pittsburghjoe Posted December 21, 2016 Author Share Posted December 21, 2016 My ears are burning. Hey, you two won't be so funny when you read these articles coming out capturing particles during superposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 (edited) Particle wave duality has already been photographed. This includes superposition. Roughly two years ago if memory serves me correctly. However seriously wouldn't you rather correctly understand the subject you have an interest in rather than simply thinking QM is weird? How often do you get such a simplified explanation on many of the QM subjects without being flooded by the math ? Edited December 21, 2016 by Mordred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburghjoe Posted December 21, 2016 Author Share Posted December 21, 2016 And yet you don't want to inspect hidden variables? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 (edited) There is no need. How would a hidden variable help? You would have to know what that hidden variable is. Secondly its been fairly conclusively shown by Bells inequality that local hidden variables cannot account for spooky action. Yet Through quantum correlation isn't needed. The experiment is cheap to setup. Both Swansont and I probably did the experiment ourselves. I know it was part of my studies. I've even considered repeating the experiment with a quantum dot detector and single photon emitter from Toshiba labs. http://www.toshiba.eu/eu/Cambridge-Research-Laboratory/Quantum-Information-Group/Quantum-Devices/ Though it was already performed by others. It didn't change any results. Particle entanglement diodes themselves have been developed. The point is we have spent the work learning QM. When you do you will find its not weird at all. Not as pop media articles portray QM. Or even entanglement. Edited December 21, 2016 by Mordred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburghjoe Posted December 21, 2016 Author Share Posted December 21, 2016 no need?! Magic is happening in front of us and you don't want to investigate because the math with get hard or you might have to accept that something supernatural is happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 (edited) The magic disappears when you study QM correctly. Particularly if you properly study what a particle is in the first place. Edited December 21, 2016 by Mordred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburghjoe Posted December 21, 2016 Author Share Posted December 21, 2016 ::pulls some of his own hair out:: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 (edited) Careful you don't go bald. Nothing replaces studying a subject of interest. Their is no easy way to fully understand QM, relativity, particle physics or cosmology. Take my word on that. I still study even after completing university Edited December 21, 2016 by Mordred 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 no need?! Magic is happening in front of us and you don't want to investigate because the math with get hard or you might have to accept that something supernatural is happening. Science isn't magic. Though Clarke's third law has some applicability here: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." So you can continue to think it's magic, while the rest of us discuss and learn science. Embracing ignorance is a choice you make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburghjoe Posted December 21, 2016 Author Share Posted December 21, 2016 Embracing ignorance is what you guys are doing. A real physicist wouldn't settle for what he is allowed to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Embracing ignorance is what you guys are doing. A real physicist wouldn't settle for what he is allowed to know. We are allowed to know anything that can be measured (directly or indirectly). So what are you referring to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburghjoe Posted December 21, 2016 Author Share Posted December 21, 2016 yes, the ignorance is strong in this one. Don't act like you don't know what I'm talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Embracing ignorance is what you guys are doing. A real physicist wouldn't settle for what he is allowed to know. Whoever claimed any physicist does? we usually claim to the best of our understanding and research. However we can easily tell when someone is speaking out of ignorance. Particularly when they don't even understand the subject under discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imatfaal Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 ! Moderator Note Embracing ignorance is what you guys are doing. A real physicist wouldn't settle for what he is allowed to know. pittsburghjoe - please bear in mind that many of those you are talking to are professional research scientists with further degrees in the subject; talking about embracing ignorance and questioning whether any who disagree can be real physicists is very close to breaching our rules on slurs and insults; this line of debate is also fallacious in its logic. We are also growing very tired of the gush of arguments from incredulity, from ignorance, and via ridicule. Can you move to more constructive and critical positions or at least provide a clearer summary of your points of contention with modern quantum theory? Do not respond to this moderation within the thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Don't act like you don't know what I'm talking about. I have no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburghjoe Posted December 29, 2016 Author Share Posted December 29, 2016 The answer to quantum weirdness was in front of us the whole time. A dimension of superposition solves everything. All superposition events interact with a special dimension that we haven't uncovered until now. We currently can't know the position & velocity of a particle because the one or the other is interacting with this special dimension. Entanglement of particle systems are linked via this dimension. Observing a particle in the double slit unhinges it's path from the unobserved dimension. For the love of no god, someone attempt a criss-cross multiple double slit experiment, we might discover proof of this new dimension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 29, 2016 Share Posted December 29, 2016 The answer to quantum weirdness was in front of us the whole time. A dimension of superposition solves everything. Superposition is not a dimension For the love of no god, someone attempt a criss-cross multiple double slit experiment, we might discover proof of this new dimension. Let us know what you find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburghjoe Posted December 30, 2016 Author Share Posted December 30, 2016 (edited) Is there something preventing this superdimention from being a real thing? Edited December 30, 2016 by pittsburghjoe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 Is there something preventing this superdimention from being a real thing? The pre-existing concepts of math and physics. The basis states already span the space of the system. There is no "new dimension" available — it's already included. You really need to sit down and learn the basics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburghjoe Posted December 30, 2016 Author Share Posted December 30, 2016 It's a new-to-us dimension. Pre-existing concepts can carry on with what they know if they want to. An EMDrive might be exploiting this superdimention and be the proof that I need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 30, 2016 Share Posted December 30, 2016 It's a new-to-us dimension. Pre-existing concepts can carry on with what they know if they want to. An EMDrive might be exploiting this superdimention and be the proof that I need. Where's the math that would back this up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburghjoe Posted December 30, 2016 Author Share Posted December 30, 2016 In order to interact with this dimension you need a molecule or smaller free sized object with a wavelength long enough that can go into superposition. EM waves are included Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 31, 2016 Share Posted December 31, 2016 In order to interact with this dimension you need a molecule or smaller free sized object with a wavelength long enough that can go into superposition. EM waves are included We're going to need more than word salad. It's still not clear you understand what superposition is, or much QM at all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburghjoe Posted December 31, 2016 Author Share Posted December 31, 2016 Maybe it would be better titled "EM Dimension", all I know is that it is the realm that superposition takes place. PLEASE humor me and pretend such a thing could exist. Are there any other flaws to it other than you not being taught it in school? Would a working EMDrive be proof of this layer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 31, 2016 Share Posted December 31, 2016 Maybe it would be better titled "EM Dimension", all I know is that it is the realm that superposition takes place. PLEASE humor me and pretend such a thing could exist. You will have to define what that means before we can pretend it exists. (It doesn't mean anything based on the usual meanings of the words. You might as well call it "dynamic banana".) Are there any other flaws to it other than you not being taught it in school? I think the fact it is a meaningless phrase you have made up is damning enough. Would a working EMDrive be proof of this layer? Only if you showed, in mathematical detail, that such a drive were only possible if this mythical dimension existed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts