/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #14335544

115KiB, 1080x1079, 1648099946535.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 18:02:04 2022 No.14335544 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>14335633 >>14336291 >>14336397 >>14336493 >>14337786 >>14338291 >>14341010 >>14342428 >>14343589 >>14344551 >>14345648 >>14347330 >>14348109 >>14348858 >>14355678

Is this an accurate representation?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 18:07:15 No.14335564 Report

Quoted By:

No. Detecting which slit the light goes through causes the collapse. That information can also be erased, which will return the interference pattern. Furthermore, this works with molecules as large as buckminsterfullerene.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 18:09:14 No.14335570 Report

Quoted By: >>14336566 >>14340295 >>14344654 >>14345649 >>14346702 >>14350185 >>14352312

No one was ever able to recreate this expeiment.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 18:15:18 No.14335584 Report

Quoted By: >>14335587 >>14335625 >>14343160

Nobody has ever explained this shit to me. Why does it have to be a human that makes the observation? Would the wave function not collapse if a dog saw it instead? What about a bug?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 18:16:30 No.14335587 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335584
This is the heart of quantum mechanics and no one has any clue what the fuck is going on. Figure it out, and you will be the next Einstein.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 18:32:46 No.14335625 Report

Quoted By: >>14335901 >>14346666 >>14347981

>>14335584
By 'observing', what is meant is another particle interacting with the observed particle. In this case, to observe which slit a photon goes through we have to interact with it as it goes through the slit. This is what collapses the wave function. The observer doesn't have to be conscious

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 25258484848.jpg, 134KiB, 1080x1079

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 18:36:28 No.14335633 Report

Quoted By: >>14335901

>>14335544
more like this

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 20:24:54 No.14335901 Report

Quoted By: >>14335916 >>14335971 >>14340239

>>14335625
>>14335633
so why do people make such a big deal about it then?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 20:29:16 No.14335916 Report

Quoted By: >>14335918

>>14335901
Because it doesn't make a lot of sense for the interference pattern to appear. It would imply multiple outcomes happening simultaneously, like a superposition.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 20:30:39 No.14335918 Report

Quoted By: >>14335946 >>14336418 >>14340303 >>14341849 >>14353342

>>14335916
okay shit I guess I actually have to read about this stuff

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1610340734127.png, 142KiB, 460x385

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 20:35:58 No.14335946 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335918

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 20:38:30 No.14335956 Report

Quoted By:

No. You need to use hands, not eyes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 20:41:33 No.14335971 Report

Quoted By: >>14336320

>>14335901
Because it demonstrate that a particle is an expanding wave. That can be extremely large. But when it interacts with another wave. They both disappear. And the product of their interaction. Starts spreading from a single point.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO double slit and measurement.png, 300KiB, 1438x1788

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 21:08:56 No.14336064 Report

Quoted By: >>14336073 >>14336404 >>14336517 >>14336533

this should be helpful

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 21:11:52 No.14336073 Report

Quoted By: >>14336090

>>14336064
>Coincidence Circuit
am I being trolled?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 21:17:31 No.14336090 Report

Quoted By: >>14336098

>>14336073
The coincidence circuit detects when a photon arrives at D0 at the same time another photon arrives at D1, D2, or D3.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 21:21:00 No.14336098 Report

Quoted By:

>>14336090
I see. It was just called that by coincidence.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Max Planck Cons.jpg, 81KiB, 850x400

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 22:49:18 No.14336291 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335544
yeah

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 23:07:01 No.14336320 Report

Quoted By: >>14338052

>>14335971
And what is this second wave? I think seeing is receiving light, not emitting it

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 23:54:30 No.14336397 Report

Quoted By: >>14336404 >>14336453 >>14336459

>>14335544
how can anyone know that the top image ever actually happens if you can't observe it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 25 Mar 2022 23:58:58 No.14336404 Report

Quoted By: >>14336459

>>14336397
You can observe it. You can do it yourself with a cheap laser pointer. Looks like the second picture in >>14336064.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 00:07:46 No.14336418 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335918
Feynman's take on it.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=kEx-gRfuhhk&t=4h17m36s

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 00:26:23 No.14336453 Report

Quoted By:

>>14336397
I did it in high school physics with a laser pointer. Ezpz

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 00:30:09 No.14336459 Report

Quoted By: >>14336517 >>14337064

>>14336397
The thing being "observed" or not (aka, measured/recorded/etc.) is which slit each individual photon of light went through. Funny enough, the OP image references this with the grainy, dotted patterns on the wall.

When we know which slit the photon went through, it acts like it shone through that one hole. Makes sense. In fact, it's natural to assume every individual photon must go through one hole or the other. That's the bottom pattern in the OP image.

When we shine a bunch of light at once, like >>14336404 suggests, it's also easy to justify the pattern. A bunch of light is shining through the area all at once, and it interferes with each other like multiple waves colliding in a lake. That's the top pattern in the OP image.

Where things get really weird is that we can shoot a bunch of individual photons, one at a time over a long experiment, and over time we still see the OP image's top pattern.

When something detects which path each individual photon took, it ends up like the bottom pattern. Otherwise, it ends up like the top pattern. Why? Only Terry A. Davis knew for sure.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1646315632423.png, 327KiB, 639x571

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 00:56:21 No.14336493 Report

Quoted By: >>14336533 >>14340034

>>14335544
Where's the proof for this? I can't find a single related image where the interference pattern is not there because the photons were observed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 01:09:01 No.14336517 Report

Quoted By:

>>14336459
>When something detects which path each individual photon took, it ends up like the bottom pattern.
It looks more like the single slit pattern as seen in >>14336064.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 01:16:13 No.14336533 Report

Quoted By: >>14337427 >>14338410

>>14336493
See >>14336064 and the paper referenced https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9903047.pdf for a real experiment. It wasn't some dude manually observing though, a second photon carried the information about which slit the photon went through. When they measured the second photon to determine which slit the first passed through, there was no interference pattern. But they were also able to destroy the information carried by the second photon and restore the interference pattern.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 01:40:33 No.14336566 Report

Quoted By: >>14336610 >>14340327

>>14335570
>No one was ever able to recreate this expeiment.
the experiment was never performed. Feynmans double-slit experiment with electrons was always a thought experiment.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 02:01:34 No.14336610 Report

Quoted By: >>14337619

>>14336566
>t. Genuinely, unironically retarded

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 07:31:20 No.14337064 Report

Quoted By:

>>14336459
>Where things get really weird is that we can shoot a bunch of individual photons, one at a time over a long experiment, and over time we still see the OP image's top pattern.
Okay that is fucking weird. So the phrase "collapsing the wave function" means perturbing ("measuring"?) the individually sent photons, so that they act like discrete particles (making the bottom half of OP's picture) instead of like a fuzzy wave (the top of the pic)?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 07:43:34 No.14337077 Report

Quoted By: >>14338264

this is just a consequence of the speed of light being being the same as the speed of time

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 13:09:25 No.14337427 Report

Quoted By: >>14337584

>>14336533
Not buying it. The interference patter is different in both cases and if you add the interference patterns you get the no interference pattern result. It's not the same experiment.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 14:35:48 No.14337584 Report

Quoted By: >>14337699

>>14337427
Well obviously it's not the exact same thing as the OP pic. The OP pic is a meme image made by someone with a superficial understanding of quantum mechanics and gets lots of details wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 14:47:59 No.14337619 Report

Quoted By:

>>14336610
>>t. Genuinely, unironically retarded
you obviously haven't studied the topic further than Dr. Quantum produced by PBS on youtube. Why not try even reading the wikipedia article?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 15:14:31 No.14337699 Report

Quoted By: >>14337770

>>14337584
the double slit experiment is defined as the meme image in the op?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 15:53:28 No.14337770 Report

Quoted By: >>14337788

>>14337699
The meme image in OP doesn't even make any sense. How is the furry supposed to see which slit the particle went through just by pointing his eyes in that direction? It's not like the particle is big enough to see by light bouncing off it, and if it was, the momentum up or down acquired by light bouncing off it would be enough to smear out that pattern of fine bands regardless of whether anybody looked in that direction.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 15:59:36 No.14337786 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335544
No. The thing which destroys the interference pattern is decoherence in the presence of macroscopic detectors, not whether or not an "observer" looks at it or not. It's a stupid meme propagated by retards and retard enablers

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 20220325_131547.jpg, 102KiB, 1024x986

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 15:59:43 No.14337788 Report

Quoted By: >>14341409

>>14337770
Shut up gay faggot homo nigger. I kill you. Prepare to die. *kills you* How about that, bitch cunt? *buries you in your parents' front yard, but not that deep, so that the neighbors' dog will dig up your dead faggot body and your parents will walk out in the morning and be shocked and horrified to see your shitty dead dog food body getting gnawed on*

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 17:37:07 No.14338052 Report

Quoted By:

>>14336320
the atoms in your retina are the second wave
or maybe the dust in the air is

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 18:53:51 No.14338264 Report

Quoted By: >>14340995

>>14337077
Light can be slowed down quite a lot. Its speed through air isn't even "light speed".

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 18:59:27 No.14338291 Report

Quoted By: >>14338297

>>14335544
>Von neuman believed in the consciousness causes collapse
why do you still get a double slit interference pattern when you are thinking about the particle/s or photon/s but not measuring them?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 19:01:36 No.14338297 Report

Quoted By: >>14338491

>>14338291
Because you don't have the information about the measurement?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 19:51:54 No.14338410 Report

Quoted By:

>>14336533
I remember in school when I just started to get my head around the normal double slit experiment and then my teacher slammed me whit that delayed choice quantum eraser shit.
An interaction with a different particle collapsing the wave function? Yeah sure, I can make sense of that.
Interaction of an entangled photon at a later time affecting the behavior of the other one? Nah bro.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 20:24:25 No.14338491 Report

Quoted By: >>14338739

>>14338297
would results be different if you knew that the measuring instrument was there or not?
let's say cheeky technician A hid a measuring instrument in the slit and then slipped and cracked his head open instantly dying, scientist B is sad so he decides to continue the experiment in honor of technician A. would you get a single slit interference pattern?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 26 Mar 2022 22:00:48 No.14338739 Report

Quoted By: >>14340208

>>14338491
>would you get a single slit interference pattern?
Yes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 08:51:53 No.14340009 Report

Quoted By:

Pluck a guitar string. It vibrates with all the possible frequencies available between it's two nodes.
Place a finger at a sub-harmonic and pluck the string. It vibrates with all the available frequencies in that sub harmonic. Fewer but still it vibrates.
Place a second finger on the string and pluck. Now there is almost no vibration as there is no more freedom for the string move.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 09:16:08 No.14340034 Report

Quoted By:

>>14336493
>Where's the proof for this?
When you polarize two parts of a wave to prevent them from interacting with each other, they don't interact with each other.
No, not because they now have different properties. It's because our conscious has a chance to learn through which slit a particle that is a ball and totally not a wave goes through.
Because Copenhagen.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO seedoflifeincircle1[1].jpg, 62KiB, 527x527

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 09:36:45 No.14340065 Report

Quoted By: >>14340145 >>14347468 >>14352247 >>14352262

i have been devising a unique view of spacetime that i think will penetrate quantum gravity and explain some of the weirdness of wave-particle duality, polarization, quantum erasure and even quantum gravity among other problems

bodhi

bodhi Sun 27 Mar 2022 10:32:17 No.14340145 Report

Quoted By:

>>14340065
and?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 11:14:14 No.14340208 Report

Quoted By: >>14340220

>>14338739
so consciousness doesn't affect the results?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 11:21:36 No.14340220 Report

Quoted By: >>14341818

>>14340208
we have no reason to assume that it does

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 11:33:14 No.14340239 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335901
> why do people make such a big deal about it then?
because they don't understand it and make it seem more mystical than it really is.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 11:55:36 No.14340295 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335570
>No one was ever able to recreate this experiment.
So not even that is true, why do they all lying?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 11:59:37 No.14340303 Report

Quoted By: >>14340312

>>14335918
>okay shit I guess I actually have to read about this stuff
That's the tactic of modern "science" Trick you in complicated papers they did not understand them self and confuse you into a believer. Similar to other religious writings such as The Bible, Das Kapital "The Capital" etc. .

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 12:03:17 No.14340312 Report

Quoted By: >>14340334

>>14340303
>t. high school dropout

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 12:11:01 No.14340327 Report

Quoted By: >>14340913

>>14336566
bullshit, it has been performed first in 1801 with sunlight, and the electron gun experiments were repeatedly performed since 1927 when young did it first.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 12:14:12 No.14340334 Report

Quoted By:

>>14340312
>>t. high school dropout
You don't want to admit that. it's not standard in science but in the political part of it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 15:58:00 No.14340913 Report

Quoted By: >>14341781

>>14340327
>the double-slit thought experiment with electrons was performed in 1801 in reality with light.
the state of your non sequitur.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 16:23:02 No.14340995 Report

Quoted By: >>14341342

>>14338264
Speed of light (electromagnetic waves) are constant.

When you "slow" light, light gets absorbed and re-emitted by atoms which takes time. There's no speed change

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO spinning-optical-illusion.gif, 2MiB, 500x500

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 16:28:26 No.14341010 Report

Quoted By: >>14341063 >>14341171

>>14335544

The term 'observation' means totally different than what the non-physicists thinks.

You "looking" at an experiment will NOT ever alter an experiment.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 16:47:08 No.14341063 Report

Quoted By: >>14341265

>>14341010
>You "looking" at an experiment will NOT ever alter an experiment.
this is a half truth. maybe not looking at a panel of the apparatus is relevant, but observing the experiments data will. The lore is once the data is observed the wave function collapses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 17:18:07 No.14341171 Report

Quoted By: >>14341181 >>14341211

>>14341010
why do you have a gif of a woman breaking her neck? her body is turning counter clockwise and her head clockwise

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 17:23:07 No.14341181 Report

Quoted By:

>>14341171
Wamen are cuter when they're dead.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Spinning_Einstein.gif, 2MiB, 300x322

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 17:30:10 No.14341211 Report

Quoted By:

>>14341171

optical illusion, for me she spins one way then reverses and spins the other

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Dense.png, 70KiB, 243x200

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 17:42:36 No.14341265 Report

Quoted By: >>14341321

>>14341063
>observing the experiments data will. The lore is once the data is observed the wave function collapses.

Wrong.
The term 'observation' means something totally different for a physicist than non-physicist.

LOOKING at data or an experiment will not EVER alter it.

Nature does NOT care that humans look at it anymore than you care if an ANT WATCHES you do something.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 17:59:36 No.14341321 Report

Quoted By: >>14341976

>>14341265
>LOOKING at data or an experiment will not EVER alter it.
yes, it does. It collapses the wave function.

>>14341265
>Nature does NOT care that humans look at it anymore than you care if an ANT WATCHES you do something.
QM is just math/statistics. there is nothing physical about it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 18:10:06 No.14341342 Report

Quoted By: >>14341355

>>14340995
>When you "slow" light, light gets absorbed and re-emitted by atoms which takes time. There's no speed change
When light passes through a medium without interacting with it, parts of its body have to be discarded. Can't changing the structure of a photon wave decrease its speed?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 18:16:37 No.14341355 Report

Quoted By:

>>14341342
Light diffraction changes its direction. It should be possible to make light move slower by controlling its direction.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 20.jpg, 81KiB, 668x446

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 18:42:05 No.14341409 Report

Quoted By:

>>14337788

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 20:21:57 No.14341781 Report

Quoted By: >>14341881 >>14341889

>>14340913

>light isn't electromagnetism

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 20:35:22 No.14341818 Report

Quoted By:

>>14340220
why do many scientists including very big ones believe this?
i had a professor who said that "the only thing we know for certain is that we are conscious" and he mentioned Neumann-Wigner interpretation is a possibility along Copenhagen and the other ones.
this interpretation sounds like psychic telekinesis

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1501043147259.jpg, 181KiB, 900x675

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 20:45:25 No.14341849 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335918
Sasuga /sci/

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 20:58:38 No.14341881 Report

Quoted By:

>>14341781
>>light isn't electromagnetism
light is a transverse electromagnetic wave a la Maxwell. you seem to be implying that electrons are light too and therefore electromagnetism?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 21:00:13 No.14341889 Report

Quoted By:

>>14341781
Photons don't attract or repel each other like electrons do. They're not the same thing at all. It's like doing the experiment with fridge magnets and calling them quantum because they stick to each other.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 21:32:24 No.14341976 Report

Quoted By: >>14341998 >>14342120

>>14341321
>>LOOKING at data or an experiment will not EVER alter it.
>yes, it does. It collapses the wave function.

NO, "observing" collapses the wave function NOT looking.

To "observe" something at the quantum scale you MUST disturb it, thus collapsing the wave function.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 21:42:32 No.14341998 Report

Quoted By:

>>14341976
>To "observe" something at the quantum scale you MUST disturb it, thus collapsing the wave function.
this is a half truth. to observe you do perturb the system, and consciously register the systems state. when both happen you have observed the system and its wave function collapses. of course, this is all a statistical formalism. don't think any of this is physical.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 22:12:50 No.14342120 Report

Quoted By: >>14342206 >>14342530 >>14343002 >>14345558

>>14341976
"Werner Heisenberg maintained that wave function collapse, "The discontinuous change in the probability function", takes place when the result of a measurement is registered in the mind of an observer."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann%E2%80%93Wigner_interpretation

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Retarted.jpg, 147KiB, 660x702

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 22:38:40 No.14342206 Report

Quoted By: >>14342217 >>14342249

>>14342120
>is registered in the mind of an observer.

That is complete bullshit, it occurs all the time without ANY observers registering the event in their minds.

Consciousness has NOTHING to do with the wave function collapse.

Replacing a human with an ANT would yield the exact SAME RESULTS!!!

Replacing a human with a fucking ROCK would yield the exact same results!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 22:40:58 No.14342217 Report

Quoted By:

>>14342206
>Replacing a human with a fucking ROCK would yield the exact same results!
easy there retard, your genius is showing

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 22:52:02 No.14342249 Report

Quoted By: >>14342264

>>14342206
>That is complete bullshit
so Heisenberg is full of shit and you know better?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 22:58:05 No.14342264 Report

Quoted By: >>14342290 >>14342302

>>14342249
>so Heisenberg is full of shit

Yes, 100% shit.
The mind of the observer has ZERO to do with wave function collapsing.
Replacing a non-thinking observer with a thinking observer will not change the experiment at all, EVER!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:06:56 No.14342290 Report

Quoted By: >>14342351

>>14342264
>Yes, 100% shit.

give me one reason I should believe you instead of this guy

Werner Karl Heisenberg was a German theoretical physicist and one of the key pioneers of quantum mechanics. He published his work in 1925 in a breakthrough paper...

Born: December 5, 1901, Würzburg, Germany
Died: February 1, 1976, Munich, Germany
Spouse: Elisabeth Heisenberg (m. 1937–1976)
Children: Martin Heisenberg, Christine Mann, Jochen Heisenberg, MORE

Awards: Nobel Prize in Physics, Matteucci
Medal, Max Planck Medal, Niels Bohr International Gold Medal
Education: Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich (1920–1923), University of Göttingen

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:11:40 No.14342302 Report

Quoted By: >>14342351

>>14342264
Who says the wave function collapsed? You just became entangled with it. You're like the cat in the box. You measured it, but for anyone who hasn't measured you too it's still quantum.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Use_The_Force.jpg, 39KiB, 500x200

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:24:14 No.14342351 Report

Quoted By: >>14342364 >>14342384

>>14342290
>>14342302

Fine, you go right ahead and believe that you can 'wish'/'pray'/'hope'/'believe'/'use the force' to influence the results of your experiments.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:28:40 No.14342364 Report

Quoted By: >>14342401

>>14342351
>Fine, you go right ahead and believe that you can 'wish'/'pray'/'hope'/'believe'/'use the force' to influence the results of your experiments.
you didn't answer the question, retard. you are claiming some authority over Heisenberg on the topic of quantum mechanics. can you state your education, awards, and publications so I can get some idea that you aren't just a schizo off his meds?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:34:01 No.14342384 Report

Quoted By: >>14342407

>>14342351
I didn't say that. I said the entire universe is entangled. If a rock measured the experiment, it'd still be quantum to another rock unless it measured both.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Dogeza.png, 7KiB, 259x224

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:39:57 No.14342401 Report

Quoted By: >>14342404

>>14342364

Like I said Dude, I am OK with you believing that YOU can 'magically' influence experiments by you just LOOKING at them.

