattern or not, then maybe you can readjust your theory in light of this clarification.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:00 PM   #247
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,031
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
The particle (before it exists) cares if spacetime (observation) will be assigned to it during its path.
Not exactly.

What is important is if it would be possible to distinguish between more than one possible path, not whether observation of that is actually assigned.

For example if there are two nuclei which might scatter a particle then the probability that a particle will be in a particular position depends upon whether or not it would be possible to determine which nucleus scattered the particle, even if no such observation is in place.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:00 PM   #248
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
What? The final panel doesn't count when QFT is deciding to swap to spacetime or not for the life of the particle ..before its tombstone.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:06 PM   #249
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,072
Thumbs down "before it exists", particle "cares", and "spacetime (observation)"

Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
The particle (before it exists) cares if spacetime (observation) will be assigned to it during its path.
10 September 2019 pittsburghjoe: "before it exists", particle "cares", and "spacetime (observation)" gibberish.
Particles always exist in the double slit experiment. They are emitted form the source, pass thru the slits and are detected at the screen.
Particles do not have feelings and do not think!
Spacetime is not observation.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:09 PM   #250
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
Nature doesn't care if you know which path a particle takes.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:10 PM   #251
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,072
Thumbs down QFT gibberish of "deciding to swap to spacetime"

Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
What? The final panel doesn't count when QFT is deciding to swap to spacetime or not for the life of the particle ..before its tombstone.
10 September 2019 pittsburghjoe: QFT gibberish of "deciding to swap to spacetime".

QM and QFT have a single, eternal spacetime called Minkowski spacetime (they are special relativistic theories).
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:11 PM   #252
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,031
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
What? The final panel doesn't count when QFT is deciding to swap to spacetime or not for the life of the particle ..before its tombstone.
Electrons don't die. Therefore there is no tombstone. We just lose track of it.

The probability that a particle will reach a certain point in time and space in no way depends upon there being something there to detect it.

And the probability that it will reach a certain point in time and space does depend upon events in between and, if there is more than one alternative path, it depends upon whether or not it would be possible to determine which path was taken.

When the interference pattern disappears that does not mean that there was any "swap to space time", it just means that the probability amplitudes for the two paths are not interfering with each other.

In some cases it can mean that, effectively, the particle can be said to be following a classical path.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:12 PM   #253
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,031
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
Nature doesn't care if you know which path a particle takes.
No, but it "cares" if it would be possible for you to know.

Or at least the probabilities that there will be a particle in a certain time and position depend upon this.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"

Last edited by Robin; 9th September 2019 at 08:14 PM.
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:14 PM   #254
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
It's that you are assigning recognition somewhere along the path of the particle.

I just mean traveling between two points when I say life.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:14 PM   #255
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,072
Thumbs down A "Nature doesn't care if you know which path a particle takes" delusion

Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
Nature doesn't care if you know which path a particle takes.
10 September 2019 pittsburghjoe: A "Nature doesn't care if you know which path a particle takes" delusion.
Nature does care - when we know which path a particle takes, the interference pattern in the double slit experiment changes to 2 bands as you know from your OP and other posts !
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:19 PM   #256
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,031
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
It's that you are assigning recognition somewhere along the path of the particle.

I just mean traveling between two points when I say life.
Who is assigning "recognition"? Quote the part where you say they are assigning "recognition".
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:20 PM   #257
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
It's what quantum observation is ..while the particle is moving of course.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:24 PM   #258
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,031
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
It's what quantum observation is ..while the particle is moving of course.
I wish you would learn to use the quote function.

I have no idea who this is addressed to or what it relates to. It doesn't seem to relate to anything anyone has said.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:26 PM   #259
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
It was to you
"recognition" is the same as "acknowledgement" ..this was mentioned in the OP
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:31 PM   #260
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,031
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
It was to you
"recognition" is the same as "acknowledgement" ..this was mentioned in the OP
I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. As far as I can recall I have said nothing about "recognition" or "acknowledgement".

If you are going to allege that I have said something, quote the part where I said it.

Otherwise don't make up stuff about what I said.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 08:52 PM   #261
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,031
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
No, but it "cares" if it would be possible for you to know.

Or at least the probabilities that there will be a particle in a certain time and position depend upon this.
Of course there is nothing spooky or teleological about this.

Any more than the rainbow seeming to "know" where you are, or the scratches on a wooden surface seeming to be arranged concentrically around the lamp you just placed on it.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 09:00 PM   #262
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,376
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
The particle itself isn't relying on it!

This is what everyone is overlooking. You are assuming uncertainty applies to physical particles from a flawed experiment. You want me to find an experiment to prove myself wrong?
Well... what have you done to disprove your own theory? How is your theory falsifiable?


Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
It's that you are assigning recognition somewhere along the path of the particle.

I just mean traveling between two points when I say life.
See, this is exactly why people keep telling you to use mathematics. The language of mathematics wouldn't be causing these problems.
__________________
A government is a body of people usually - notably - ungoverned.
-Shepard Book
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 09:16 PM   #263
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,031
You just have to consider a double slit experiment where there are two screens where both have double slits but only the second screen has equipment to detect which slit the particle passes through.

According to the the OP the particle is set physical/spacetime because there is a detector in the path and so there must have been a definite path all the way from the emitter to the back panel.

So it must have passed through one or other of the slots in the first screen even though there was no detector and there should be no interference before the second screen.

According to standard QM the path from the emitter to the second screen would have to be calculated with interfering waves and the last stage of the path using non-interfering waves.

I think it would be pretty easy to establish experimentally which was the case.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th September 2019, 11:18 PM   #264
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,695
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
  1. quantum field excitation of a new particle is about to happen


  2. it gets assigned a path in the quantum field


  3. if the path contains a spacetime enactor (a detector), it swaps the particle to physical (Physical: structure, 3D, more than just information ..real to us.)


