By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Or rather, does anyone understand it more than most (I appreciate the adage "if anyone says they understand quantum physics then they haven't understood quantum physics")?
Particles don't exist in any particular position - they exist in a "superposition" - until they're observed, right? If this is the case, then every particle that makes up my bathroom doesn't currently exist in any particular position as no-one's observing it? If you extrapolate out, logically, then my bathroom doesn't exist until someone observes it? Currently, there is nothing there, like a computer game that only renders the bits you're in (it saves energy by only rendering what is needed when it's needed)?
However, do particles need to be observed by humans to have a position? Surely if a spider is in my bathroom, it has at least some perception of it, in order to attach its web, so the bathroom does exist? That begs the question, how far down does perception go (perception that would influence particles)? There might not be a spider in the bathroom, but there will certainly be thousands of microbes - is their perception of their surroundings enough to render the bathroom?
I love watching, reading and thinking about this sort of stuff... and no, I haven't been smoking anything! Genuinely interested in what any science-minded folk think.
Quantum mechanics doesn't really say things don't exist until observed, but rather that their quantum properties (position, spin etc) aren't definite until measured; they exist in a "superposition" of possibilities (a wave function) that "collapses" into one reality upon interaction, or being measured, not necessarily by a conscious observer but by an instrument of some sort, causing a change from potential to definite. The universe existed for billions of years without observers, so things (like stars, galaxies) definitely existed, but their quantum properties behaved according to probabilities until measured or interacted with. "Spooky action at a distance" is entirely another thing though....
Edit. I briefly studied physics at university, but it was in the 70's.
[Post edited 18 Dec 12:44]
2
Does anyone on here understand quantum physics? on 12:48 - Dec 18 with 901 views
It's very much worth stepping all the way back and remembering that what scientists call things have a very specific domain meaning vs. what people would understand that word to mean in an everyday context.
A good example of this is theory, which in science is something which is something supported by a vast body of evidence that has been repeatedly tested. There's way more to it than that but still.
In normal terms if someone comes up with a theory about something, it's probably not going to be like that, it could be as rigourous as a bit of a guess.
And in your example, one of the things that has a double meaning depending on context is "Observer".
It’s not so much that things don’t exist until measured, more that their state isn’t fully know until measured. But using quantum physics/mecahnics it’s possible to predict the state to a very high level of accuracy. Something like that anyway, so obviously no I don’t understand it at all lol
Oh, and it’s applied to really small things (think Conor Chaplin and smaller).
Does anyone on here understand quantum physics? on 12:42 - Dec 18 by Meadowlark
Quantum mechanics doesn't really say things don't exist until observed, but rather that their quantum properties (position, spin etc) aren't definite until measured; they exist in a "superposition" of possibilities (a wave function) that "collapses" into one reality upon interaction, or being measured, not necessarily by a conscious observer but by an instrument of some sort, causing a change from potential to definite. The universe existed for billions of years without observers, so things (like stars, galaxies) definitely existed, but their quantum properties behaved according to probabilities until measured or interacted with. "Spooky action at a distance" is entirely another thing though....
Edit. I briefly studied physics at university, but it was in the 70's.
[Post edited 18 Dec 12:44]
Cheers (and cheers to the other respondents who've said similar). I've basically misunderstood what the superposition is.
Not wanting to go off at a tangent here, but rather to join a few dots inspired by other responses to the topic - I've never been happy with the Big Bang Theory, which I simplistically boil down to "One day nothing went bang and then suddenly everything showed up".
I prefer a "Small Pfut Theory", where one day nothing went "pfut" and then suddenly an observer showed up and the rest is just history.
0
Does anyone on here understand quantum physics? on 13:49 - Dec 18 with 706 views
Does anyone on here understand quantum physics? on 12:56 - Dec 18 by Swansea_Blue
It’s not so much that things don’t exist until measured, more that their state isn’t fully know until measured. But using quantum physics/mecahnics it’s possible to predict the state to a very high level of accuracy. Something like that anyway, so obviously no I don’t understand it at all lol
Oh, and it’s applied to really small things (think Conor Chaplin and smaller).
Does anyone on here understand quantum physics? on 13:28 - Dec 18 by Cafe_Newman
This is what TWTD is all about. Nice thread.
Not wanting to go off at a tangent here, but rather to join a few dots inspired by other responses to the topic - I've never been happy with the Big Bang Theory, which I simplistically boil down to "One day nothing went bang and then suddenly everything showed up".
I prefer a "Small Pfut Theory", where one day nothing went "pfut" and then suddenly an observer showed up and the rest is just history.
The Big Bang is a bit of a misnomer really, and was coined by someone taking the piss out of it. It's actually not thought of as one big bang but something very small and hot, that was already there, which rapidly expanded.
Does anyone on here understand quantum physics? on 12:51 - Dec 18 by DanTheMan
It's very much worth stepping all the way back and remembering that what scientists call things have a very specific domain meaning vs. what people would understand that word to mean in an everyday context.
A good example of this is theory, which in science is something which is something supported by a vast body of evidence that has been repeatedly tested. There's way more to it than that but still.
In normal terms if someone comes up with a theory about something, it's probably not going to be like that, it could be as rigourous as a bit of a guess.
And in your example, one of the things that has a double meaning depending on context is "Observer".
Ah, the problem of using language to discuss things that happen outside of the existence of language (or before and after language in curved space time...maybe)
And to answer queries about whether there actually was a Big Bang, consider whether it is possible for sound to travel in a space too small for sound waves ?
Does anyone on here understand quantum physics? on 13:15 - Dec 18 by SaleAway
Heisenberg, Schrodinger and Ohm are in a car
They get pulled over. Heisenberg is driving and the cop asks him "Do you know how fast you were going?"
"No, but I know exactly where I am" Heisenberg replies.
The cop says "You were doing 55 in a 35." Heisenberg throws up his hands and shouts "Great! Now I'm lost!"
The cop thinks this is suspicious and orders him to pop open the trunk. He checks it out and says "Do you know you have a dead cat back here?"
"We do now, asshole!" shouts Schrodinger.
The cop moves to arrest them. Ohm resists.
Point of order: Heisenberg should throw up his hands and say "Great! Then I was lost!" Because the information pertains to the past.
Possibly even works better as a joke, as "then" has a double meaning of "at that time", satisfying the logic of a joke about Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, and "In that case", which allows the ambiguity of a reference to the present.
The supra-level to the joke is, of course, that the cop as the embodiment of inflexible law is an archetype for Newtonian physics.
And the last laugh is on Heisenberg, who still gets a ticket for speeding and is arrested for wasting Police time, because he misunderstood the gravity of the situation.
It has been observed that explaining a joke kills it.
Even Schrödinger would have to agree that, without opening the box to check, this one certainly is dead now.
4
Does anyone on here understand quantum physics? on 15:57 - Dec 18 with 398 views
Does anyone on here understand quantum physics? on 18:50 - Dec 18 by The_Flashing_Smile
What's that got to do with the price of fish?
Marvel's quantum physics, primarily through the Quantum Realm, uses real quantum concepts like superposition (being in multiple states) and time dilation but bends them for storytelling, showing a subatomic dimension where time and space are fluid, enabling time travel via Pym Particles, though the scale and magic involved are fictionalized to create adventure and universe-spanning events like the Snap.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
