Schrödingers cat

>>35094517
No. At first it seems like bullshit, but it just works. Anyone that tells you that they understand why that's the case is full of shit.

>>35094517
It's an analogy for quantum theory. It's the way electrons and stuff act.

>>35094584
Explain. I though it was about an actual cat.

>>35094517
He's dead inside but very much alive because he has to live in a box with no openings to the outside world.

A bit like any robots, actchally.

>>35094629
When scientists were testing protons or electrons, they would send one at a time against a board with 2 holes in it, or something. When they observed the electrons (or protons, idk) directly they found that the electron or proton would go through one of the holes specifically. But when they looked at just the end result (like having a backboard) they found evidence for the electron or proton going through both holes.

On a quantum level, literally anything is possible. It is actually possible for you to phase through the chair you are sitting in. Not likely, but possible.

I know I explained it terribly, I'm sorry. I'm going off of memory from my AP Chem class from a year ago

>>35094782
That sounds retarded. Quantum physics are bullshit, we should've just stuck with Newton.

>>35094846
Truth is stranger than fiction. It blew my mind when I learned it.

>>35094846
Basically, electrons/protons/whatever take the path of least resistance, so they are taking every path to find the one of least resistance and only taking one path at the same time.
anything is possible

>>35094517
Read up on the history surrounding the theory. It sounds bullshit for a very, very particular reason that I won't spoil for you.

you're all dummies who can't grasp a simple exercise created to illustrate the concept that perception is everything and you can't make a claim with no proof
especially you>>35094782

>>35094517
Yup, never made sense to me. Something can't be dead and alive at the same time, people who say it makes sense are just memeing to try and look smart.

File: to end it all.jpg (67KB, 709x765px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 709x765px

>>35094846
kill yourself please

I sure hope you don't breed

>>35095083
you cant even use punctuation
who's the real "dummie" here

>>35095073
Fucking tell me you cock
Orig

>>35095084
anon being dead or alive is really a spectrum from a biologic standpoint

check yourself

>>35095109
no shit, im talking about the colloquial interpretation of dead. no need to be pedantic when it's obvious what i meant

>>35095100
>criticizes my lack of punctuation
>doesn't use punctuation himself

>>35095083
I'm just poorly paraphrasing/summarizing it. The proof is out there.

>>35095149
i never said i was smart dummy

>>35095127
it's not something to be ignored tho

you said something can't be dead and alive at same time

actually most of things you see as "alive" are in fact dead and alive at same time

>>35094517
Yup. Its a silly way of saying "we don't currently know the cat's status".

File: 1486802912646.jpg (5KB, 370x334px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 370x334px

It's simply a bullshit thought experiment meant to make the Copenhagen interpretation silly when it's applied to the macro level.

>>35094517
it's just one of many way of saying it

it could be like you have seen your mom coming out of a hotel in downtown, unless you ask her, you won't know if she fuck someone in there or it's just for some other purpose, but if you do ask her, it will be one or the other

how about you dont form strong opinions about shit you dont understand, retards
of course it wasn't a real cat it was an analogy (an autistic one, schroedinger was probably an autistic virgin like you)

in physics, due to how light and other factors interact with each other, you observing something that is happening influences the outcome
schroe "autist king" dinger thought he can make this concept easier to understand with the example of a cat in a deathtrap
the cat is locked in a box and alive, but as soon as you open the box to check if the cat is alive, poison is released and the cat dies
that means anytime someone checks to see if the cat is alive, they will only see a dead cat even though it was alive the whole time and they will think "this box contained a dead cat" when in reality what killed the cat was them looking if the cat is alive
this is a really retarded analogy and i don't know which autists thought it's a good idea but yeah

a better analogy is you masturbating in your room, you masturbate every day constantly, but if i ask your parents they will say "we dont know. we never saw him masturbate"
this is because as soon as you hear footsteps you stop and pretend you were reading wikipedia
so your parent will never know if what they are seeing is the truth, thus they are forever uncertain
that's the uncertainty relation published by schroedinger

>>35094782
This is wrong and an official correction is likely to occur within your lifetime.

What is really happening is the future exists and any attempt to change the past is impossible, as illustrated by the slightly modified version of the double slit experiment called 'delayed choice'. Pop scientists, university professors and laymen are not to be believed because at the end of the day they are not the ultimate authority on how the universe should behave. Modern physics has so many inconsistencies. Einstein refused to believe it, he just didn't have the tools we have now to prove it.

>>35095068
how the fuck am i going to just fall through my chair

explain that for me faggot

>>35094782
>i dont get it
>therefore anything is possible!!!
retarded

>>35095331
anon are you literally retarded?

how do you go about making assumption on things you don't understand at all?

>>35095331
Where did I say "therefore"

I was just trying to explain it as best as I remember it, fuck off.

>>35095422
that's what that guy is doing though
>On a quantum level, literally anything is possible.
he's basing that all on observation

>>35095286
Atoms are like 99% empty space.

>>35094517
it clearly contradicts the logic of the classical physics, so i don't care about it.

>>35095446
That's what the science video said *shrug*

File: seriously.jpg (58KB, 500x380px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 500x380px

>>35095459
whatever floats you boat mate

is rivalry between different branches of physics really a thing? wtf

>>35095489
and i guess aliens are real because the history channel scientist said so

>>35095503
>whatever floats you boat mate
why did you make a passive agressive respone to a normal reply?

>>35095507
False equivalence, but yes, aliens ARE possible.

>>35095522
Because I can, is there a problem officer?

>>35095539
i just don't get how you can get mad over such an opinion.

>>35095507
no, aliens are (possibly) real because pilots, astronauts see them all the time, they are caught on radar and governments have been documenting UFOs since forever

>>35095523
possible? yes
but confirmed? no

>>35095286
You're not a quantum particle you stupid fuck.

>>35095553
It's okay, I don't understand why you're having such an opinion over my the first part of my opinion too.

>>35095570
>you're having such an opinion
what opinion?

>>35094517
It's not a theory, it's a thought experiment Schrodinger created to point out the absurdity of quantum mechanics applied to macroscopic objects. The basic idea is, since quantum states exist in a superposition of all their possible states, the cat in the experiment must also exist in a superposition of all it's possible states.

>>35095591
>>35095553

bean orginale

>>35095630
where exactly is the opinion in this post?

>>35095646
you think that I'm mad but I'm not

if you go back my first post you'd see my focus is entirely on the second part about "rivalry between different physics branches" but you chose to hang on to the first part of it

kinda like a "I don't like the tone of your voice" type of comment which misses the main point

>>35095279
thanks physicist-anon

>>35095503
>is rivalry between different branches of physics really a thing?

Not really. Where I am there's a rivalry been condensed matter theory and particle theory groups, but that's not serious.

>>35095646
>>35095718
and to think I have to lay it out for you, and that I actually did, there's a high probability that we are both somewhat autistic, but of course, you'd outclass me

>>35095718
>you think that I'm mad but I'm not
you literally confirmed that you're passive agressive
>Because I can

>>35095750
That's a very keen observation, do you intend to become a private detective? I totally see you working as one.

>>35095760
>if i use sarcasm he may not notice i'm mad

>>35094517
No, think about a trap. It's both a man and woman at the same time, and you won't know for sure which it is until you see the penis. So technically, you're not gay unless you see the penis.

>>35095780
do you really think I would be mad over something so mundane?

well doesn't really matter, it's kind of like the thought experiment originally discussed here, you won't really know, but I guess you can chose to see as you wish

>>35095813
see >>35095750

dgdfsgdfgdsfg

>>35095760
can you both shut the fuck up? the only prize you're winning is proving that you're both retarded

>>35095092
>valuing raw truth higher than aesthetics
you too

>>35095838
no I'm going to prove to this guy that he's totally mad

>>35095838
>argueing means you're retarded
yeah ok

>>35095880
>pretending to be me
really now?

>>35095867
What the hell are you talking about?

>Fucking robot

>>35095459
>it clearly contradicts the logic of the classical physics
No it doesn't. Classical physics is the limit case of quantum theory for many particle systems and bigger velocities. The only exception is gravity. It's not yet a fact that it comes from the quantum world but there are a few candidate theories for explaining it

>>35095890
I'd say arguing over what's the better burger between Big Mac and Quart Pounder is pretty retarded.

Especially when the thread is about Schrodingers cat.

>>35095910
If a theory works, but is ugly, it should be made more aesthetic before being taught in schools. Classical physics are very straightforward and intuitive, despite being inaccurate on very small or very large scales. I like them better than the modern shit.

>>35095952
God no. It works, is successful, and is required to understand pretty much anything in modern physics.

File: wink.png (404KB, 800x850px) Image search: [Google]

404KB, 800x850px

>>35095952
well, it seems like the academia doesn't share the same feeling as you do

better start working on getting into a position where you could reject them ugly thesis now

>>35095931
>No it doesn't
yes it does, being dead contradicts being alive.
no, i'm not talking about a few cells of something, but the whole object.

>>35095940
>I'd say arguing over what's the better burger between Big Mac and Quart Pounder is pretty retarded.
besides that being not retarded at all, you're neither argueing about schrodingers cat right now

>>35094517
YES
My god I'm glad someone else out there feels the same way

>>35096010
The old stuff worked well enough for people to have adequate technology and cheap food; good enough for me.

>>35096016
Why not just disregard academia and do my own thing? Lots of people are doing that now.

>>35096038
>yes it does
Read >>35095602. And it's not a contradiction since, as the modern understanding is that near classical paths the phases add constructively. So for large objects they become localised.

>>35096094
>The old stuff worked well enough

But it was incomplete, there's lots of things that can't be explained with classical physics.

>>35096123
>Read >>35095602
>quantum mechanics

>And it's not a contradiction
per definition it is.

>>35096038
well you're a pretty persistent about your exclusive righteousness of being off-topics, I will give it to you

>>35096139
Human knowledge will always be incomplete. Might as well stop at a point where everything is beautiful and makes sense.

File: heh.jpg (55KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 640x640px

>>35096154
I don't think you have the power to dictate human curiosity.

>>35096148
Are you being intentionally dense? Schrodinger was attempting to show an absurdity of using QM to describe classical objects. Since the advent of the path integral formulation we've understood how something can be fundamentally quantum mechanical and classical at the same time.

>>35096150
>exclusive righteousness
?
i didn't object when he said he was passive agressive.

>>35096154
Such a depressing attitude.
>and makes sense.
Except it didn't make sense, that's literally the reason for physics advancing.

>>35096173
Never said I did. Just pointing out what I think we should do. Even if curiosity is unstoppable, I think more effort should be put into making sure theories don't just work, but work elegantly. It's like releasing a half-finished game and updating it constantly, vs. waiting a few more years and releasing a polished final product. The latter is obviously preferable.

>>35096189
>QM
as i said i don't care about quantim mechanics.

i answered op's concrete question, no matter if it refers to a theory involving quantum mechanics.

>>35096211
>Such a depressing attitude.
How do you get depressed from that? I don't get it. It's like getting depressed from cooking pasta or something. Maybe there's something wrong with your brain.

File: what are you doing.jpg (5KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 225x225px

>>35096190
oh for sho

let's stop, there is no point

>>35096253
What? How can you answer OP's question if you don't care about QM?

>>35096255
>let's stop, there is no point
>goes on
you don't look any better doing this.

>>35096261
>it clearly contradicts the logic of the classical physics, so i don't care about it.

gerwgerwgerwg

>>35096236
don't you think elegance is a bit too subjective?

>>35096254
You want to stop because everything is just comfy enough. You remind me of Nietzsche last men, it's sad to see, but annoyingly (and worryingly) common sentiment around these parts.

>>35096288
you cared enough to replied

>>35096288
That's not answering the question and it's also wrong. I've tried to explain.

>>35096318
literally who are you replying to? that doesn't make any sense to my reply.

>>35096319
>That's not answering the question
>Anyone else think

>it's also wrong.
like i said, no.

>>35096299
Not really, no. Most people's brains work similarly enough to where beauty is pretty universal. A lot of people pretend otherwise, but usually it's just to signal to their social group.

>>35096305
I still don't get it. You keep saying essentially "<thing> is bad" but you haven't explained your reasoning. If you're adding salt to a soup you're making, would you keep adding salt after it tasted good?

Now I know you'll say "but science isn't a soup" but I think the same idea applies. Knowledge can continue indefinitely depth-wise, and beyond a certain point it becomes cumbersome and difficult for most people to wrap their minds around. It would be more useful, then, to stop at a certain optimal depth.

>>35096366
>Shall I climb that mountain?
What's the point, I'm perfectly fine here.
>Shall I harvest the grain?
Nah, the wild grains are good enough for me.
>Should I build a shelter?
Why do that when I have cave.
>Should I try and expand the horizons of what I and other know?
No need, we know enough right now

My argument is your lack of drive and ambition is disgusting, something that should be expunged from humanity.

>indefinitely
No

>difficult for most people to wrap their minds around. It would be more useful, then, to stop at a certain optimal depth.

So we should stop advancing to appease brainlets and the worst elements of society? No thanks.

>>35096439
Your idea that "doing new things" is the only form of ambition reveals the fact that you have a science fetish and your system of morals is retarded.

File: 1484047858185.webm (520KB, 360x360px) Image search: [Google]

520KB, 360x360px

>>35094517
>See, that one's dropped in from nowhere! I should EXPECT that! But at the same time, I CAN'T expect that, because they're ninjas. As soon as I EXPECT it, they won't DO it. Ninjas understand Quantum Mechanics better than people realize
-Gordon Freeman

>>35096493
>Your idea that "doing new things" is the only form of ambition

It quite literally is. Everything else is just following in great men's footsteps. You should be striving to do better and be better.

>>35096528
Are you a brain in a jar?

>>35096542
Are you a brainlet?

>>35096560
No. I wasn't using your intelligence as a pejorative, I was implying that you seem to lack any concept of physical skill or achievement. A life spent mastering carpentry is just as valid, if not more so, as a life spent investigating the nature of the universe. In my opinion, Tesla's machinist was just as great of a man as Tesla himself.

>>35095286
Tunnelling probability decreases exponentially with distance and the potential barrier. Even a small increase in mass for a particle drastically decreases the chance of successful tunnelling (e.g. hydrogen vs. deuterium).

t. idiot chemE major who got an A in physical chemistry

>>35095286
if you're enough of a fatass

>>35096595
>A life spent mastering carpentry

But by your own reasoning why would you want to master carpentry? After a certain point it just becomes cumbersome and difficult for most people to do. It would be more useful, then, to stop at a certain optimal depth.

>>35096621
Because the results are beautiful and easily understood.

>>35096645
Beauty is subjective. I'm sure a can find more beauty in the EFE's than in some well made stool.

>>35096670
>Beauty is subjective.
No it isn't. People only say that when they're pretending to be retarded.

>>35096678
>No it isn't.
Well that's just fucking retarded. And we've reached the natural end point of this conversation. At least I had nothing better to with my time.

File: wtf1.jpg (33KB, 307x272px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 307x272px

>>35096678
Is this nigga serious?

I think you've mistaken beauty for popularity.

>>35096708
>>35096725
You know beauty when you see it. If you pretend you don't, you're either being disingenuous or you've become so pathologically intellectual that it's dulling the best parts of your subjective experience, in which case I feel sorry for you.

>>35096747
>You know beauty when you see it
>B...but it's not subjective guys

What?

>>35096678
>Beauty isn't subjective
>>>35096747
>it's dulling the best parts of your subjective experience

Nigga at least try and be consistent.

>>35096763
Everyone will know a beautiful thing is beautiful. Some will pretend they don't, but this is usually for social reasons. Beauty is hard-coded into the human mind.

>>35096788
You can subjectively experience objective things.

>>35094517
you're obviously not intelligent enough to understand the concept

>>35096790
haven't you ever come across someone who has a second opinion about things you find elegant/beautiful/etc?

or is that they are just all out there trying to get you?

Brainlet detected

Things dont exist until someone is observing it. The quantum state of particles is ambiguous until the observation has been made. Think of it like entering a new room in a videogame. The state of the room in the process on your CPU is undecided until you walk into it and observe it. Same thing in our reality.

This is one of the biggest pieces of evidence that the universe is a simulation or projection of some sort.

>>35094517
Lol showed my power level while talking about this with drunk Normie's tonight

Probably go hermit mode cause of this shit

Fuck shrodies cat.

>>35096847
Maybe about the minor details, or maybe they might not like something *as much* as I do, or vice versa, but I've never encountered a person with a radically different idea of beauty than myself.

>>35096965
Probably says more about your friends than anything else. I have totally different ideas and standards of beauty than any of my friends.

>>35096998
Your "totally different ideas" are probably variations on a common theme.

>>35094517
What if the Cat that is dead is alive and the cat that is alive is dead but we can't see how both are dead or alive?

What if the cat that is dead is doing far more than the cat that is alive but it does what it does far quicker than the mind can see and the cat that is alive only appears to be alive but is doing so little however due to it's visibility it appears that it's doing more

>>35095083
Finally, one of you isn't a fucking degenerate

>>35097031
Nope. For example at least two of them have said they don't understand what I see in oneitis. It's her cheeks btw

>>35094517
>dead and alive
Acutally you're the cat who is also the observer.
This means both is true. The cat is dead and alive and it's not dead and alive.
Kids.

>>35097091
and buttcheeks I bet

>>35097121
She has a great ass, seriously top notch. But I was referring to her face cheeks.

>>35096895
>same thing in out reality.
>implying the state of a room isn't determined untill you walk into the room
>duuhh.. and if a tree falls in the woods and no one's around. How you know it fell?? Wrap your fat piece of brain about that sucker einstein!

>>35097062
Actually that's Schrodinger's Cat with two cats

>>35097144

>implying the state of a room isn't determined untill you walk into the room

Thats exactly what i was saying. Every time you walk into that room the simulation will be a little bit different. Some polygons will be rendered differently, sometimes there will be a little more or little less, some dimension will be a little different. Its not noticable when playing but every time the room is simulated and rendered it will be just a little bit different from the previous time it was simulated.

>duuhh.. and if a tree falls in the woods and no one's around. How you know it fell?? Wrap your fat piece of brain about that sucker einstein!

Correct, until someone, or something has observed it, theoretically it never happened. The thing is that im not the only observer, other people and other things can also observe.

>>35094846
>we should've just stuck with Newton.
>t. brainlet

>>35097323

Dimensions*

Forgot to add that with "dimensions" im not talking about the "dimensions" in cartoons, im talking about stuff like height, width and length of objects.

I hate it because the "I'm such a need lmao" redditors love it

>>35096895
>things don't exist until someone is observing it

Proof? This isn't a fucking video game

>>35094517
If I remember correctly the theory goes like this:
Because on the quantum level crazy stuff happens, a particle can be in two different states at once. So a radioactive atom can both be decayed and not at the same time. So what if a cat is locked in a steel chamber, and if the atom has decayed the cat will die from radiation and if it hasn't the cat will stay alive. Since a particle can be in two states at once that means that the cat will both be dead and alive.

>>35094517
It's just meant to represent how absurd the quantum world is, very few think it would apply to an actual cat.

>>35094782
Yeah something like that. E;ectrons. Basically when observed it produced a bunch of dots on the board, and when no observed a wave pattern. Since the electrons were sent through individually, one electron would have to go through both holes and interact with itself.

Remember though in that experiment to "observe" the electron you have to interact with it. It's not just like looking at a car passing by, it's a bit more like trowing tennis balls at a bowling ball and recording where the tennis balls are going to tell where the bowling ball is/where it's going.

>>35094846
Idiot. That physics explains actual results, classical physics can't.
Regardless of how retarded that would be if somehow a crystal ball could make legitimate predictions I wouldn't just ignore it.

>>35097909
Except people explain it as if it WOULD apply to an actual cat and then many people believe it

>>35097968
Yeah well these people rare full of shit what can I say. If you want some real baseless quantum woo listen to what deepach Chopra or whatever the fuck his name is.

>>35094517
Some people say Cats have 9 lives

>>35098202
>take a kitty
>put kitty in blender
>blend
>red goo turns into a live kitty
activates my almonds