NationStates Jolt Archive

Since many people seem to have problems with unconventional thoughts and the first reaction then seems to be to think it is wrong by default, what is your stance on quantum physics?

Do you think Heisenberg's Uncertainty, Wave-Particle-Duality or the weird behaviour of quarks are something which really exists or do you not trust scientists here?

poll coming

Quantum mechanics make baby Jesus cry.

As far as we know and what my admittedly limited knowlege of the field tells me, yes.

I don't know..

I tried to understand it but I got scared by that radioactive-zombie-cat-in-a-box..

http://img439.imageshack.us/img439/9172/bunnyhu5.png

That is no pancake!

Trilby63;12097533']I don't know..

I tried to understand it but I got scared by that radioactive-zombie-cat-in-a-box..

same but no cat ,it was a rat for me

I like thinking about quotes from famous physicists about quantum physics, because they sum up my attitude on the matter pretty thoroughly.

http://img439.imageshack.us/img439/9172/bunnyhu5.png

What happened to pancake bunny?

Trilby63;12097548']What happened to pancake bunny?

what pancake bunny?

That is no pancake!

WHAT?? I told the person taking the picture to put a pancake on the bunny's head, so it prolly has to be a pancake.

what pancake bunny?

Erm...

Hey, have you ever noticed the subtle messages hidden within that Hong Kong Phooey cartoon about subservience to authority even in the face of incompetence? If you think of Hong Kong Phooey as the state and Spot as the working class it becomes painfully obvious..

Trilby63;12097533']I don't know..

I tried to understand it but I got scared by that radioactive-zombie-cat-in-a-box..

The cat/rat was not radioactive it would have been killed if radioactive decay in a group of atoms occurred, also it was no zombie. It was in a quantum state between alive and dead.

Trilby63;12097564']Erm...

Hey, have you ever noticed the subtle messages hidden within that Hong Kong Phooey cartoon about subservience to authority even in the face of incompetence? If you think of Hong Kong Phooey as the state and Spot as the working class it becomes painfully obvious..

never heard of such a cartoon. and what exactly does this have to do with my question?

There's a lot of stuff that can only be explained by Quantum Physics.
But it's not the easiest theory to believe either.
:headbang:

The cat/rat was not radioactive it would have been killed if radioactive decay in a group of atoms occurred, also it was no zombie. It was in a quantum state between alive and dead.


Sorry? What is the difference?

never heard of such a cartoon. and what exactly does this have to do with my question?

Wasn't the Pancake Bunny a villain in Hong Kong Phooey?

I don't have a screwdriver small enough to be a quantum mechanic.

Trilby63;12097582']Wasn't the Pancake Bunny a villain in Hong Kong Phooey?

don't know, cuz i've never even heard of such a cartoon.

I don't have a screwdriver small enough to be a quantum mechanic.

lol:)

don't know, cuz i've never even heard of such a cartoon.

Well?

Trilby63;12097599']Well?

well what?

well what?

*points at the internet*

*nudges Swilatia*

i don't know this part of physic so much but i still believe it does have its own logic.

There are a lot of inventions that no conventional physic knowledge can explain...

if you have some free time. Please take your time to go trough this site

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Main_Page


there are a lot of stuff there to read... some might spark your interests...

get to know what is "Over Unity" ;)

Well in essence, if it were reasonable to assume that the multiplication of the atmospheric difference in quanities unrecognised would be perpetuated to be resolved of a belief in that which has necessary derivatives in an informative sense, such a sitaution could become engaged in anomalities which have been served over to a confusion of materials; however as the example of prior would be of an incorrect state, this would cause such a statement to be completely unfounded and thus undesirable.

My brain is, like, so big and full of words.

Indeed.

Well in essence, if it were reasonable to assume that the multiplication of the atmospheric difference in quanities unrecognised would be perpetuated to be resolved of a belief in that which has necessary derivatives in an informative sense, such a sitaution could become engaged in anomalities which have been served over to a confusion of materials; however as the example of prior would be of an incorrect state, this would cause such a statement to be completely unfounded and thus undesirable.

hwaa!?!?!?:confused:

I can't remember much of QM now... but I don't remember having a problem with it either. If the model fits well then that must mean that my current understanding of the scientific model is incomplete, not that the QM was wrong. QM states that electrons can be both waves and particles. The model works. Ergo my current understanding that the state of being a wave and the state of being a paricle are mutally exclusive is wrong.

hwaa!?!?!?:confused:

Excellent response! It was actually a load of nonsense made to sound like it actually meant something. If it did actually mean anything, it was basically just this (or something like this):

Well, if it was reasonable to assume [specific thing], such an assumption could be confusing, however as it's not reasonable to assume [specific thing], the statement was completely pointless.

Do you think Heisenberg's Uncertainty, Wave-Particle-Duality or the weird behaviour of quarks are something which really exists or do you not trust scientists here?I trust scientists not to claim their theories are true, but rather that they are the best description of reality available.

meh, might reformulate, you're right... made that thread when I was tired and fed up with IDlers who apparently just can not believe their position in thw world...

whta?

(Yeah, I know Swil's supposed to say that)

Where's the option, "Of course, it's true and my brain doesn't hurt?"

Where's the option, "Of course, it's true and my brain doesn't hurt?"It both is and isn't there. If you squint with one eye and turn your head 34 degrees, you might just succeed in collapsing the waveform to the "is-there" state so you can select it.

Yes and no. Quantum Mechanics sometimes fits in with every earthbound scientific theory and is necessary to prove the validity of our current outlook on the subatomic level. However, Quantum Mechanics almost always contradicts Astrophysics.

So, its great on a terrestrial level, but thats about it, at least right now.

what pancake bunny?


THIS is pancake bunny.

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/151/pancakebunnyti9.png (http://imageshack.us)

Trilby63;12097548']What happened to pancake bunny?

Sadly, pancake bunny died a few years ago (points to sig)

Trilby63;12097578']Sorry? What is the difference?

http://ytmnfinity.ytmnd.com/

There's a good way to explain the whole Schrodinger's cat theory. It's extremely basic, but easy to understand. (Ignore the stuff related to YTMND; I only link it because it's the best way I've found to explain it. Even my little five year old cousin understood this easily.)

http://ytmnfinity.ytmnd.com/

There's a good way to explain the whole Schrodinger's cat theory. It's extremely basic, but easy to understand. (Ignore the stuff related to YTMND; I only link it because it's the best way I've found to explain it. Even my little five year old cousin understood this easily.)

So it's a zombie cat from a parallel universe?

THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS ACTUALLY 42 MILES PER HOUR. MAXWELL HAS LIED TO YOU. QUANTUM PHYSICS IS BASED ON DECEPTION. TIMECUBE.

LOL

Since many people seem to have problems with unconventional thoughts and the first reaction then seems to be to think it is wrong by default, what is your stance on quantum physics?

Do you think Heisenberg's Uncertainty, Wave-Particle-Duality or the weird behaviour of quarks are something which really exists or do you not trust scientists here?

poll coming

I don't know why people freak out about quantum physics......it's pretty cool.

It doesn't make my brain hurt at all.

I don't know why people freak out about quantum physics......it's pretty cool.
It doesn't make my brain hurt at all.Indeed. It's all plain to understand. Maybe it makes only some "special" people's brains hurt.

Trilby63;12098568']So it's a zombie cat from a parallel universe?

...no. The cat merely demonstrated that the quantum physics of the time was wrong because they said the cat was both alive and dead, when the cat was really alive or dead depending on which universe you were in.

There hasn't been an experiment that's disproven quantum mechanics yet, so it is reasonable to assume that it's a decently accurate interpretation of the world.

This site is a good site to learn Quantum Physics: http://www.physicsforums.com/

whta?

(Yeah, I know Swil's supposed to say that)

so why did you rip that off?

I don't know why people freak out about quantum physics......it's pretty cool.

It doesn't make my brain hurt at all.

"Anyone who says that they understand Quantum Mechanics does not understand Quantum Mechanics" -Richard Feynman

In a certain sense, truth is an outmoded concept. Aristotle and classical logic like true/false 1/0 binary distinctions, but such distinctions don't apply to the world that well.

Quantum theory is a model for physical phenomena. Quantum physics is not like Plato's Allegory of the Cave, an analogy designed to be easily understood, filled with irrelevant details, but instead is a model to be used by scientists to predict phenomena. It's not perfect, but it works pretty good. In general, models may become increasingly difficult to understand as they approach perfect emulation of reality.

I still feel that String Theory is a bit odd. I have a feeling that 100 years from now, String Theory may seem as quaint and outdated as the idea of "the ether" does today.

I still feel that String Theory is a bit odd. I have a feeling that 100 years from now, String Theory may seem as quaint and outdated as the idea of "the ether" does today.

There's a lot of debate over whether or not string theory can even be considered science, let alone a viable physical theory of the multiverse.

This whole deal of extra dimensions that we can't observe and time as a physical property seems to have no place in science which deals only with the physical realm. Can anyone prove that time is a physical property and not just a neccessary concept. If not, then it is incompatible with the space-time theory, since space is a physical property. Also, the wave-particle duality is a paradox, and by definition, a paradox is a logical impossibility. Quantum physics does not explain as much as some claim it does, since its explanations can't be explained. How can there be 10-11 dimensions that overlap with our 3? Excuse me, 4. Sorry time, you silly little theoretical concept. It is another illogical idea. These quantum physicists should start their own religion, because that is exactly what this stuff is. Maybe their theoretical strings are a little loose.

Since many people seem to have problems with unconventional thoughts and the first reaction then seems to be to think it is wrong by default, what is your stance on quantum physics?

Do you think Heisenberg's Uncertainty, Wave-Particle-Duality or the weird behaviour of quarks are something which really exists or do you not trust scientists here?

poll coming

It is the best present explanation of observed facts.

This whole deal of extra dimensions that we can't observeWe might be able to observe them, they aren't a priori out of our reach, hence they're valid scientific conjectures.

Can anyone prove that time is a physical propertyYou can measure it; and anything you can measure is physical.

Also, the wave-particle duality is a paradox, and by definition, a paradox is a logical impossibility.No, a contradiction is a logical impossibility, a paradox is merely something that seems like a contradiction, it isn't necesarily one.

Quantum physics does not explain as much as some claim it does, since its explanations can't be explained.Huh?
That doesn't make sense. You can never, for no theory, explain the most basic explanation. That would be circular, as you'd have to explain it in terms of itself. You need a base to start from. You can't explain logic in terms of logic either, you need a meta-logic for that, and to explain that a meta-meta-logic, and so on. There's a serious grounding problem. It's insane to claim a theory should solve that, as it's impossible.

How can there be 10-11 dimensions that overlap with our 3?You're confusing quantum mechanics with string theory. Even so, they neatly explain how the extra dimenions might not be apparant.

These quantum physicists should start their own religion, because that is exactly what this stuff is. Maybe their theoretical strings are a little loose.Perhaps you should get an idea of what you're actually talking about. Because you could make a much better case against string theory if you actually knew something about it, rather than attack strawmen.

I still feel that String Theory is a bit odd. I have a feeling that 100 years from now, String Theory may seem as quaint and outdated as the idea of "the ether" does today.

Read "In Search of Shroedinger's Cat" -- String theory, once hailed as nearly the Ultimate Answer has died and is looked on today with about as much reverence as spontaneous combustion or eugenics.

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0553342533.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V1056455535_.jpg

Good book. Heady, but still accessible to the average NS'er.

Read "In Search of Shroedinger's Cat" -- String theory, once hailed as nearly the Ultimate Answer has died and is looked on today with about as much reverence as spontaneous combustion or eugenics.

I figured that would happen sooner or later, but I haven't kept up with the latest theories. What's replacing it as the theory du jour?

A quantum physicist is a bit like a toddler with Play Doh: You don't know if your toddler made an elephant or a rhinoceros, but you don't want to squash his creativity because some day, he might become a great artist. :D

I figured that would happen sooner or later, but I haven't kept up with the latest theories. What's replacing it as the theory du jour?

Well, that's one of the problems. There really aren't very many since so many people have devoted their research efforts to string theory over the past three decades and comparatively little on other theories.

The standard model of string theory developed in the 70's is pretty good, but beyond that things are falling apart more and more. It's not the ToE people hoped it would be, and most of it is in increasing doubt as is. I think once the whole thing collapses we'll be left with the things discovered during the first superstring period in the late 70's.

Well, it's not as funny since you mentioned it in the OP. but when I saw the thread title, I wanted to post:
"I'm uncertain."
Badum tish!

seems to be rubbish to me.

What I read about quantum theory makes sense to me. I've never read up on string theory. I'm also liking Heim Physics

Burkhard Heim (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heim_theory)

It's hard to understand but I also read an article about it in New Scientist a few months ago.