pittsburghjoe

https://youtu.be/sGZG_JBr7uQ?t=8s

physical mass isn't present during superposition

I say it can, you don't have proof that says it can't. The large hadron collider can't get particles to the speed of light because they are observed particles.

Did someone take me seriously for once?! or is this a cruel joke.

No physical mass for anything in superposition is just the tip of the iceberg. Anything in a superposition event can move at the speed of light or faster. Nothing is able to move at the speed of light unless it is capable of going into a superposition state. Anything in a superposition event can move at the speed of light or greater as mostly EM waves along its probability density map. The areas of the density map that are denser are the areas that the bulk of the object (EM waves) travel past the most. I call them ghosts. I'm willing to pay for someone to write this into a formula. I think a buckyball is good test subject.

Has someone tested the travel time of particles in the delayed choice experiment? I realize that timing an unobserved object isn't going to be easy, but could we, at least, get an average time?

Entangle two particles, put one deep underground and inside a faraday cage. See what happens when you observe one of them.

Hey guys! Did you enjoy your vacation while I was being punished? To add to my argument and to further enrage you, I realized that quantum tunneling shows mass bypassing a solid barrier. You still want to defend physical mass in superposition? I purpose a buckyball be fired at a single slit that has a width smaller than the buckyball and see if it passes through it. OR put it into a box that has a divider with a single slit (width smaller than the buckball) and see how often buckyball makes it to the other side. The hidden variable can satisfy your equations without being physically there. I'm not saying a particle disappears when in superposition ..just that it turns mostly into EM waves. Well aren't you a gem. It's almost comical that you're willing to question everything EXCEPT for what I'm pointing at.

Your experiments didn't involve proving what a particle is during superposition.

I'm asking you to question what you are told. Would it really be that awful if QM needed updated a bit?

So the answer is "don't make me think about it"

Sorry if I made you uncomfortable.

I'm willing to believe energy goes through both slits as waves, but not mass.

Let me give it some meaning. Energy is the top tier shell of this force/dimension. EM/quantum waves are within/below this tier. If I can solve Mass Gap and Quantum weirdness with this way of thinking ..would you take it seriously?

Sick burns you guys! I assure you I cried a little. You can't know that for sure. I see mass the same way as a 3D modeling program does. A measured neutrino or electron has a single set of x,y,z (a vertex). Anything bigger being brought over from Energy will have depth (more x,y,z's assigned to the object). So there is a chance it is in the form of energy. You don't know that. It's great that mass has a wavelength after its converted from energy. You are overlooking something revolutionary.