0
32

[–] Amadameus 0 points 32 points (+32|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Just before we start going down the crazy train here, I'd like to point out:

"Measuring" doesn't need to involve a person. In fact, a better word would be "interact."

There is nothing special about a person looking at the system, you can't put a blindfold on and have the results change.

The scientist's definition of 'measurement' is a sensor determining where a particle is located, not some spooky magic effect of particles knowing if they're being watched.

Remember the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? You can know a particle's position but not its' speed, or vice versa. That's because measuring its' position gives it a random speed, and measuring its' speed only tells you that it's moving, not where it is. MEASURING SOMETHING IS A FORM OF INTERACTING WITH THAT THING.

A good way to describe this experiment is as a game of Plinko.

  • We drop a puck past two sets of pins into three buckets.
  • At the first set of pins, the puck can fall left or right.
  • At the second set of pins, the puck can now go left/center or center/right depending on which way it fell off the first pin.
  • If you measure the puck at both sets of pins, it behaves exactly as a classical object and you get a 25/50/25 spread in the buckets.
  • Now let's block the left path on the top set of pins. A classical object would give you a 0/50/50 spread, right? That's what you get.
  • Now let's ONLY measure the bottom set of pins. Suddenly the object becomes a waveform and you get a 25/50/25 spread.

DESPITE there being a block in place, the object becomes a quantum wavedoodle and the doodlething moves through the block anyway. But it only does this if there is NO INTERACTION. For tiny objects like atoms, just measuring it is an interaction.

The title statement is valid, but it doesn't mean what you think it does.

Atoms "measure" each other zillions of times per second just by bonking into each other.

Reality shall continue as usual - we've just confirmed that reality is really fucking weird. Move along.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
5

[–] Amadameus 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Spirit science depends on clickbait headlines and not reading the article, I've always found the best way to spread science is to talk about it!

0
2

[–] Ben77 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Nice post. Although, apparently you are 'shilling' lol

Stop taking backhanders from the laws of physics immediately! You little scamp!

0
4

[–] Amadameus 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Inertia has been paying me $1 per post under the table. Initially was only for a month of shilling, but they just haven't stopped!

Wave propagation is giving me free WiFi and cell reception for votes, up then down then up then down then up then down...

I also got a free energy machine from Thermodynamics for moderating a subverse in their favor, but that place is just total chaos.

The Strong Nuclear Force wants me to help brigade a group but every time we do they just break into smaller and smaller subverses...

0
1

[–] Mediocrity 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

And once again, my theory that Plinko is an analogy for everything is confirmed. Thank you.

0
0

[–] Erotic_Toe_Sucker 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Remember the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? You can know a particle's position but not its' speed, or vice versa.

Momentum, not speed. At least learn what the Uncertainty Principle is before you comment on it.

9
18

[–] Retron 9 points 18 points (+27|-9) ago 

I think this confirms we live in a simulation. A common trick used in simulation and games programming is procedural generation, where a seed is given but the world is not created until it's needed. So say you spawn in Minecraft, and you can see the immediate surroundings generated based on the seed, the world outside that seed does not exist until you leave the current area and move toward the unknown area, which at then point the game looks at the seed, generates what should be on the other side, and draws it in. In this case, the universe isn't creating the teeny tiny bits until it needs them because we are looking for them, which saves on CPU load.

Also I've had like four hours sleep in three days.

1
16

[–] tame 1 points 16 points (+17|-1) ago 

I gotta admit, every time people start talking about "consciousness" being the thing that collapses the wave function, I think about all of the different forms of culling and lazy evaluation that go on in most games to save CPU power.

I mean think about it - what if the universe literally did adaptive LOD depending on what you were looking at. Walk around at room scale and Newtonian physics is correct, zoom in far enough and it'll simulate the quantum stuff, zoom out to super large scale and it uses some lazy approximation that leaves us scratching our heads. It's not dark matter messing with the way galaxies move, that's just a skybox.

0
6

[–] Retron 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Exactly! You managed to put in to words what my sleep addled brain could not. It's LOD at its most extreme, and I am the blurry texture at the far end of the map.

0
3

[–] WhoToldYouThat 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Yeah get some sleep. If you have to measure anything through something... that thing you're doing the measuring through is your reality.

1
2

[–] hellinacell [S] 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

I think this confirms we live in a simulation.

I think this is crazy, but I'll also admit I've been thinking along exactly the same lines.

1
1

[–] Viropher 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

Came here just to say that.Minecraft is a fantastic example. Upgoat!

4
12

[–] ChadPUA 4 points 12 points (+16|-4) ago 

Shut the fuck up with your gross misinterpretations of quantum mechanics. Us "measuring" shit is the same as every single particle interaction, which nature does a fucktillion times every second.

Reality exists. Quantum mechanics is just the wave/probabilistic behavior of the universe on small scales.

We do not "live in a simulation" just because QM isn't intuitive / different from classical mechanics.

Source: I'm a published physicist.

0
4

[–] epsilona01 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

We just don't know which one exists until we interact with it, imparting causality.

7
-5

4
12

[–] Crashmarik 4 points 12 points (+16|-4) ago 

I dispute this. I often find myself covering my eyes and praying things didn't exist. Supreme Court decisions and Hillary Clinton both come to mind. They never cease to exist.

0
0

[–] RevanProdigalKnight 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Have you tried putting them in a sealed box?

5
-3

[–] revofire 5 points -3 points (+2|-5) ago  (edited ago)

This, these researchers obviously have no grasp on reality because I'm having a hard time wishing my problems away by not measuring them with a measuring tape.

1
3

[–] hellinacell [S] 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

This, these researchers obviously have no grasp on reality because I'm having a hard time wishing my problems away by not measuring them with a measuring tape.

They're talking about quantum reality. The universe we experience directly doesn't follow quantum law. At least, not in any way any scientist has ever been able to figure out.

1
9

[–] EngelbertHumperdinck 1 points 9 points (+10|-1) ago 

I wanna do a double slot experiment but my wife's not down with it.

0
13

[–] Amadameus 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

You'll have better results if you add an observer. Tell her science said so.

2
4

[–] tame 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago 

I don't like the way they use the world "measurement". Is it "measured" when the atom hits whatever detector they're using, after the laser gratings (ie. when they say "measured" do they just mean "it interacts with something")? Or is it "measured" when the detector generates an electrical pulse? Or when the researcher sees the pulse on their equipment? Or when I get to that point in the article while I'm reading it?

The only way that it really makes sense is that the wave function never actually collapses, it just looks like it does to us for some reason.

1
7

[–] Amadameus 1 points 7 points (+8|-1) ago  (edited ago)

You hit the nail on the head. "Measuring" something is, by definition, "interacting" with that thing.

The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle states that even measuring something will change its speed/position randomly.

Pretty much what they did was removed an interaction and allowed the quantum wavedoodle to move past it like it didn't exist. Add the interaction again, and you get a completely different set of results.

This is a duplication of an existing double-slit experiment, they just did it with atoms instead of electrons. That's important because atoms are much more massive and so their wavedoodle thingies are much smaller and harder to measure. We confirmed that even though it's hard to measure, the wavedoodle is still there.

0
0

[–] YodaDankfish 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Ok, what's a wavedoodle..? What are you referencing?

2
0

[–] hellinacell [S] 2 points 0 points (+2|-2) ago 

I don't like the way they use the world "measurement". Is it "measured" when the atom hits whatever detector they're using, after the laser gratings (ie. when they say "measured" do they just mean "it interacts with something")

I think it means it only exists once something tries to find it.

I know there are people working on a different interpretation currently though, and are trying to find a (mathematical) way that the collapse of the wave function could be a random process. I don't buy into it though. There's already too much established data suggesting a strange connection between observer and observed.

0
0

[–] k_digi 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

yes it's about location.

0
0

[–] Black_Kinght 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I think it means it only exists once something tries to find it.

Yes, that's the basis of it. Until someone forces quantum particles to appear somewhere, they are technically everywhere at once. They become a mathematical probability until you look for them. Very much like some kind of simulation, as others have said.

1
1

[–] Genocide 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

A very interesting result, no doubt but it hardly confirms that we live in a simulation. It also doesn't disprove that hypothesis, either.

All that it really confirms to me is that there is a lot of exciting scientific information to learn about the universe around us that we don't yet understand. Think about it - the best hypothesis we have for why quantum particles behave the way they do is based on the closest thing that we can relate it to - computer simulations; which, of course makes perfect sense from the standpoint that computer simulations are some of the most technologically advanced things that we, as humans, have accomplished.

I think of it like the monkey seeing the obelisk and comparing it to the rock he's holding.

0
1

[–] Rekutan 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Yes our reality acts more like a computed simulation than an actual physical reality. The results from the classic Double Slit Experiment only makes sense on the assumption that this is a big virtual reality. Check out Thomas Campbell (former NASA physicist) on YouTube he does a good job explaining it, and how this relates to consciousness (us).

The soon the be released game No Man's Sky is built on these same principals, where nothing is predetermined and only rendered when the player goes there and looks, thereby creating endless (quintillions?) variations of the different planets. Apparently called procedural programming.

load more comments ▼ (8 remaining)