Comments

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

brain_in_a_box, to asklemmy in What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?

You’re absolutely right that the mechanism that’s causing the wave function to collapse is the presence of whatever piece of equipment the particle is hitting.

It’s by no means clear that this is true; it depends on where you fall on interpretational questions. Hell, probably the leading approaches suggest that the wave function doesn’t collapse at all, it just appears to when our brains become entangled with the experiment.

brain_in_a_box, (edited ) to memes in It's a simple world view

that wouldn’t be a free market

Yes it would, the banks are free to buy the influence of legislators.

The idea of a free market means that working hard makes you go farther.

No, that’s just a vague platitude, you might as well say that a free market is when happiness and icecream.

What we have is an oligarchy dicatorship

A dictatorship of capital, if you will.

brain_in_a_box, to asklemmy in What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?

That’s literally what dark energy and dark matter are though, place holder names for phenomena we don’t fully understand yet. I’m not sure how you weren’t aware of that.

brain_in_a_box, to asklemmy in What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?

Have you looked at anything to form this wild speculation then?

brain_in_a_box, to memes in The Nordic Model

The thing is that the nordic model still gives the lions share of the wealth to the 1 percent, they just use the proceeds from exploiting the third world to supplement the wealth of the domestic working class.

brain_in_a_box, to asklemmy in What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?

Well scientists have definitely detected it, and said as much

brain_in_a_box, to asklemmy in What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?

What would count as detection to you?

brain_in_a_box, to asklemmy in What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?

Concave brain_in_a_box and naevaTheGOAT? Really? That’s the level you decided to go with while trying to argue that your prompt led to meaningful discussion and not lowest common denominator anti intellectualism.

Notice that they didn’t bother to reply to neava either. More to the point, it’s pretty unreasonable to have to craft long explanations to people basically saying that their ignorance is better than the entire scientific establishments knowledge. Especially when it will likely either get rejected or ignored. Just look how many times people have tried to explain dark matter in this thread.

brain_in_a_box, to asklemmy in What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?

Other way around, we propose them becuse we do detect them.

brain_in_a_box, to asklemmy in What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?

It’s a great demonstration of why people are saying this prompt is indulging anti-science cranks. This person has not done any research and doesn’t understand the concept of entanglement, but they’re declaring that one of the most vigorously tested and fundamental ideas in modern science is wrong.

brain_in_a_box, to asklemmy in What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?

“I don’t understand it, so almost a century of experiments must all be wrong.”

brain_in_a_box, to asklemmy in What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?

It is very much still researched, in fact it’s still the dominant framework in quantum gravity

brain_in_a_box, to asklemmy in What is Something Scientific that you just don't believe in at all?

Kind of, but technically no. The idea is, when doing the double slit experiment, that you start with two essentially separate wave-functions; the wave function of the particle, which is in a super position of going through slit A and slit B, and the wave function of the experimenter/surrounding world, which is in a singular defined state.

However, by doing a measurement, the experimenter entangles their wave function with the wave function of the particle, forming one wave function for the whole system, which evolves into a super position of ‘particle goes through slit A and the observer measures the particle going through slit A’ and ‘particle goes through slit B and the observer measures the particle going through slit B’.

Importantly, the super position doesn’t contain a portion for ‘the observer measures both outcomes at the same time’, so there’s no way for us to see all superposition’s at once.

The question of why we only experience measuring one outcome is exactly the same as the question of why an identical twin only experiences one life, and not both, essentially.

brain_in_a_box, to memes in Remember, if Fascism wins it is YOUR FAULT.

Not been watching any news recently?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #