The great thing about quantum is you don't understand how it works, but the math adds up.

The great thing about quantum is you don't understand how it works, but the math adds up.

The terror of quantum is that the math works out, but nobody can figure out how.

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

A Conspiracy Theorist Is Talking Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I understand how it works

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Too bad you can't explain it, though, am I right?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        If you can construct me a language capable of representing it then I can

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          It's called mathematics, you false peawiener.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Quantization does not work at those levels, it is completely useless, second, mathematics does not explain how things work, it is a tool used to quantize states, so you could then do arithmetic on them, the only way to answer the hows and whys is to directly observe them

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >mathematics does not explain how things work

            You're an idiot.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            describing the effects =/= describing how it works

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Distinction without difference. You're an idiot.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            So you can mathematically describe what it feels like to breathe air? Cool, I'll wait for your equations.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Sure we can start with volume. My lungs have a certain volume of air that it can intake. Too little and the breath is short. Too much and it overinflates the chest, causing discomfort the values of these volumes are known and are all mathematical. The actual experience of breathing can be understood in brainwaves that are calculated mathematically. There's not a single element of the animal behavior of breathing that cannot be represented by numbers.

            Not so with quantum Mechanics. at some point the theory just can't explain the results anymore. The most apparent example of this are probability amplitudes. The math works out but it cannot be described as to how.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Sure we can start with volume. My lungs have a certain volume of air that it can intake. Too little and the breath is short. Too much and it overinflates the chest, causing discomfort the values of these volumes are known and are all mathematical. The actual experience of breathing can be understood in brainwaves that are calculated mathematically. There's not a single element of the animal behavior of breathing that cannot be represented by numbers
            Literally none of this mathematically describes what it feels like, not only that you didn't provide a single number or equation, not only that you are describing effects, not how these effects come to occur, try again

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            That has nothing to do with your previous arguments, you're being fallacious as hell, and there may even be elements of quantum mechanics in consciousness. This will make it impossible to describe.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >That has nothing to do with your previous arguments,
            Yes it does, I asked you to quantize experience and you failed to do so
            >This will make it impossible to describe.
            It is impossible to describe, that's my whole point, mathematics can only be used to quantize very specific properties, it does not ask how things work, it asks "what happens when". What happens when when you put X and Y together? You get Z. It does not ask how X and Y make Z or why X andY make Z, otherwise you wouldn't need any of the other sciences, you wouldn't need language if you could just express everything as quantities, but you can't, because that's not how reality works, the problem with quantum level stuff is that you can observe Z, maybe even assign some values to it, but it is impossible for you to quantize what X or Y are, the model falls apart because there is nothing to quantize, nothing to numerically or linguistically describe, the only way to attain the knowledge is through direct experience.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            We've strayed far from the original point. You claim to understand quantum mechanics. Talkin' out your ass. The only means to communicate how things happen in detail is mathematics, but even if it were not you don't have any method to communicate the idea. Now you're attempting what I can only guess is mind over matter idiocy to try to separate mathematics from science.

            It boggles the mind. Still, you are talking out your ass because even if I did believe that you understand quantum mechanics, which I don't, you admit that you have no means to communicate your knowledge to anyone else. Thus whether you're telling the truth or lying everything is going on in your head, and it doesn't look likely to be going anywhere. So that should wrap this up.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >The only means to communicate how things happen in detail is mathematics
            No? What do you think interaction is? Do you think that numbers are flying into your eyes when you look at a waterfall? All the information of existence is already there, every particle, every state, every property, position, mechanism, etc, only thing you have to do is open your eyes and look, it's all right in front of you.
            even if I did believe that you understand quantum mechanics, which I don't
            I never asked you to, I just say how it is
            >Thus whether you're telling the truth or lying everything is going on in your head
            Everything you believe is just in your head, there is no way for you to prove anything is true or real, all you can do is trust that the knowledge you have been given is true. Therein lies the answer, I've seen it all, I've experienced it firsthand, the knowledge of everything shot through me like film on a reel, I don't have to prove that it is true because I know it is true, whether or not you choose to believe it is completely irrelevant, it doesn't change anything.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >because even if I did believe that you understand quantum mechanics, which I don't, you admit that you have no means to communicate your knowledge to anyone else.
            I think that's how our species is supposed to function.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >because even if I did believe that you understand quantum mechanics, which I don't, you admit that you have no means to communicate your knowledge to anyone else.
            I think that's how our species is supposed to function.

            People in every normal culture communicate facts, sirect information, and usually leave the conclusions on the listener. Only judaized cultures primarily communicate only the conclusions, with no need to substantiate them.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          ENGLISH MOTHERFRICKER!

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >The great thing about quantum is you don't understand how it works, but the math adds up.
    why is that great? wouldn't it be better if you understood it AND the math added up?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's great because the universe has assured you a measure of blissful ignorance.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        ok then why is that terrifying

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Because with all ignorance we can't even imagine the ramifications that may come our way.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            sounds like ignorance isn't that blissful for you

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yep.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            my main point: OP is saying something he thinks is profound but is actually quite meaningless

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You can boil hard science down to building models that make predictions. If the predictions are proven correct you can say the model correct and true. But why does that model describe reality? You're always going to be stuck with an unanswered "why" in science. If you want "why" you need philosophy or religion.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    "The terror of quantum" is that it's complete nonsense, but its proponents started a war over it when they got kicked out of the academia for it.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The problem with academia is that they are still trying to make some type of classical sense of it.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        You can't make sense of it, because it's nonsense. The experiments are not actually done as presented, and no actual predictions are made, only what happens with what probability. Remember last year, when they claimed to ibseve photons going back in time? When you read the actual paper, they created an amplitude modulated light beam, and measured its sideband.

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    synchronization of chaos

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >mfw even though symmetry predicts them, there are no right-chiral neutrinos
    Uhm, does nature actually have a left-wing bias?

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Big deal, shits is here or there or maybe at both places at once, nothing strange about fuzzy, everything is fuzzy including humans but we convinced ourselves for a moment that its all clear and we can nail it.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >omg, my brain, it feels so big!!!
    >its full of so much schizo israelite jargon and fancy soiyence polysyllables
    >oh no
    >i can't hold it in any longer
    >i'm…
    >i'm gonna…
    >i'm gonna QUANTUUUUUUUUMMMMMM!!!!!!

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Paradoxical Logic.
    That is Exactly How Quantum Mechanics is Solved.
    Would anyone like to pose me, DR. PHILONIUS EGGMAN, your questions… ABOUT THE QUANTUM REALM?

    I will answer, and bash your Double Black person Brains in, with the Truth.

    ?si=wk6e6dtaB0NW2jpz

    -Eggman

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Anyway, would anyone like to scientifically critique my theoretical experiment on a gold fusion reactor?

    First off, a marble-sized sphere of pure gold.
    Next, highly refractive aluminum, that is magnetized by copper wire, which is frayed with an electrified kitchen knife.
    The aluminum is wrapped around the gold sphere, and the copper wire is could around the aluminum.
    After that, place the charge in a ceramic bowl, that is filled half an inch of general motor oil, which is also lined with a millimeter of battery acid.
    Double Black person Rig your own janky-ass ignition device, and plop that shit in a microwave.
    Turn it on, and elucidate me with the results.

    -Professor Eggman

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    simple question for any 'quantum physicists'
    i have a laser pointer and a double-slit diffraction. i can make the wavy pattern show up, in fact, it always shows up. but i can never get the two lines. what do i need to do to get the two lines?
    funny enough, i cant find a single photo or video of anyone getting the two lines in real life, just a bunch of shitty animations. is this whole meme just a complete fraud?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      If you detect the electron after it has passed the slit, then you will interfere collapse the interference pattern. That means the waveform pattern will not appear. Set up a detector after one of the slits and the electron must move from that point onward. So if you detect the electron in such a way that you know that the electron must have passed through one slit or the other, then you know that it cannot make an interference pattern. It would have had to have some other course of events that did not "Collapse the wave form."

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        the only thing im detecting here is more bullshit
        there is no 'wave function'. just wavelet path integrals that no one can solve

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Set up a detector after one of the slits
        How? What kind of detector does this?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          You just pass light behind the slit and it will occasionally scatter with the electron. It can literally be seen doing this.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >So if you detect the electron in such a way that you know that the electron must have passed through one slit or the other, then you know that it cannot make an interference pattern
        lol, just cover one of the slits and you instantly know which slit it goes through, alternatively just use one slit, guess what happens, it produces the exact same pattern, just less intense

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    um yeah obviously

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *