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.

 

Needed: A Little Help With That Double-Slit Experiment

page: 8
2
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2011 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by NorEaster
 


The earth is the centre of the universe and if you say it isn't then you are being irresponsible in your interpretation. The earth is flat and you can't make me believe otherwise.




Okay, now I get it.

Damn. You really had me going there. I thought you were being serious.




posted on May, 11 2011 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


You seem to be in the wrong forum for getting others to see it your way.
The majority of posts indicate that you are a minority here.
Your truth is not recognized by the spirit as the truth.
The truth is not material.
It is immaterial.
edit on 11-5-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
I guess that I'm just calling this experiment out on being slipshod hack science.


The double slit experiment is has been consistently reproduced for many years.

You should do more research on this topic...



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jezus

Originally posted by NorEaster
I guess that I'm just calling this experiment out on being slipshod hack science.


The double slit experiment is has been consistently reproduced for many years.

You should do more research on this topic...


The process is not isolated enough to allow for a responsible interpretation. Have they tried this within a vacuum chamber to see what happens? Did they use a variety of particles, or with a variety of cluster combinations? What about trying a variety of methods of observing - including multiple cameras or even a variety of zoom distances and other means of documenting the particle activity?

If they haven't even tried to replicate these results using other methods of affecting the primary process (shooting particles through a double slit) in a similar manner (observing and/or not observing the particle activity) then it's not much of a examination of the impact of human observation on particle activity.

They already have the parlor trick worked out, but is it being caused by what they have assumed? Unless they open up the process enough to establish the net cause - regardless of tiny adjustments to the specifics in the way that I just suggested - then I can't assume that anyone's really interested in proving anything with that routine. If I were conducting that project, there would be reams of available experiment iterations that would have already isolated the reason for the anomalous results. The fact that there aren't tons of that sort of data that's as available as the data from one tightly repeated process suite, tells me that other versions (especially ones that shouldn't affect the results) that may exist probably call the entire "retroactivity" meme into question.

Especially since, just as you said, it's been years of trotting it out again and again. I'm not impressed.



posted on May, 11 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by NorEaster
 


You seem to be in the wrong forum for getting others to see it your way.
The majority of posts indicate that you are a minority here.
Your truth is not recognized by the spirit as the truth.
The truth is not material.
It is immaterial.
edit on 11-5-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)


So, this is the flat-earth forum? I had no idea.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


I see you don't get irony either.

This experiment was carried out using bucky balls which are a lot bigger than light and they got the same results.
If you have not heard of bucky balls go to google and type in 'double slit and bucky balls', i found it very interesting.
edit on 12-5-2011 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


I've made my point. I'm all set with this thread. Thanks for the exchange.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join