  4. the particle or wave is sent via the quantum field if it's a wave / spacetime if physical
Let me see if got this right: Some entity is calculating the entire path of a particle or a wave before the particle or wave is emitted, and if this entity finds an observer in the path, it decides to send a particle instead of a wave?

You believe you have killed duality by inventing a new entity that makes decisions for all waves if they should be turned into particles.

Have you heard of the principle of parsimony, or Occam's Razor?

Your entity could be a host of little invisible gnomes that monitor all possible paths, or - and this would make some religious believers happy - it could be some god doing this necessary work
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 02:46 AM   #265
wollery
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
 
wollery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,885
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
The particle itself isn't relying on it!

This is what everyone is overlooking. You are assuming uncertainty applies to physical particles from a flawed experiment. You want me to find an experiment to prove myself wrong?
Find an experiment that could prove you wrong.

That's actually how science works. You make a prediction and design an experiment that could show your prediction to be wrong.

If you can't design an experiment capable of doing that then your ideas can be dismissed as just another random kook interpretation of QM with no merit.

Tell us what could be done to prove you wrong. Without that you have nothing.
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad

"Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin
wollery is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 08:10 AM   #266
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,376
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Let me see if got this right: Some entity is calculating the entire path of a particle or a wave before the particle or wave is emitted, and if this entity finds an observer in the path, it decides to send a particle instead of a wave?

You believe you have killed duality by inventing a new entity that makes decisions for all waves if they should be turned into particles.

Have you heard of the principle of parsimony, or Occam's Razor?

Your entity could be a host of little invisible gnomes that monitor all possible paths, or - and this would make some religious believers happy - it could be some god doing this necessary work
Spoiler -- it's god alright!
__________________
A government is a body of people usually - notably - ungoverned.
-Shepard Book
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 08:56 AM   #267
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,568
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
Unsupported because I'm first person to realize what we are overlooking.
Holy Cow! We have another Einstein folks.

Last edited by Steve001; 10th September 2019 at 09:38 AM.
Steve001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 08:58 AM   #268
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,568
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
I can't explain it any simpler, if anyone here had a open mind for one f'n minute they might see what I'm pointing at.
We do, but some math not assertions would help you immensely.
Steve001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 09:26 AM   #269
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
The uncertainty principle and bell's theorem could prove me wrong, but I can prove them incomplete. Uncertainty is only considering waves and Bell is only considering spin.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 09:32 AM   #270
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Let me see if got this right: Some entity is calculating the entire path of a particle or a wave before the particle or wave is emitted, and if this entity finds an observer in the path, it decides to send a particle instead of a wave?
There is a part of me that thinks spacetime is god and that would explain the knowledge of the paths. But in reality, it's a quantum field excitation that doesn't care about distance or time. That excitation will be physical or a wave on it's creation because it doesn't have time. It's path from a to b is known because its state would have changed.

Last edited by pittsburghjoe; 10th September 2019 at 09:48 AM.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 09:37 AM   #271
Steve001
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,568
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
The particle itself isn't relying on it!

This is what everyone is overlooking. You are assuming uncertainty applies to physical particles from a flawed experiment. You want me to find an experiment to prove myself wrong?
That not how science(tists) work. Scientists test their hypothesis to see if it stands up to their assumptions. That's what is required of you.

Last edited by Steve001; 10th September 2019 at 09:41 AM.
Steve001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 11:02 AM   #272
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
Hmm, maybe it isn't the path after-all. It just happens to know the path because knowing what state it will be would show the same thing.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 11:30 AM   #273
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
The delayed choice quantum eraser is my proof. It clearly shows the state is decided before either entangled particle even starts moving.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 11:50 AM   #274
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
Unobserved quantum waves not having spacetime is a very big deal. Without time, its life is instantaneous.

No need for a god or path info. Boom! Quantum physics is changed from this day forward, you got to witness it in real-time.

Last edited by pittsburghjoe; 10th September 2019 at 11:53 AM.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 12:35 PM   #275
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,576
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
Unobserved quantum waves not having spacetime is a very big deal. Without time, its life is instantaneous.

No need for a god or path info. Boom! Quantum physics is changed from this day forward, you got to witness it in real-time.
You're in for a bad repetitive motion injury if you keep patting yourself on the back.

Meanwhile, you're an anonymous poster on the 'net that has already been on the receiving end of the ban hammer elsewhere for the material you're pimping.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 12:38 PM   #276
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
I can not wait to rub it in their faces.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 12:39 PM   #277
phunk
Illuminator
 
phunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,068
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
The uncertainty principle and bell's theorem could prove me wrong, but I can prove them incomplete. Uncertainty is only considering waves and Bell is only considering spin.
I don't think you even know what the uncertainty principle is. Could you explain it, in your own words?
phunk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 12:39 PM   #278
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,576
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
I can not wait to rub it in their faces.
Better bring something to eat because you're in for a long wait.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 12:48 PM   #279
pittsburghjoe
Muse
 
pittsburghjoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: BHole
Posts: 851
Originally Posted by phunk View Post
I don't think you even know what the uncertainty principle is. Could you explain it, in your own words?
Any uncertainty principle experiment that shows uncertainty means a wave was involved.
pittsburghjoe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2019, 12:57 PM   #280
BStrong
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,576
Originally Posted by pittsburghjoe View Post
Any uncertainty principle experiment that shows uncertainty means a wave was involved.
Too bad that wasn't an answer to the question put to you.

Describe the uncertainty principle in your own words.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like

"Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus
BStrong is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:16 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.