/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #13327256

53KiB, 858x899, observe.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Sat 26 Jun 14:22:14 2021 No.13327256 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>13332638 >>13332838 >>13332851 >>13334338 >>13334892 >>13335184 >>13337206 >>13338980 >>13340947 >>13341162 >>13341178 >>13343913

/lit/izen here, wtf tell me stuff like this isnt real, no way does it actually change when something conscious is observing it

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 00:11:44 No.13332638 Report

Quoted By:

>>13327256
An observer doesn't have to be a living thing, or even aware that it's observing something, it can be just a particle or something that interacts with the system in an way, including exchangin information with it. I hate the term observer so much because it leads to pseudo mystical like this. Perturber would be more accurate imo.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 00:30:38 No.13332682 Report

Quoted By:

>>13331243
If you 'observe' the photon it gets absorbed, so there's no pattern visible in reality. It's just a thought experiment.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 00:38:47 No.13332717 Report

Quoted By: >>13335157

>>13327300
This is the most retarded meme made in physics. Uncertainty principle on dual slit experiment. Cringe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 00:44:46 No.13332742 Report

Quoted By:

>>13327295
Objectively wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 01:14:23 No.13332813 Report

Quoted By: >>13333174

I'll never understand this experiment. To me all it shows is wave like properties. I don't see how there's a particle like property at all. You never see the two lines. To 'detect' experiments close one slit and then they see a diffraction pattern through a single slit, that's still a wave property.

Enoch

Enoch Mon 28 Jun 2021 01:20:01 No.13332838 Report

Quoted By:

>>13327256
>When I interfere with one of these things processes to measure something it act differently
FUCKING WOW
SO HECKIN EBINRINO

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 01:23:52 No.13332851 Report

Quoted By: >>13332884

>>13327256

It does NOT work that way!
You as an external observer have ZERO influence on the result. That would be retarded beyond belief. Closing your eyes is not going to change the experiment!!!
Physicists use the term Observation, but it does NOT have the common meaning.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 01:33:39 No.13332884 Report

Quoted By: >>13332890 >>13332899

>>13332851
So it’s really just that we don’t have a way of looking at it that doesn’t interfere with it, and if we did it wouldn’t change it’s behaviour

Enoch

Enoch Mon 28 Jun 2021 01:37:40 No.13332890 Report

Quoted By:

>>13332884
It's a feature not a flaw

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 01:42:25 No.13332899 Report

Quoted By: >>13332907

>>13332884

No closing your eyes is NOT going to change the experiment AT ALL.
Observation as used by physicists does NOT mean your eyeballs looking at the experiment do ANYTHING

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 01:45:40 No.13332907 Report

Quoted By:

>>13332899
Wtf no? That's not true at all.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 01:47:54 No.13332913 Report

Quoted By: >>13334856

>>13331243
This is what I also want to know.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1494491624482.png, 5KiB, 650x650

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 01:59:46 No.13332942 Report

Quoted By:

>>13327291
or is it? how do you know if the information isnt propagated to something conscious?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 02:04:12 No.13332958 Report

Quoted By: >>13335181

>>13327981
Incorrect. /diy/ is darn smart.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 03:20:12 No.13333174 Report

Quoted By: >>13333570

>>13332813
>. I don't see how there's a particle like property at all.
See my comment here, and particularly this paper. Look at the images, or even better the videos showing that the wave patterns are formed one particle at a time.
>>13328709
https://arxiv.org/abs/1210.6243

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 05:44:03 No.13333570 Report

Quoted By: >>13333612

>>13333174
Why do they bother showing the image of two lines in so many books and such then? If it never actually occurs. Do large scale particles (like balls or something) give a diffraction pattern? Is this just a matter of the way they describe it to beginners being stupid and it makes sense if you actually study it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 05:47:35 No.13333577 Report

Quoted By:

>>13327295
That's putting the cart before the horse. The particle doesn't assume an observable state because we measured it, we're able to measure it because it assumes an observable state.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 06:00:36 No.13333612 Report

Quoted By:

>>13333570
>>13333570
>Why do they bother showing the image of two lines in so many books and such then?
Which books?
>Do large scale particles (like balls or something) give a diffraction pattern?
No. The de broglie wavelength of it is too small.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 11:52:11 No.13334338 Report

Quoted By: >>13334538

>>13327256
I found this article on the subject which helped me understand better.
>https://medium.com/science-first/the-double-slit-experiment-demystified-disproving-the-quantum-consciousness-connection-ee8384a50e2f

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 13:15:49 No.13334522 Report

Quoted By:

>>13327819
people on /lit/ don't read, they just (poorly) try to give the impression that they do.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 13:24:17 No.13334538 Report

Quoted By:

>>13334338
When you shoot photons (or presumably any other thing) at the particle, it grounds them in certainty and takes them out of their hypothetical “field of probability” state. So it’s the interaction (which still sounds pretty metaphysical and spooky) of another thing that isn’t the particle that does it, not conscious observation.
Ok thanks anon, I finally understand it

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 15:53:24 No.13334846 Report

Quoted By: >>13338710 >>13343487

>>13327291
>>13327295
>>13327300
Wrong. Consciousness is actually involved. That is because everything that is ontologically instantiated has some non-zero amount of consciousness. So it's correct that conscious observation causes decoherence, just not observation in the "looking at with eyes" sense.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 15:58:17 No.13334856 Report

Quoted By:

>>13331243
>>13332913
its all about polarized light, we use polarizers in the slits to know which slit the light came out of; a different polarizer in each slit 'marks' the light denoting where it came from.

The polarizers are the observation, without them we have no idea what path the light takes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 16:09:00 No.13334892 Report

Quoted By:

>>13327256
stuff like this isnt real

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 17:48:03 No.13335157 Report

Quoted By:

>>13332717
100% sure that meme was made to fuck with midwits with the "muh when measuring it you affect it" thing, and they bought it and ran with it further... and now we are here

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 18:04:33 No.13335181 Report

Quoted By:

>>13332958
/diy/ has possibly the worst spelling on the whole site

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Jun 2021 18:05:27 No.13335184 Report

Quoted By:

>>13327256
This is a gross misunderstanding of how the double slit experiment works.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Jun 2021 06:31:49 No.13337202 Report

Quoted By:

bump

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Jun 2021 06:33:39 No.13337206 Report

Quoted By: >>13338710

>>13327256
>when something conscious is observing it
No, when our measuring devices measure it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Jun 2021 16:25:15 No.13338710 Report

Quoted By: >>13338993

>>13334846
Good boy :)
>>13337206
Measuring devices are "aware" of the light which is how and why they give a result. The human brain is nothing more than what we see with cells as they turn from single-celled organisms into multicellular complex organisms... Nobody believes that a horse is one giant cell. Nor too should anybody believe that a horse is one giant consciousness.

It is merely a collective of things working as a singular thing precisely as cells do. When a measuring device takes a measurement as an input and gives some form of output, an act of awareness has taken place.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 675E7DB1-68FA-4C4B-9BED-0F7A69D0 (...).png, 89KiB, 886x886

Anonymous Tue 29 Jun 2021 16:40:01 No.13338770 Report

Quoted By: >>13341793

>>13328019
Bro how you shoot photons or electrons and shit? It doesn’t even make sense to me

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Jun 2021 17:10:38 No.13338863 Report

Quoted By:

great the schizos are awake. This is why we can't have a good physics general

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Robert Lanza.png, 724KiB, 775x677

Anonymous Tue 29 Jun 2021 17:53:02 No.13338980 Report

Quoted By: >>13339132 >>13340966

>>13327256
https://bigthink.com/surprising-science/is-human-consciousness-creating-reality

If that meme gets it right then Robert Lanza must be very close to the truth about reality.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Jun 2021 17:57:31 No.13338993 Report

Quoted By: >>13339087

>>13338710
you type like a disgusting pervert
>Measuring devices are "aware" of the light which is how and why they give a result.
just because you want to force a definition of "aware" doesn't mean measuring is an act of awareness. In fact most of the time any measurements are made, there isn't anything to be aware of without extra computation. You're just the faggotiest of faggots with a motive to push some unscientific bullshit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Jun 2021 18:23:47 No.13339087 Report

Quoted By: >>13339132

>>13338993
"knowledge or perception of a situation or fact."

