[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Home]
4Archive logo
Quantum tunnelling debunked
If images are not shown try to refresh the page. If you like this website, please disable any AdBlock software!

You are currently reading a thread in /sci/ - Science & Math

Thread replies: 38
Thread images: 3
File: 1428077365383.jpg (172 KB, 900x612) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1428077365383.jpg
172 KB, 900x612
The theory of quantum tunnelling derives mathematically the result that particles have a non-zero probability of passing through a barrier which in classical mechanics would be impassable. It predicts that particles can pass through walls.

Now a ball is clearly made out of particles. Therefore there has to be a non-zero probability that a ball can transition through a solid wall.

Why has this never been observed?

There have been hundreds of thousands of recorded sports matches with balls, but not even once did we see a ball transition through a wall. Not even when it was kicked with full force against the wall, i.e. should have more energy and thus a higher probability of passing through the wall.

Explain pls.
>>
>>7846336
>Why has this never been observed?
Quantum effects only happen on very small scales
>>
>>7846336
Goddammit? Now that OP has debunked tunnelling I guess my STM will stop working. Damn.
>>
gr8 b8 m8, i r8 8/8
>>
>>7846336
Each particle has a non zero chance of passing through the wall yes and in fact on many occasions individual particles likely do and you could detect that with proper equipment but the entire ball moving through the wall would require every particle moving through the wall together at the same time.

That may or may not be possible but even if it is possible the chance of it happening would be so ridiculous that its not surprising at all that we haven't seen it even if you considered every ball ever thrown against a wall in all human history.
>>
>>7846336
>muh if y is composed of x, y has the properties of x

Beta radiation can kill if ingested and is an electron
So can alpha radiation, and is neutrons and protons

Neutrons, electrons and protons make up all common materials

So, it *logically follows* eating edible food and drinking water will give you cancer and radiation burns

Wow, this logic thing is fun
>>
>>7846360
STMs don't exist. The images are photoshopped!
>>
This b8 is so obvious.
>>
>>7846336
You know, I thought I was actually going to hear some interesting news for once.
>>
http://vvkuz.ru/books/zurek.pdf
>>
>>7846360
Thinking the same thing, but I guess his soccer ball just invalidated all your work. Sorry :/
>>
>>7846336
>Why has this never been observed?

It DOES occur... ALL THE TIME... the problem is it is EXTREMELY unlikely to occur... you have a near zero probability of ever observing it occur... You have a near zero percent probability of ever observing someone you know winning the top prize in a lottery, BUT someone DOES win
>>
>>7846336
>Mass leads to gravity
>I have mass
>But then so does the earth
>Therefore I should have the same gravitational pull as the earth

General relativity BTFO
>>
>>7846388
Could you imagine if it happened one day, you're just pissing around with a tennis ball or something, throwing it at a wall and it just passes right through it.
>>
>>7846336
we dont have a sample size big enough . the probability of the thing you're describing to happen is orders of magnitude lower then 1 in (number of particles in the observable universe. factorial)

shit even if all of observable space was tightly packed with balls hitting walls it wouldn't be a reasonable sample size to expect this kind of thing to happen .
>>
billions of particles with a 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% chance of passing through a single layer of another particle apparently means that footballs should be frequently passing through matter? ;)
>>
>>7848043
'frequently' is relative
>>
>>7848028
That would be pretty insane. But probably there is more at play that makes macroscopic quantum stuff impossible and not just really really unlikely.
>>
>>7848070
>But probably there is more at play that makes macroscopic quantum stuff impossible

No.. there is not.. it DOES occur.. just EXTREMELY infrequently

Modern computer chip manufacturers have to consider quantum effects when designing their chips.. quantum tunneling of electrons is a "big problem" for them
>>
>>7846336
>small group of particles randomly observed "phasing" through solid objects

>Billions of particles all randomly don't experience the same effect

>Quantum mechanics debunked
>>
A nucleus wont tunnel because it doesnt exhibit wave properties like an electron.

The probability is so low, that if a few of the electrons from a ball impacting a wall did manage to tunnel, it would only appear as an electron transference.
>>
>>7848096
This. Transistors are getting so small that electrons will jump from one side of the transistor to the other, despite it being an open circuit because the transistor is only about 30 silicon atoms wide. I think the physical limit will be 10-12 atoms wide, which isnt far away
>>
>>7848128
>A nucleus wont tunnel because it doesnt exhibit wave properties like an electron.
But it does. Look into cold atom BECs for quantum mechanical behavior on the scale of atoms.
>>
>>7848096
Yes quantum tunneling of electrons is very real I'm aware, that's not what I was talking about.

Is an electron macroscopic like a ball? Do you know if its possible to make a ball tunnel through a wall? Not just a few particles that likely happens all the time I mean the whole thing all at once.
>>
It would have 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% prob so we dont see it
>>
>>7848128
>A nucleus wont tunnel because it doesnt exhibit wave properties like an electron.

I take
>what is alpha decay
for 300, Jim.

Wavelike behaviour has been observed even in small molecules.
>>
>>7848257
Wait, so its still possible?
>>
>>7848287
>Wait, so its still possible?

YES... very very very very .... very... very unlikely
>>
The OP has been addressed more or less correctly, but I will add: the tunneling particle doesn't pass or phase through the barrier. It simply has a probability that it exists on the other side and the barrier acts as an observation which can select for this eventuality.
>>
File: EffetTunnel.gif (322 KB, 200x200) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
EffetTunnel.gif
322 KB, 200x200
Every single time the ball hits the wall 'some of it' goes through the wall. The energy in the ball is transferred from the tunnelling particles to particles that are reflected back through the wall to the original ball.
>>
>>7846336
It's the Correspondence Principle
>>
>>7848028
there are a ton of 'glitch in the matrix' stories about things disappearing when dropped, no trace found
of course they are dismissed as imaginary
>>
>>7846388
This. The probability is so small that it wouldn't happen in the lifetime of our universe.
>>
>>7846336
>Why has this never been observed?
You aren't going to see a quantum effect like tunneling happening to a soccer ball. In theory it can happen but it would be an extremely low probability.
>>
>>7848658
that explains where all my guitar picks went
source though?
>>
Quantum tunneling makes me think our universes positions is defined in something akin to floating point. What we observe is just the effects and there's no logical explanation for this shit from our point of view.
>>
>>7849238
i wouldn't wanna link but theres a subreddit called glitch in the matrix and that's a fairly common story there
>>
>>7846336
>Therefore there has to be a non-zero probability that a ball can transition through a solid wall.
non-zero doesnt mean that it ever happens, just that it could
also this effect is called QUANTUM tunnelling, not fucking huge ass things tunnelling
Thread replies: 38
Thread images: 3
Thread DB ID: 513278



[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / biz / c / cgl / ck / cm / co / d / diy / e / fa / fit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / news / o / out / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vip /vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Home]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.