Total Posts:28|Showing Posts:1-28
Jump to topic:

Anyone here understand quantum mechanics?

MysticEgg
Posts: 524
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 11:49:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Truly? I might sound cynical, but it's just something I've noticed.

Many people (sometimes correctly, sometimes not) say things like:
1) Evolution tells us...
2) Climate change tells us...
3) This video I have here on YouTube tells us...

Blah, blah, blah.

Now, I'm sure that the Internet can teach you good things - many things - from card tricks to basics of geology and everything in between. However, I am skeptical of philosophers delving into quantum mechanics. It's far too complex for most to understand and videos/documentaries always cherry-pick.

So, for something as complex as quantum mechanics, before people start using it to argue for idealism, can I see your understanding? Parroting is nice, but not useful. I'm not saying people do this out of spite; I'm not saying I dislike people that do. Quite to the contrary, I think people come to DDO to learn and expand their skills set. But my concern is people are seeing a couple of vids from somewhere as something as complex as quantum mechanics and making themselves look like experts on the subject.

With only a couple of exceptions; they're not.

Don't get me wrong, what they say might be accurate and true, but they've got to appreciate their own ignorance and I'm extremely skeptical of those that don't admit this, honestly.

Take InspiringPhilosophy on YouTube, for example. I've had a couple of conversations with him and he's a nice guy. However, he admits for his primary goal being about Christian apologetics. Hmm. OK, but he's spent many-a-video explaining quantum mechanics. Well, isn't that convenient for us?

I may sound cynical - and maybe I am - for which I apologise. Still, my questions, therefore:

1) Do you study QM?
2) If you do, do you study this professionally?
3) If you don't, do you admit your ignorance OR do you contest that you're not?
4) If you contest that you're not, why?

3b) If you don't study professionally, do you gain your knowledge from the Internet?

(I apologise for my ranting and if I sound rude; I don't mean to be.)

Many thanks,
J
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 12:01:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 11:49:38 AM, MysticEgg wrote:
Truly? I might sound cynical, but it's just something I've noticed.

Many people (sometimes correctly, sometimes not) say things like:
1) Evolution tells us...
2) Climate change tells us...
3) This video I have here on YouTube tells us...

Blah, blah, blah.

Now, I'm sure that the Internet can teach you good things - many things - from card tricks to basics of geology and everything in between. However, I am skeptical of philosophers delving into quantum mechanics. It's far too complex for most to understand and videos/documentaries always cherry-pick.

So, for something as complex as quantum mechanics, before people start using it to argue for idealism, can I see your understanding? Parroting is nice, but not useful. I'm not saying people do this out of spite; I'm not saying I dislike people that do. Quite to the contrary, I think people come to DDO to learn and expand their skills set. But my concern is people are seeing a couple of vids from somewhere as something as complex as quantum mechanics and making themselves look like experts on the subject.

With only a couple of exceptions; they're not.

Don't get me wrong, what they say might be accurate and true, but they've got to appreciate their own ignorance and I'm extremely skeptical of those that don't admit this, honestly.

Take InspiringPhilosophy on YouTube, for example. I've had a couple of conversations with him and he's a nice guy. However, he admits for his primary goal being about Christian apologetics. Hmm. OK, but he's spent many-a-video explaining quantum mechanics. Well, isn't that convenient for us?

I may sound cynical - and maybe I am - for which I apologise. Still, my questions, therefore:

1) Do you study QM?
2) If you do, do you study this professionally?
3) If you don't, do you admit your ignorance OR do you contest that you're not?
4) If you contest that you're not, why?

3b) If you don't study professionally, do you gain your knowledge from the Internet?


(I apologise for my ranting and if I sound rude; I don't mean to be.)

Many thanks,
J

What are your credentials? o.O
MysticEgg
Posts: 524
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 12:06:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 12:01:48 PM, Such wrote:
At 2/16/2014 11:49:38 AM, MysticEgg wrote:
Truly? I might sound cynical, but it's just something I've noticed.

Many people (sometimes correctly, sometimes not) say things like:
1) Evolution tells us...
2) Climate change tells us...
3) This video I have here on YouTube tells us...

Blah, blah, blah.

