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.
“I am sorry that I ever had anything to do with quantum theory,” Erwin Schrödinger reportedly complained to a colleague. The Austrian physicist was not lamenting the fate of his now famous cat, which he figuratively placed in a box with a vial of poison in 1935. Rather he was commenting on the strange implications of quantum mechanics, the science behind electrons, atoms, photons and other things submicroscopic. With his feline, Schrödinger attempted to illustrate the problem: according to quantum mechanics, particles jump from point to point, occupy several places at once and seem to communicate faster than the speed of light. So why don’t cats—or baseballs or planets or people, for that matter—do the same things? After all, they are made of atoms. Instead they obey the predictable, classical laws quantified by Isaac Newton. When does the quantum world give way to the physics of everyday life? “That’s one of the $64,000 questions,” chuckles David Pritchard of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Originally posted by AQuestion
Originally posted by ubeenhad
Originally posted by AQuestion
Yup. What is it that collapses the wave function?
Measurement problem.
Originally posted by AQuestion
Sure why not, a science that does not work. Sure, all the experiments we have done at a quantum level are wrong. I am not even discussing their multi-universe answer. I think what you are saying is that nothing we measure at a quantum or subatomic level is accurate, there are problems with that. If it meets all the requirements for being a full fledged theory, then, are you rejecting scientific method or the answers? If you reject the scientific method then you are no different from anyone else that believe in a myth that does not have to be supported by evidence.
Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by ubeenhad
Dear ubeenhad,
You stated that there was a measurement error, I am trying to understand if you agree or disagree with what has been witnessed at the quantum level.
Originally posted by AQuestion
When we witness quantum entanglement or some of the other counter-intuitive things that occur on the subatomic level, we need to have an answer for why.
Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by ubeenhad
Dear ubeenhad,
Why includes cause and effect, it is the question of how things occur and sometimes there is purpose and intent. If you wish me to word my question differently I can. What is it that causes the outcome of the double slit experiment to change just because it is being observed?
Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by ubeenhad
Dear ubeenhad,
Why includes cause and effect, it is the question of how things occur and sometimes there is purpose and intent. If you wish me to word my question differently I can. What is it that causes the outcome of the double slit experiment to change just because it is being observed?
Originally posted by ImaFungi
Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by ubeenhad
Dear ubeenhad,
Why includes cause and effect, it is the question of how things occur and sometimes there is purpose and intent. If you wish me to word my question differently I can. What is it that causes the outcome of the double slit experiment to change just because it is being observed?
according to my minimal understanding.,,.,.
the instruments used to image/sense/detect such small scale quanta as photons,,,, interact with the photons,, because of their process of detection,,, thus changing the outcome of the experiment when trying to observe...thus heralded "the measurement problem"edit on 20-10-2012 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by ImaFungi
Dear ImaGungi,
In other words you don't believe it is possible to measure accurately at the sub atomic level. Wow, they sure wasted billions and billions of dollars to build CERN and the Large Hadron Collider to measure things on a sub atomic level. I must therefore assume that both you and ubeenhad believe spending all that money was a waste of time and that all of the people involved don't understand science. I could be wrong of course, there are many things I do not know; but, I am going to think very poorly of the scientific community if they keep building these machines when they cannot possibly work.
Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by ImaFungi
Dear ImaFungi,
LOL. You managed to not answer anything I asked you. Why did we spend billions to create machines that cannot do their job? Are you smarter than all of those physicists because I am not, are they all just thieves?