It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
That is the way science works.
When a theory fails a test, you throw out the theory.
Einstein has failed over and over and over again.
Relativity still fails to account for many observations.
Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by masterp
Relativity still fails to account for many observations.
Such as? Could you please supply some examples?
Or perhaps our electric-universe prophet can oblige us with a few?
Originally posted by Devino
reply to post by mnemeth1
Describing the rope hypothesis and the 'in phase' (constructive) and 'out of phase' (destructive) reaction of light (starting around 7:30 in the video) reminds me of the desired results for the Michelson-Morley experiment. It appears that this experiment, using a laser interferometer, was the attempt to find this same apparent reaction from light.
The object of the Michelson-Morley experiment was to find evidence for the Luminiferous Aether. Do you think that the result of the laser and needle experiment, and therefore the double slit experiment, might actually prove the existence of a Luminiferous Aether?
Originally posted by mnemeth1
there are two descriptions of how such interference patterns are formed in quantum.
one is particle theory that says little balls bounce off the corners.
the other is wave theory that says waves passing through the slits interfere with each other.
neither wave nor particle explanations can account for why an interference pattern is seen when a laser is passed over a solid post, such as his needle.
waves pass around solid objects without creating an interference pattern.
Michelson was expecting a phase shift. Waves would add themselves constructively or destructively, showing a characteristic interference pattern. The goal was to measure the fringes displacement after a 90° rotation.
Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by Loki
Ah, I think that might be the OP. He has a link to Fascist Soup in his signature.
To embed a video only post the part of the link AFTER the equals sign. Only post the whole link like you did if not embedding.
originally posted by: geezlouise
WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW!
...
(vid working?)
are not really very insightful at all and are just based on misconceptions about the observer effect.
the quantum channeling of Ramtha, the 35,000-year-old Lemurian warrior, and on to even greater nonsense.
The logic in the video you posted isn't exactly that, but it's pretty close.
Quantum woo is the justification of irrational beliefs by an obfuscatory reference to quantum physics...
The logical process runs something like this:
I want magic to exist.
I don't understand quantum.
Therefore, quantum could mean magic exists.
michaeljandrew necrobumped it before you did, but there's nothing wrong with a necrobump as long as you don't expect a reply. Once in a while, some old threads come back to life after a necrobump.
originally posted by: geezlouise
omg I just noticed this thread was from 5 yrs ago. Now I feel really late to the party.
It's the basis for the woo in the what the bleep do we know video you posted, that says something about the electrons being aware they're being observed because they're subject to the observer effect. I provided another example of the observer effect that's less quantum so people can see the observer effect for what it is, and it's not what the video implies.
originally posted by: geezlouise
(where did that come from? lol)
So the what the bleep video could use the same logic to say the tire is aware it's being observed when someone check the tire pressure. It's just a stupid conclusion to draw from seeing that there's an observer effect, whether talking about tires, turkeys, photons or electrons, and just one example of the misleading things that bother physicists in the "What the Bleep" video.
In science, the term observer effect refers to changes that the act of observation will make on a phenomenon being observed. This is often the result of instruments that, by necessity, alter the state of what they measure in some manner. A commonplace example is checking the pressure in an automobile tire; this is difficult to do without letting out some of the air, thus changing the pressure.