Now, I'm sure that the Internet can teach you good things - many things - from card tricks to basics of geology and everything in between. However, I am skeptical of philosophers delving into quantum mechanics. It's far too complex for most to understand and videos/documentaries always cherry-pick.

So, for something as complex as quantum mechanics, before people start using it to argue for idealism, can I see your understanding? Parroting is nice, but not useful. I'm not saying people do this out of spite; I'm not saying I dislike people that do. Quite to the contrary, I think people come to DDO to learn and expand their skills set. But my concern is people are seeing a couple of vids from somewhere as something as complex as quantum mechanics and making themselves look like experts on the subject.

With only a couple of exceptions; they're not.

Don't get me wrong, what they say might be accurate and true, but they've got to appreciate their own ignorance and I'm extremely skeptical of those that don't admit this, honestly.

Take InspiringPhilosophy on YouTube, for example. I've had a couple of conversations with him and he's a nice guy. However, he admits for his primary goal being about Christian apologetics. Hmm. OK, but he's spent many-a-video explaining quantum mechanics. Well, isn't that convenient for us?

I may sound cynical - and maybe I am - for which I apologise. Still, my questions, therefore:

1) Do you study QM?
2) If you do, do you study this professionally?
3) If you don't, do you admit your ignorance OR do you contest that you're not?
4) If you contest that you're not, why?

3b) If you don't study professionally, do you gain your knowledge from the Internet?


(I apologise for my ranting and if I sound rude; I don't mean to be.)

Many thanks,
J

What are your credentials? o.O

Oh no, my friend! I claim total ignorance on this. I'm wondering if anyone can honestly claim anything different.
Sswdwm
Posts: 1,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 12:22:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 11:49:38 AM, MysticEgg wrote:
Truly? I might sound cynical, but it's just something I've noticed.

Many people (sometimes correctly, sometimes not) say things like:
1) Evolution tells us...
2) Climate change tells us...
3) This video I have here on YouTube tells us...

Blah, blah, blah.

Now, I'm sure that the Internet can teach you good things - many things - from card tricks to basics of geology and everything in between. However, I am skeptical of philosophers delving into quantum mechanics. It's far too complex for most to understand and videos/documentaries always cherry-pick.

So, for something as complex as quantum mechanics, before people start using it to argue for idealism, can I see your understanding? Parroting is nice, but not useful. I'm not saying people do this out of spite; I'm not saying I dislike people that do. Quite to the contrary, I think people come to DDO to learn and expand their skills set. But my concern is people are seeing a couple of vids from somewhere as something as complex as quantum mechanics and making themselves look like experts on the subject.

With only a couple of exceptions; they're not.

Don't get me wrong, what they say might be accurate and true, but they've got to appreciate their own ignorance and I'm extremely skeptical of those that don't admit this, honestly.

Take InspiringPhilosophy on YouTube, for example. I've had a couple of conversations with him and he's a nice guy. However, he admits for his primary goal being about Christian apologetics. Hmm. OK, but he's spent many-a-video explaining quantum mechanics. Well, isn't that convenient for us?

I may sound cynical - and maybe I am - for which I apologise. Still, my questions, therefore:

1) Do you study QM?
I have, not at a particularly advanced level
2) If you do, do you study this professionally?
F*** no!
3) If you don't, do you admit your ignorance OR do you contest that you're not?
I have studied it, and I still claim ignorance, seriously.
4) If you contest that you're not, why?

3b) If you don't study professionally, do you gain your knowledge from the Internet?
No, I was taught it at graduate level.

(I apologise for my ranting and if I sound rude; I don't mean to be.)

Many thanks,
J
QM I thought could be visualized by imagining everything is standing waves when I first begun on it. But I was wrong, string theory does that, which makes even less sense. QM is something you just have to do the math, make sure your assumptions about the boundary conditions are sound, get your results, and never hope to understand what it means, only that they work.

It's not quite as crazy as I portray, but it makes no intuitive sense, which is the point. It's just a ridiculously good approximation of the truth of reality on the atomic scale. It predicts stuff occurring without a cause, or reterocausally, and that things will violate the laws of logic (they will be 2 states simultaneously for e.g.) unless you break your back to rework your understanding of the laws of logic/interpretation of QM (Schroedinger's cat is a famous example)
Resolved: the Zombie Apocalypse Will Happen
http://www.debate.org...

The most basic living cell was Intelligently Designed:
http://www.debate.org...

God most likely exists:
http://www.debate.org...
MysticEgg
Posts: 524
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 12:23:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 12:22:04 PM, Sswdwm wrote:
At 2/16/2014 11:49:38 AM, MysticEgg wrote:
Truly? I might sound cynical, but it's just something I've noticed.

Many people (sometimes correctly, sometimes not) say things like:
1) Evolution tells us...
2) Climate change tells us...
3) This video I have here on YouTube tells us...

Blah, blah, blah.

Now, I'm sure that the Internet can teach you good things - many things - from card tricks to basics of geology and everything in between. However, I am skeptical of philosophers delving into quantum mechanics. It's far too complex for most to understand and videos/documentaries always cherry-pick.

So, for something as complex as quantum mechanics, before people start using it to argue for idealism, can I see your understanding? Parroting is nice, but not useful. I'm not saying people do this out of spite; I'm not saying I dislike people that do. Quite to the contrary, I think people come to DDO to learn and expand their skills set. But my concern is people are seeing a couple of vids from somewhere as something as complex as quantum mechanics and making themselves look like experts on the subject.

With only a couple of exceptions; they're not.

Don't get me wrong, what they say might be accurate and true, but they've got to appreciate their own ignorance and I'm extremely skeptical of those that don't admit this, honestly.

Take InspiringPhilosophy on YouTube, for example. I've had a couple of conversations with him and he's a nice guy. However, he admits for his primary goal being about Christian apologetics. Hmm. OK, but he's spent many-a-video explaining quantum mechanics. Well, isn't that convenient for us?

I may sound cynical - and maybe I am - for which I apologise. Still, my questions, therefore:

1) Do you study QM?
I have, not at a particularly advanced level
2) If you do, do you study this professionally?
F*** no!
3) If you don't, do you admit your ignorance OR do you contest that you're not?
I have studied it, and I still claim ignorance, seriously.
4) If you contest that you're not, why?

3b) If you don't study professionally, do you gain your knowledge from the Internet?
No, I was taught it at graduate level.

(I apologise for my ranting and if I sound rude; I don't mean to be.)

Many thanks,
J
QM I thought could be visualized by imagining everything is standing waves when I first begun on it. But I was wrong, string theory does that, which makes even less sense. QM is something you just have to do the math, make sure your assumptions about the boundary conditions are sound, get your results, and never hope to understand what it means, only that they work.

It's not quite as crazy as I portray, but it makes no intuitive sense, which is the point. It's just a ridiculously good approximation of the truth of reality on the atomic scale. It predicts stuff occurring without a cause, or reterocausally, and that things will violate the laws of logic (they will be 2 states simultaneously for e.g.) unless you break your back to rework your understanding of the laws of logic/interpretation of QM (Schroedinger's cat is a famous example)

That's a surprisingly good way of putting it.
Sswdwm
Posts: 1,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 12:39:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
That's a surprisingly good way of putting it.

What makes it more annoying is that for systems more complicated than a hydrogen atom, it's impossible to make a perfectly precise prediction. You need to cut corners and make approximations in the math in order to just get an answer you can test.

For every level of additional precision you need to add another power of computational resources to compute. And therefore while it's easy to get precise answers for single electrons, and atoms, for molecules (which is my work), you end up having to sacrifice precision very quickly and the results quickly become incomputable or meaningless.

So yeah, I hate it, but it works =\
Resolved: the Zombie Apocalypse Will Happen
http://www.debate.org...

The most basic living cell was Intelligently Designed:
http://www.debate.org...

God most likely exists:
http://www.debate.org...
Sswdwm
Posts: 1,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 1:19:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 1:15:15 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I am a quantum mechanical engineer.

Cool! In what sort of application?
Resolved: the Zombie Apocalypse Will Happen
http://www.debate.org...

The most basic living cell was Intelligently Designed:
http://www.debate.org...

God most likely exists:
http://www.debate.org...
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 1:20:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 1:19:48 PM, Sswdwm wrote:
At 2/16/2014 1:15:15 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I am a quantum mechanical engineer.

Cool! In what sort of application?

