STORY   LOOP   FURRY   PORN   GAMES
• C •   SERVICES [?] [R] RND   POPULAR
Archived flashes:
227917
/disc/ · /res/     /show/ · /fap/ · /gg/ · /swf/P0001 · P2559 · P5117

<div style="position:absolute;top:-99px;left:-99px;"><img src="http://swfchan.com:57475/19612007?noj=FRM19612007-29DN" width="1" height="1"></div>

This is resource JGVGWYR, an Archived Thread.
Discovered:4/2 -2017 09:40:06

Ended:4/2 -2017 22:33:13

Checked:4/2 -2017 22:53:22

Original location: http://boards.4chan.org/f/thread/3210907
Recognized format: Yes, thread post count is 57.
Discovered flash files: 1





File: Dr Quantum - Double Slit Experiment.swf-(9.89 MB, 320x214, Loop)
[_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)03:39:45 No.3210907

Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)04:00:35 No.3210913

  Meme magic is real.

>> [_] /b/astard 02/04/17(Sat)04:02:37 No.3210914

  >>3210907
  Decent flash 5/7

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)04:08:51 No.3210916

  learned something new

  8/10

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)04:41:05 No.3210924

  >>3210914
  gb2 imgur

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)05:44:24 No.3210936

  I will never understand quantum shit

  it changes because you observe it? that just means you're pissing off the gods, time to sacrifice
  a goat so they don't rain fiery hail down on us

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)05:55:32 No.3210939

  >>3210936
  No anon. This experiment is saying that we are the gods.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)06:07:18 No.3210942

  Okay, giggle away because the word 'slit' is funny, whatever.

  Seriously though: John Astin is a motherfucking pimp and I'll watch him do anything.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)06:57:44 No.3210949

  http://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-3

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)07:04:40 No.3210950

  the reason the interference pattern disappeared is presumably because of the way the "camera"
  physically interacts with the electrons.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)07:16:13 No.3210951

  >>3210907
  Interesting. I was always prepared for the hood, though.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)07:57:57 No.3210969

  >>3210936
  >>3210907
  this has always been one of the most interesting experiments to me.
  It implies the act of thinking about things changes them.
  really makes you question what reality is.
  good way to give some people an existential crisis.
  another interesting experiment with the LHC(hadron collider) suggests that energy and matter can
  be converted to one another back and forth and that matter can be made from a vacuum/void with
  enough (a fuckton) energy.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)08:01:28 No.3210972

  >>3210969
  The wavefunction collapses when the quantum is observed. In the case of this experiment, the
  quantum is observed when the camera interferes with it. Human awareness isn't a factor here.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)08:06:32 No.3210978

  >>3210950
  >>3210972
  in what way does the "camera" interfere?

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)08:13:30 No.3210980

  >>3210978
  Suppose they measure using a beam, which causes interference

  just a guess

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)08:14:39 No.3210981

  This voice sounds really familiar.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)08:17:09 No.3210982

  >>3210981
  John Astin did the voice.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)08:27:21 No.3210985

  >>3210969
  Also matter will always appear in a void, It doesn't take energy to do that. A perfect vacuum is
  impossible.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)08:40:03 No.3210987

  >>3210950
  >>3210969
  >>3210972
  >>3210978
  >>3210980
  The "observer" is at least an electromagnetic (photoelectric) device
  adding a strong enough electromagnetic field/radiation into the environment collapsing the wave
  behaviour. Particle superposition must collapse to transfer the minimum information needed to
  "interfere with something"/"exchange energy". The wave can interfere with itself without
  trade/loss energy and still be a wave, but to interfere and trade energy (prove your existence)
  they collapse.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)08:43:33 No.3210988

  >>3210969
  It's not thinking about it that changes them, it's being observed. schrodingers cat is a perfect
  example of this, when the cat isn't being observed it can be dead and alive. Just like an
  electron can be both a wave and a particle when unobserved.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)08:44:23 No.3210989

  >>3210985
  Not that impossible.
  Ordinary vacuum still have potential energy.
  If we drain this energy we can get some real void.
  I don't now how. but this not mean that is impossible.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)08:58:30 No.3210992

  >>3210987
  This is kinda weird.
  the wave of possibilities carry only one coin of energy to be trade when the wave collapses.
  What in the hell is in charge to prevent one electron to not mess up inside the wave and hit two
  or more places instantly. Hit one place collapse all the wave faster than light, so what kind of
  information or lack of it says to the wave "hey the particle hit something, disappear now!"?

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)09:39:32 No.3210996

  Meh, just more evidence that electrons aren't real. It's almost like we are drowning in a sea of
  positrons and the electron's mass is the energy equivalence of the positrons displaced from by
  the positive charge on the nucleus. I have always been suspicious of pair production where a high
  energy photon will spontaneously convert into a positron-electron pair. This could also solve the
  mystery of dark matter and dark energy.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)10:01:18 No.3211003

  >>3210936
  >>3210969
  There is no magic behind it.

  Observing something literally means bouncing a photon off whatever it is you want to measure.
  If you don't bounce a photon off it, nothing is interacting with it. (beside itself)
  Or an EM field. Or, if sufficiently close to a large mass, the gravities.

  >>3210989
  Doing so would probably rip a hole in the universe and collapse in to a blackhole.
  This is one of the theories as to why blackholes happen, the space is ripped so violently by
  gravitational waves that it simply tears.
  The fact we found gravitational waves just there is further proof to this theory than Einsteins
  flawed ideas.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)10:06:39 No.3211004

  >>3210992
  We don't know what is "in charge" yet.
  All we know is there can't be equal particles in the same unit. (atom in this case, not sure if
  it applies to "super atoms")
  So no 2 electrons in the same spin or some shit like that. I forgot the exact definition of it.
  There was a term for it that defines the rules.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)11:22:31 No.3211014

  >>3210907

  love quantum mechanics

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)11:54:16 No.3211018

  >>3210972
  The movies file that the camera creates is then in a superposition until a human watches it.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)13:01:45 No.3211035

  >>3210907
  Nigga i saw this in chemistry class years ago

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)13:16:43 No.3211038

  >Comes on to /F/ to watch stupid flashes about dumb shit
  >comes across one of the most interesting discussions I've seen ANYWHERE this year
  >Well fuck.
  never change /F/

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)13:23:51 No.3211041

  >>3211038
  >/F/
  No, fuck off. Fuck you, go away.

>> [_] /b/astard 02/04/17(Sat)13:35:44 No.3211049

  >>3210924
  I'll gb2fuckin'yermum

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)13:36:08 No.3211050

  >>3211038
  >comes across one of the most interesting discussions I've seen ANYWHERE this year
  how illiterate are you
  FYI, there is more to life than social medias and 4chan

>> [_] /b/astard 02/04/17(Sat)13:41:06 No.3211053

  >>3211038
  >/F/
  You're a daft cunt and I hope your mother dies of cancer

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)13:50:35 No.3211055

  >>3210907
  this isn't even the weirdest this series of experiments got.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-MNSLsjjdo (a more indepth recap)

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgs (where it gets so weird time travel occurs)

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)13:54:33 No.3211056

  >>3210978
  for more info
  >>3211055

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)13:56:30 No.3211057

  >>3211055
  >the quantum experiment that broke reality
  >how the quantum eraser rewrites time
  This is just clickbait bullshit. Quantum mechanics is a model of nature, not magic.

  >it gets so weird
  Translation : I don't understand it so it's magic

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)13:57:39 No.3211058

  >>3210987
  >>3210980
  >>3211003
  >>3210972
  >>3210950

  you don't understand enough of what was going on. I assure you the camera was not the issue,
  because they found so long as they destroyed the readings it went back to the interference
  pattern. It literally only cared about whether people were trying to understand what was going on.

  >>3210936
  honestly probably the closest of all of you.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)13:58:41 No.3211060

  >>3211057
  the titles are admittedly clickbait, the content is not. Watch them nigga. Especially the eraser
  one.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)13:59:55 No.3211065

  >>3211058
  >when I try to understand why the walls around me are not collapsing they start to collapse
  It's an easy trick if you want to rob a bank

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)14:00:22 No.3211066

  >>3211057
  >educational programming made by the Public Broadcast Station is bullshit

  Okay whatever, lol

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)14:00:44 No.3211067

  >>3211053
  >/b/astard

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)14:02:34 No.3211069

  >>3211057
  fine nigga, watch the rest of the /f/ video, which is gonna say the exact same thing

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pD_la1VUbcg

>> [_] /b/astard 02/04/17(Sat)14:03:27 No.3211070

  >>3211067
  At least I didn't put /B/astard

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)14:05:21 No.3211073

  >>3211060
  I know they're interesting, but the clickbait playing on the general idiocy surrounding quantum
  mechanics infuriates me

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)14:11:26 No.3211075

  >>3211069
  wait, so the entangled twin knew how to shape based on whether its partner was going to be
  watched or not in the future?

  LITERALLY HOW?! HOW DOES IT KNOW IT'S BEING WATCHED, HOW DOES IT KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE WATCHED
  /IN THE FUTURE/, AND HOW DOES IT KNOW ITS /TWIN/ IS GOING TO BE WATCHED IN THE FUTURE?!

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)14:15:49 No.3211076

  >>3211075
  It's God playing tricks on physicists.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)14:20:42 No.3211078

  >>3211075
  "In the future" in the sense that the information is transferred faster than the speed of light,
  meaning that over a large enough distance, you could theoretically know about an event before you
  physically see it. Actual experiments show this is not quite the case though.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)14:25:44 No.3211080

  >>3211078
  nigga this is an actual experiment, and it's saying D0 had its results corresponding to the
  partner that went through B, before the photons from B finished running their course, much less
  knew what detector they were going to land in and whether they should be interference or clump as
  a result.

  That is "in the future" 100% of the definition. It somehow knew where its partner was going to
  land in advance.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)14:38:56 No.3211083

  ALRIGHT YOU WANNA KNOW FINE! I ADMIT IT! I DON'T KNOW HOW QUANTUM MECHANICS WORK!

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)14:42:32 No.3211084

  Here's the deal with quandum stuff:

  We are used to dealing with stuff we can observe without interacting with it. In reality, when
  you look at something, light is bouncing off of it, and you are observing that. Light bouncing
  off of something changes it, but on our size level, it's virtually unnoticeable. Another example
  is how a cop observes your speed by bouncing a radar wave off of your car.

  On the quantum level, when you observe something (like, bouncing a particle off of it to measure
  its location) you change it. If you try to figure out where it is, you change its movement, and
  if you try to figure out its movement, you change its location.

  This is the uncertainty principal, you can only know one.

  Once you understand this, everything else makes sense. I saw someone talking about entanglement
  here, and the same thing is true. Two entangled particles stay entangled until you observe one.
  Then, you've broken the entanglement because you have changed one, and you haven't changed the
  other. It doesn't need to know, it just keeps doing its thing (and you don't know what that is),
  and the one you changed is now doing a different thing.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)15:19:52 No.3211089

  >>3211080
  More precisely... when you later check what the results were, you always find that they agreed
  with what you expected.

  Maybe everything that happened that far away was in a superposition state until you interacted
  with it, and only then does it definitely become the results that you expected. Check out the
  delayed choice quantum eraser.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)15:47:51 No.3211097

  Now are electrons waves or matter or both? Pretty sure there's a name for it. Don't tell me to go
  to /sci/ because that's where proto-neets go to die.

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)15:56:27 No.3211099

  how do you define observe?
  I mean if you just put a "camera" with the sole purpose of getting different results, for atom
  waifu production in a distant future?
  Does anyone Need to see the results for it to change?
  What if you use a broken camera?
  What if nobody ever sees that recorded by a camera, doest it still change its behaviour?

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)16:02:50 No.3211100

  >>3211080
  >>3211089
  No, the main issue is that, though the EPR paradox was created to try to illustrate the issue,
  you cannot decide the state of the particle in advance, so you cannot communicate meaningful
  information. The fact that the state is decided when you observe it ignores that fact that both
  sides still have to observe it, meaning that no information can be transferred. So yes, remote
  measurements can interfere with one another, but the distribution of outcomes prevents you from
  transferring information.

  Sources:
  http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/137-physics/general-physics/particles-and-
  quantum-physics/810-does-quantum-entanglement-imply-faster-than-light-communication-intermediate
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality
  http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/203831/ftl-communication-with-quantum-entanglement

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)16:04:16 No.3211101

  >>3211099
  Observe means cause interference in any way, shape, or form. Different types of interference
  cause different outcomes (e.g, measuring momentum vs position)

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)16:16:47 No.3211108

  >>3211003
  i dont know how they measure it but, do they need to throw something at it to get the bounce to
  observe?
  or there are already things bouncing off of it and you just need to catch it

>> [_] Anonymous 02/04/17(Sat)16:31:19 No.3211114

  >>3211058
  >>3211003
  >>3211108
  There is no notion of bouncing or impact. It is purely the type of interference. Photons are not
  necessarily a tangible particle, so it is somewhat disingenuous to imply that you physically
  interact with something by observing it in the classical sense.

  One thing worth noting, that I don't think is mentioned in the video, is that the experiment is
  reproducible with larger particles aside from electrons. I believe they were able to reproduce it
  with the various particles up to the size of a sodium atom (can't recall exactly, though).



http://swfchan.net/37/JGVGWYR.shtml
Created: 4/2 -2017 09:40:06 Last modified: 25/4 -2017 09:47:46 Server time: 29/03 -2024 02:02:54