Your Psionic powers are truly miraculous to behold.

I grovel before you!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:42:18 No.14342404 Report

Quoted By:

>>14342401
take your meds.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO yoda.jpg, 179KiB, 1536x864

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:43:22 No.14342407 Report

Quoted By: >>14342416 >>14342441

>>14342384
>I said the entire universe is entangled

The 'force' is everywhere, in you, in me, in the trees, it unites us all.

You have become Yoda!

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:46:15 No.14342416 Report

Quoted By: >>14342426 >>14343206

>>14342407
>You have become Yoda!
the consciousness-wave function collapse link is basic mainstream quantum mechanical lore, schizo.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO belief.jpg, 54KiB, 720x684

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:50:24 No.14342426 Report

Quoted By: >>14342480

>>14342416
>the consciousness-wave function collapse link is basic mainstream quantum mechanical lore

So if I hire more witch-doctors than you do, can i have them 'mojo' the resents to be different than what you want them to be??

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:50:38 No.14342428 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335544
Yes

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 27 Mar 2022 23:55:34 No.14342441 Report

Quoted By: >>14342474

>>14342407
Now you don't believe in quantum physics at all? Why do the dots group up then?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Reading.png, 187KiB, 628x642

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 00:08:12 No.14342474 Report

Quoted By:

>>14342441
>Why do the dots group up then?

Because the detector to see which slit the photon passed though disturbed the wave function collapsing it.
Turn the detector off and the results go wave to showing a wave interference pattern.

The 'observation' (detector) interferes with the wave function, collapsing it, so the detector can 'observe' which slit the photon passed through.

I completely fail to understand why you think you looking at the experiment influences it.

Turn detector on you get bars, turn it off you get wave interference pattern.

You looking at it does NOTHING!

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 00:11:38 No.14342480 Report

Quoted By: >>14342491

>>14342426
>So if I hire more witch-doctors than you do, can i have them 'mojo' the resents to be different than what you want them to be??
Heisenberg was an actual doctor who won the Nobel Prize. Calling him a witch-doctor is just your schizophrenia showing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 00:17:35 No.14342491 Report

Quoted By: >>14342530

>>14342480
>. Calling him a witch-doctor is just your schizophrenia showing.

Not him, the magical 'conscious observers' that influence the wave function collapse are the witch-doctors.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 00:32:51 No.14342530 Report

Quoted By: >>14342547 >>14343002

>>14342491
>Not him
so you believe Heisenberg when he says >>14342120

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 00:44:43 No.14342547 Report

Quoted By: >>14342565

>>14342530
>so you believe Heisenberg when he says

No, a consensus 'looker' does not collapse a wave function. An 'observation' device DOES collapse a wave function.

You can look at double slit experiment all day long and nothing will happen to change the wave pattern until you turn on the 'observation' device that will then collapses the weave function so that the photon goers though one or the other slit leading to a two bar pattern.
With the 'observation' device turned on you can look at it or not but you will still the two bar pattern.

A conscious observer does absolutely nothing to the experiment.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 00:50:54 No.14342565 Report

Quoted By: >>14342579

>>14342547
>>so you believe Heisenberg when he says
>No
so you don't believe in quantum mechanics. I'm not asking BTW. This is the only logical conclusion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 00:57:13 No.14342579 Report

Quoted By: >>14342589 >>14342618

>>14342565
>you don't believe in quantum mechanics

There is no belief, it just IS.
I DO KNOW that consciousnesses does NOT 'magically' influence ANYTHING. You thinking of something does not make anything happen. You watching something does not make anything happen.

Quantum wave functions collapse then they are disturbed , this disturbance is called observation.

Many people think their definition of observation is the same as a physicist, they are wrong.

The two slit experiment works with or without a conscious looker and does not change whatsoever if a human is there or not.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 01:00:46 No.14342589 Report

Quoted By: >>14342604

>>14342579
>Many people think their definition of observation is the same as a physicist, they are wrong.
no. you are wrong according to Heisenberg. Stop proselytizing your schizo shit.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 4Chan_Science.jpg, 52KiB, 750x600

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 01:07:04 No.14342604 Report

Quoted By: >>14342618 >>14342625 >>14343951 >>14348720

>>14342589

Dude, you can stare at the double slit experiment all day long and you will will get a wave interference pattern. Look or do not look NOTHING you do will change the experiment.

Turn on the detector and the pattern will be a two bar pattern, you can look or not look nothing you do will change the experiment.