Adding in BS human things like self awareness is irrelevant. Where an observation is made there is an observer, whether that thing is complex enough to understand what is being observed or not.

Consciousness emerging from inanimate matter is supernatural. There are even some people who think ants and other insects aren't conscious because of this obsession with humanizing everything. The same reason people say God is love or whatever. It is such a trap.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Jun 2021 18:35:52 No.13339132 Report

Quoted By:

>>13339087
See >>13338980
Here is a critical and extreme misunderstanding of what consciousness is, due to humanization.

There is no such thing as a "level of awareness". To think there is, requires either supernatural souls or similar, or a misunderstanding of what it is.

If I took your consciousness and a fly's consciousness and swapped them do you know what would happen? Because I can tell you, there would be no difference at all. The fly consciousness would now be experiencing your brain and vice versa. It would have your memories, behaviors, personality. There is no way it could not unless there is something religious going on.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO looking2.png, 640KiB, 858x899

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 04:42:37 No.13340947 Report

Quoted By: >>13341166

>>13327256

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 04:48:15 No.13340966 Report

Quoted By: >>13341175

>>13338980
There are actually 2 Bob Lanzas

>Bob before LSD
>Bob after LSD

Aren't we lucky we live in the 2nd Bob's world

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 06:18:43 No.13341162 Report

Quoted By:

>>13327256
Yup the measurement update is a fundamental aspect of the dynamics. Before you observe, it's in a superposition of states with zero entropy. After observation it collapses to one state with positive entropy. What we chose to pay attention becomes increasingly more hidden. But the wisest among us like Ed Teller knows this is all part of thermodynamics, i.e. an irreversible process.
https://youtu.be/5rn_YiT5FhY

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 06:21:49 No.13341166 Report

Quoted By:

>>13340947
wisdom

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO giphy.gif, 2MiB, 480x360

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 06:32:01 No.13341175 Report

Quoted By:

>>13340966

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO image_2021-06-30_073342.png, 319KiB, 858x899

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 06:33:44 No.13341178 Report

Quoted By: >>13343572

>>13327256

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1625036645933.jpg, 129KiB, 896x994

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 07:04:06 No.13341215 Report

Quoted By: >>13341739

When I was a little kid I was convinced that everything existed the way it did only when I was looking at it and when I would look away it would be it’s true self.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 11:29:10 No.13341739 Report

Quoted By:

>>13341215
Basically legit, except the "way it did" is the mental representation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 11:41:24 No.13341793 Report

Quoted By:

>>13338770
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_gun#:~:text=An%20electron%20gun%20(also%20called,has%20a%20precise%20kinetic%20energy.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 20:46:59 No.13343487 Report

Quoted By: >>13343900

>>13334846
>Wrong. Consciousness is actually involved.

lol no. decoherence occurs with any interaction with matter, consciousness has no part in it. One, because this idea is fucking stupid. Two, because this has already been experimentally tested and confirmed.

And if you are about to reply and tell me something along the lines of 'but checking/observing the detectors that check the interference pattern afterward is what actually collapses the wave function' please save your energy.

The universe did plenty well enough to roll itself into a macroscopic snowball of decoherence without us or someone conscious to observe it.

the pseud/philosophy in this thread is strong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 20:59:04 No.13343525 Report

Quoted By:

You got us man. What can I say? Mystic Pop Science sells, and QM is the finest example.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_20210630-220923_Opera.jpg, 21KiB, 651x1134

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 21:09:48 No.13343572 Report

Quoted By:

>>13341178
Only the truly enlightened will get this.

Ommmmmmmmmmm.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 22:45:53 No.13343900 Report

Quoted By:

>>13343487
>The universe did plenty well enough to roll itself into a macroscopic snowball of decoherence without us or someone conscious to observe it.
Prove it, rigorously.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Jun 2021 22:49:12 No.13343913 Report

Quoted By:

>>13327256
>no way does it actually change when something conscious is observing it
rest assured it does not
those who think it does are suffering from a mental derangement

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches