Gottem

Comments

• DragonAce@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Image

  source
• Cethin@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I have to comment this every time people post it, because they don’t actually understand it. They only understand the mystical view of quantum mechanics, which isn’t real.

  Observation, in the case of this experiment, has nothing to do with humans looking at it. It has to do with the particle/wave interacting with something, which causes the waveform to collapse into a single particle. The reason this happens is because any interaction requires the information to be known, so it can’t be wave-like anymore. It has nothing to do with consciousness or anything like that. It only has to do with an interaction that requires information to be discrete.

  source

  • Ziglin@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    People keep explaining like it’s a huge surprise.

    I think I am technically a physicist so this could be a case of xkcd 2501 but it seems obvious enough.

    Surely nobody actually believes that is how it works. I think I understood it that way and was mind blown for like 5min before being sceptical and asking for clarification and still being mind blown by how it was actually meant. I was a child when that happened.

    All the adults I’ve spoken to about it learned about it school and understood straight away. That is of course completely biased though.

    source

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      There are entire new age movements based on the misunderstanding of quantum mechanics.

      Off the top of my head: What the Bleep do we Know? And The Secret are two that come to mind.

      source
    • davetortoise@reddthat.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It’s probably (hopefully) not a majority, but a disturbing number of people really do believe it works like that. I’ve once had someone, whose intelligence I used to respect, calmly explain to me that telekinesis is possible because “QM proves that the mind can influence matter”.

      source
    • Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I wouldn’t be so sure. There’s a disturbingly high amount of people (including adults) out there who take Schrödinger’s cat literally.

      source
    • FundMECFS@piefed.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      A lot of people do believe it unfortunately.

      source
    • Danquebec@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I may not have been paying attention in school. Once adult, I read about it but wondered what it means “when observed”. Couldn’t find anywherw that explained it clearly. Figured it was surely related to a physical process necessary to get signals, but I couldn’t know what exactly. Now, I know.

      source
  • Smaile@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Maybe you shouldn’t have been refering to it as OBSERVATION then poindexters, then you wouldn’t confuseinh the laymen and getting annoyed.

    source

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I totally agree. “Observe” was a bad choice of words, but it stuck. It should have been “interacted with”, or “measured”, or something like that.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      The point is that you can’t observe anything without some kind of interaction. Even just looking at something requires bouncing light off of it.

      We’re used to our observations seeming passive because light is often hitting the things anyways, but the double slit experiment forces the point because the subjects of the experiment are so small that even just using ways of observing them affects the outcome of the experiment.

      source
    • Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Sincerely yes, we can just stop saying observation and start saying interaction or something else less confusing

      source
  • mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Well but this meme is accurate because it said monitoring the situation. So when you start monitoring which slit the particle goes through, you changed the outcome.

    source

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It is. I just always feel the need to comment this on these posts because the mystical understanding annoys me, and is surprisingly common. This meme doesn’t do that exactly, and it even has an accurate experiment setup.

      source
  • Smoogs@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Is the thing you’re indicating that it’s interacting with was the slits ?

    Or are you referring to something else?

    Can you explain further?

    source

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      No, not the slits. How the “observation” is done is you measure what goes through the slit with a detector just on the other side. The detector has to interact with the photons, so it collapses the waveform, making it behave like a particle, only passing through one slit. If you remove the detector then it has wave-like behavior, as the waveform only collapses once it hits the surface on the far end.

      The waveform collapses any time it interacts with something. The experiment just takes advantage of this by making it collapse in a way that creates a different result than if we don’t collapse it until later, where the waves can interact.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • vivalapivo@lemmy.today ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Went here to write this

    source
  • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    This is /c/science_memes, not /c/exactly_correct_science_memes

    source

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I’m aware. I just hate the mystical way things like this are treated, and there’s a lot of uninformed people. I don’t care that the meme is wrong. I care that people believe it the experiment says something other than what it says, which is already really cool.

      source
• athatet@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Image

  source
• crunchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Image

  source
• supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  If only helicopter parents understood the basics of the double slit experiment!

  source

  • lugal@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I’m afraid a significant number of them does but prefer the second one. It’s easier to predict and less chaotic

    source
• Hazmatastic@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Not just the double-slit for quantum mechanics, but it applies to people too. In a workplace, the second you start evaluating performance based on a metric, it ceases to be a useful metric. Why? Because people will shit the bed willingly in every other aspect of their job if it makes the number their boss looks at better. At that point, “highest performers” are really just the best bullshitters who can fake short-term benefits in lieu of long-term solutions, and all of them just make things worse overall.

  source

  • bss03@infosec.pub ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It’s Goodhart’s Law.

    source
• ExtremeUnicorn@feddit.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  What’s that weird site where you have to first read the quote below the reply on top?

  source

  • DragonOracleIX@lemmy.ml ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Xitter

    source
• Etterra@discuss.online ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Yeah but it only works at the subatomic level.

  source

  • alsimoneau@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Actually, they managed to see the effect with a 114 atoms molecules

    source

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      There are no particles, there are only waves

      Macrodoses LSD

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Not necessarily. There was a dude who was studying some plant and was measuring their leaves, and discovered that touching them to measure them stunted their growth. It confused him a lot at first.

    I think the plant was mimosa pudica, but I will double check the story when I have had some sleep. I just wanted to add this briefly because it’s a very funny story. The dude was super confused when it happened, because I think that science didn’t realise the extent to which plants could detect and respond to touch at that time

    source

    • flora_explora@beehaw.org ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      This has absolutely nothing to do with the meme apart from similar wording. The underlying mechanisms are completely different though

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Kolanaki@pawb.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    “A watched pot never boils.” 😤

    source
  • bss03@infosec.pub ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Nope, the Aussies quantum entangled whole atoms, and were able to do a Bell test on objects with rest mass. It’s news: www.youtube.com/watch?v=pp9n5QwVgu4

    source