The human looking 'OBSERVING' the experiment has ZERO influence on the experiment.

Turning the detector on or off is all that matters in changing the pattern form a wave interference pattern to a two bar pattern.

Sorry, if this offends your magical 'conscious observer' belief, but reality does not care about your beliefs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 01:13:20 No.14342618 Report

Quoted By: >>14342622 >>14342638

>>14342579
>>14342604
Not the other anon, but while I totally agree with everything you said, your way of arguing is extremely ineffective. Just warning you that these midwits are getting the better of you because they're able to cite 1 scientist while you aren't citing any. (Yes, authority DOES matter in this field).

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 01:15:10 No.14342622 Report

Quoted By: >>14342624

>>14342618
>these midwits are getting the better of you
so Heisenberg is a widwit?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 01:16:10 No.14342624 Report

Quoted By: >>14342632

>>14342622
No, he was a great man who made errors like even the greatest genius does. You're a midwit for using his name as a rhetorical token.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 01:16:29 No.14342625 Report

Quoted By:

>>14342604
>The human looking 'OBSERVING' the experiment has ZERO influence on the experiment.
you continue to contradict Heisenberg. You are thinking you are on your way to a Nobel prize of something by reiterating yourself? You are a schizo.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 01:17:46 No.14342632 Report

Quoted By:

>>14342624
>You're a midwit for using his name as a rhetorical token.
He was a pioneer of QM. If you think he's full of shit, then you either just don't understand QM or are a schizo

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO There_It_Is.gif, 2MiB, 390x205

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 01:20:35 No.14342638 Report

Quoted By: >>14342649

>>14342618
>you aren't citing any.

I am not writing a paper here.
I am just stating the truth about a simple experiment that for some strange reason people use to justify their believe that they can 'magically' can change the results of an experiment by just looking at it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 01:24:24 No.14342649 Report

Quoted By:

>>14342638
>I am not writing a paper here.
you aren't doing anything except showing how ignorant you are of QM.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 03:05:08 No.14342853 Report

Quoted By:

So, suppose you're doing single-slit experiment with singular electron, except there's no wall for electron to strike. In fact, there's cosmos after the slit. How big can "electron's quantum wave" get?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO damedakoitsu.png, 168KiB, 408x572

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 04:28:51 No.14343002 Report

Quoted By: >>14343222 >>14345510

>>14342530
>>14342120
Not him but you people are fucking retarded
Heisenberg also said this,
>Of course the introduction of the observer must not be misunderstood to imply that some kind of subjective features are to be brought into the description of nature. The observer has, rather, only the function of registering decisions, i.e., processes in space and time, and it does not matter whether the observer is an apparatus or a human being; but the registration, i.e., the transition from the "possible" to the "actual," is absolutely necessary here and cannot be omitted from the interpretation of quantum theory

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 05:53:27 No.14343160 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335584
Hint: consciousness has a direct effect on reality as we perceive it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 06:34:34 No.14343206 Report

Quoted By:

>>14342416
The many worlds and copenhagen interpretation are mainstream lol, not your schizo deepak chopra tier theory.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 06:46:50 No.14343222 Report

Quoted By: >>14343229

>>14343002
Baséd.
Do you have a source on this quote? I would appreciate it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 06:51:10 No.14343229 Report

Quoted By: >>14343243

>>14343222
Physics and Philosophy, p. 137

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 07:01:08 No.14343243 Report

Quoted By: >>14343430

>>14343229
>Physics and Philosophy
Is it this book?
https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=2230AC9A33DE4DD150753879AD38FBE1
I still can't find the quote in it. Where did you get the actual text that you posted?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 09:02:10 No.14343430 Report

Quoted By: >>14343603

>>14343243
No the original guy but if you want I found it here as well
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_(quantum_physics)

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 10:36:58 No.14343589 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335544
What does this experiments even prove? That everything is like in video games and only exist if you're looking at it?
I also saw a variation of this experiment where they split the photon and it would somehow still do the same thing even if the detectors were set much further away than the wall. Implying the light would send information from the future?

Seriously what does all of this mean for us? Simulation, stuff is predetermined, universe has a consciousness?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 10:43:18 No.14343603 Report

Quoted By:

>>14343430
Thanks. Another fun quote from that page:
>As John Bell inquired, "Was the wave function waiting to jump for thousands of millions of years until a single-celled living creature appeared? Or did it have to wait a little longer for some highly qualified measurer—with a PhD?"

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 13:53:32 No.14343951 Report

Quoted By: >>14344014 >>14344015 >>14344040

>>14342604
then please explain to us the Delayed choice experiment

knowledge of the experiment caused the wave function collapse

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 14:17:51 No.14344014 Report

Quoted By:

>>14343951
Not that guy but doesn't the wave particle always happen if you're making a measurement?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 14:18:02 No.14344015 Report

Quoted By:

>>14343951
>explain to us the Delayed choice experiment
By polarizing a part of a photon wave, you change the properties of this part and prevent it from interacting properly with other parts. When you change parts of this wave again, to make them identical to each other, they regain the ability to interact properly.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 14:29:14 No.14344040 Report

Quoted By: >>14344077

>>14343951
Not even that guy but first learn basic QM properly before asking nonsensical questions about experiments you don't understand

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 14:53:48 No.14344077 Report

Quoted By: >>14344079

>>14344040
>you must learn our religion to understand our miracles

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 14:55:24 No.14344079 Report

Quoted By:

>>14344077
If you think physics is miracles, that's your problem, not mine. Fuck off schizo.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Heisenberg-57c7d88b5f9b5829f412a (...).jpg, 11KiB, 309x257

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 15:08:51 No.14344096 Report

Quoted By: >>14344247

since this is the qm thread can you guys help me understand something?
since neither the delta x or delta p can't be zero does that mean that two particles approaching each other will have momentum in every direction with every magnitude as x reaches zero? is that the same thing as degeneracy pressure and the explanation to why physicists say it's impossible for two things to touch?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 16:19:46 No.14344247 Report

Quoted By: >>14344278

>>14344096
It's part of degeneracy pressure; you also need the particles to be fermions or else they could all just assume the same state, and if it was one with low, not very uncertain momentum and high position uncertainty, you wouldn't get much pressure at all.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 16:32:13 No.14344278 Report

Quoted By: >>14344448

>>14344247
thanks, i'd assume that this doesn't hold in black holes, right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 17:32:33 No.14344448 Report

Quoted By:

>>14344278
Stars turn into black holes when the gravity is stronger than the degeneracy pressure. As a star collapses into a black hole, the uncertainty of its particles' momentum becomes larger and larger, increasing the degeneracy pressure, but the gravity also gets stronger as the particles move closer together.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1646487175030.gif, 1MiB, 600x352

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 18:11:23 No.14344551 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335544
no, maybe if the "looking" symbolises the measuring device entangling into the quantum system.

this video explaining quantum computers might be useful for you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RGEYYJmMtU&t=4s

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 28 Mar 2022 18:55:15 No.14344654 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335570
We did it in physics 101 in uni.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 01:34:57 No.14345510 Report

Quoted By: >>14345556

>>14343002
>>Of course the introduction of the observer must not be misunderstood to imply that some kind of subjective features are to be brought into the description of nature. The observer has, rather, only the function of registering decisions, i.e., processes in space and time, and it does not matter whether the observer is an apparatus or a human being; but the registration, i.e., the transition from the "possible" to the "actual," is absolutely necessary here and cannot be omitted from the interpretation of quantum theory
this doesn't change the fact that wave function collapse requires the state data to register in the observers mind, and that is what Heisenberg believed. nice non sequitur, retard.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 01:54:16 No.14345535 Report

Quoted By:

what if entanglement denotes a certain relationship to time

if time is a cone of possibilities in front of every object in the time axis couldnt entanglement be a 'unity' of all the particles into a single time universe?

since they are in the same universe once we describe that particular universe we can conclude information about both particles simultaneously

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 02:15:06 No.14345556 Report

Quoted By: >>14345558

>>14345510
>requires the state data to register in the observers mind
Retard

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 02:17:47 No.14345558 Report

Quoted By: >>14346636

>>14345556
>Retard
so was Heisenberg retarded too? explain this >>14342120

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 03:14:14 No.14345648 Report

Quoted By: >>14345662 >>14346620

>>14335544
What I don't understand is how you can ever not observe it? Isn't the only way to measure something to make some sort of observation? at which point it collapses, so how can you ever confirm that there is a non-observable state?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 03:14:19 No.14345649 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335570
you can do it at home with a laser pointer, a post it, and a razor blade to cut the slits

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 03:28:37 No.14345662 Report

Quoted By:

>>14345648
In one case wave collapses when detector interacts with electron, when electron hits the wall wave was already collapsed
In other case wave collapses when electron interacts with a wall

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 14:44:05 No.14346620 Report

Quoted By:

>>14345648
nothing was ever observed. The double-slit experiment for electrons is a thought experiment.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 14:55:35 No.14346636 Report

Quoted By: >>14347968

>>14345558
What's retarded is your hilarious misunderstanding of what Heisenberg said

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 15:18:10 No.14346666 Report

Quoted By: >>14346679 >>14348119 >>14348858

>>14335625
then how come observing one particle collapses the wave of its entangled pair?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 15:25:52 No.14346679 Report

Quoted By:

>>14346666
If the particles are entangled, there are no separate wavefunctions of one particle or the other. There is only a combined wavefunction. That's what it means to be entangled.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 15:38:20 No.14346702 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335570
it has been done one photon at a time

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 20:38:27 No.14347330 Report

Quoted By: >>14347744 >>14348079

>>14335544

Here is something that will really blow your mind about quantum entanglement.
You already know that two entangles particles act together even across huge distances "Spooky action at a distance" (the distance between them seems to be irrelevant, as if there was no distance between them).
Quantum entangled particles are entangled in space-time.
You can do experiments where the entangled particles act together across TIME, (spooky action through time, they act as if there was no time difference between them).

https://www.discovery.com/science/Entangled-Quantum-Particles-Communicate

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 21:40:41 No.14347468 Report

Quoted By:

>>14340065
no you haven't, you are in 4chan(nel).org and your most visited boards are pol, qa, and b

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Mar 2022 23:44:47 No.14347744 Report

Quoted By: >>14348723

>>14347330
>You can do experiments where the entangled particles act together across TIME, (spooky action through time, they act as if there was no time difference between them).
makes it seem like our time isn't the real Time, but is just the simulated sequence of events. same with space. the real Time/Space is outside the simulation and no spooky action is possible in the real thing.
If our universe has weird complicated physics, then Occam's razor supports the claim that our universe isn't the fundamental layer of physics.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 01:16:30 No.14347968 Report

Quoted By:

>>14346636
>What's retarded is your hilarious misunderstanding of what Heisenberg said
explain it to me then. It seems clear enough to me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 01:21:21 No.14347981 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335625
>The observer doesn't have to be conscious
Technically they do in order to perform any scientific experiment and share the findings. It always ultimately reaches consciousness if you look at the data as a human being.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 02:22:07 No.14348079 Report

Quoted By:

>>14347330
Quantum entanglement doesn't do anything beside hinting that nothing is random.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 02:37:12 No.14348109 Report

Quoted By: >>14348492

>>14335544
yes but it's misleading the wavefunction changes with any infinitesimal change in it's state. the subjective act of observation is an outrageously large summation of changes in the wavefunction
rockefller foundation trying to use scientism to make believe in free will. asinine sophistry

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 02:41:47 No.14348119 Report

Quoted By:

>>14346666
checked

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 07:09:03 No.14348492 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348109
>rockefller foundation trying to use scientism to make believe in free will
wat

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 10:18:52 No.14348720 Report

Quoted By:

>>14342604
>conscious observer
who's turning the "observer/detector" on and off? don't tell me it's a "program" or a "switch"
it is in fact turned on by a conscious decision
>but reality does not care about your beliefs.
reality does not "observe" reality for the sake of proving something to the same reality, that would be the observer, and that would change the game
>the observer observes itself and declares that indeed it's an entity, the observer goes to "sleep" and the wave's doing its things

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 10:22:00 No.14348723 Report

Quoted By:

>>14347744
>supports the claim that our universe isn't the fundamental layer of physics.
Shit, I could have told you that from reading Kant.

Do you know what all science is? Studies of the expressions of something else entirely.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO parallel-universes-1536x1086.jpg, 274KiB, 1536x1086

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 10:27:03 No.14348731 Report

Quoted By: >>14348770 >>14351103

slightly off-topic, but does anybody else notice everything LessWrong touches turns into hell?

>Quantum Immortality
>"We'll all end up in Everett hell branches!"

>AI
>"Its going to create hell

My guess is hell is real only if the universe is run by a LessWronger.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 11:04:29 No.14348770 Report

Quoted By:

>>14348731
This thread has no topic

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 12:04:31 No.14348858 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335544
If you believe the mumbo jumbo science that says humans evolved from apes, then sure.

>>14346666
It just does, ok?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Mar 2022 21:49:56 No.14350185 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335570
i did it in physics 2 lab lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Mar 2022 06:07:32 No.14351103 Report

Quoted By: >>14352280

>>14348731
>My guess is hell is real only if the universe is run by a LessWronger.
You're right that they have a fixation on Hell, but it's precisely because they hate the idea of it and are genuinely afraid of the Demiurge sending them to Hell. If a LessWronger became God, he'd turn everything into a stereotypical utopia where nobody had free will and everyone was obligated to be happy forever.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Mar 2022 17:04:57 No.14352247 Report

Quoted By:

>>14340065
Can you tell us about it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Mar 2022 17:09:01 No.14352262 Report

Quoted By:

>>14340065
Whats quantum gravity and how does it differentiate from electro-weak-force or/and strong-nuclear-force

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Mar 2022 17:16:35 No.14352280 Report

Quoted By: >>14352314

>>14351103
>If a LessWronger became God, he'd turn everything into a stereotypical utopia where nobody had free will and everyone was obligated to be happy forever.
How scary. If only there were a place to put them for the rest of eternity where they can only interact with each other and can't harm normal people...

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Mar 2022 17:24:18 No.14352312 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335570
So what I did at university in my physics course was just a dream? And the experiment, where we calcualted the loschmidt constant in our chemistry lab using a ruler, milimetre paper and a laser pointer with known wavelength, which builds on the same scattering principle, was probably just a hoax? No wonder my calcualtions where outside the error.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Mar 2022 17:24:24 No.14352314 Report

Quoted By: >>14352338

>>14352280
A stereotypical utopia would at least be better than what most people would do. LessWrongers wouldn't punish anyone. I have the feeling you would.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 31 Mar 2022 17:32:40 No.14352338 Report

Quoted By:

>>14352314
Which part of my suggestion do you consider punishment and why?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 33e.jpg, 36KiB, 600x583

Anonymous Fri 01 Apr 2022 02:08:22 No.14353342 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335918

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 01 Apr 2022 19:42:53 No.14355678 Report

Quoted By:

>>14335544
>Is this an accurate representation?
no

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