Time travel, duh.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 1:22:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm also working on a cage in which we can trap God. Kinda like one of those things for mice where you put the cheese in them, then the mouse goes in and gets locked in. He wont be hurt.
Sswdwm
Posts: 1,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 1:23:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 1:20:41 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 2/16/2014 1:19:48 PM, Sswdwm wrote:
At 2/16/2014 1:15:15 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I am a quantum mechanical engineer.

Cool! In what sort of application?

Time travel, duh.

Lol I thought you were joking but it's actually a real thing:
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Too bad we can't send information this way
Resolved: the Zombie Apocalypse Will Happen
http://www.debate.org...

The most basic living cell was Intelligently Designed:
http://www.debate.org...

God most likely exists:
http://www.debate.org...
MysticEgg
Posts: 524
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 1:50:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 1:15:15 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I am a quantum mechanical engineer.

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...

Could you verify that? I'm in a picky mood.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 2:04:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 1:50:51 PM, MysticEgg wrote:
At 2/16/2014 1:15:15 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I am a quantum mechanical engineer.

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...

Could you verify that? I'm in a picky mood.

Quantum entanglement, blah, blah, blah. Probability waves. People thinking observation brings things into being, out of their probability waves. Idealism. The universe doesn't know. Spin, otherwise it seems to half make sense (besides the whole "what the f*ck is going on here anyway" bit). Time travel. Profit.
MysticEgg
Posts: 524
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 2:05:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 2:04:03 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 2/16/2014 1:50:51 PM, MysticEgg wrote:
At 2/16/2014 1:15:15 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I am a quantum mechanical engineer.

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...

Could you verify that? I'm in a picky mood.

Quantum entanglement, blah, blah, blah. Probability waves. People thinking observation brings things into being, out of their probability waves. Idealism. The universe doesn't know. Spin, otherwise it seems to half make sense (besides the whole "what the f*ck is going on here anyway" bit). Time travel. Profit.

Did you just respond with jargon? +1

D
MysticEgg
Posts: 524
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 2:05:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 2:05:00 PM, MysticEgg wrote:
At 2/16/2014 2:04:03 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 2/16/2014 1:50:51 PM, MysticEgg wrote:
At 2/16/2014 1:15:15 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I am a quantum mechanical engineer.

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com...

Could you verify that? I'm in a picky mood.

Quantum entanglement, blah, blah, blah. Probability waves. People thinking observation brings things into being, out of their probability waves. Idealism. The universe doesn't know. Spin, otherwise it seems to half make sense (besides the whole "what the f*ck is going on here anyway" bit). Time travel. Profit.


Did you just respond with jargon? +1

D

I think I've just figured it out!
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 2:09:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm currently working on an experiment in quantum mechanics where I kill everything that could possibly observe anything to see what happens. The results should be interesting, I think.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 2:18:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Seriously though, the whole spin thing sounds completely retarded to me. Something like a base energy level and the application of additional energy on top of that to make "reality" out of "waves" seems vastly more sensible. Is this really what physicists are thinking; that observation makes the world?
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 7:26:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 2:19:05 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I watched a video and it made sense for like 15 minutes, then went full retard lol.

Wait a minute, when do you ever go full retard?
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,134
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 7:43:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 11:49:38 AM, MysticEgg wrote:
Truly? I might sound cynical, but it's just something I've noticed.

Many people (sometimes correctly, sometimes not) say things like:
1) Evolution tells us...
2) Climate change tells us...
3) This video I have here on YouTube tells us...

Blah, blah, blah.

Now, I'm sure that the Internet can teach you good things - many things - from card tricks to basics of geology and everything in between. However, I am skeptical of philosophers delving into quantum mechanics. It's far too complex for most to understand and videos/documentaries always cherry-pick.

So, for something as complex as quantum mechanics, before people start using it to argue for idealism, can I see your understanding? Parroting is nice, but not useful. I'm not saying people do this out of spite; I'm not saying I dislike people that do. Quite to the contrary, I think people come to DDO to learn and expand their skills set. But my concern is people are seeing a couple of vids from somewhere as something as complex as quantum mechanics and making themselves look like experts on the subject.

With only a couple of exceptions; they're not.

Don't get me wrong, what they say might be accurate and true, but they've got to appreciate their own ignorance and I'm extremely skeptical of those that don't admit this, honestly.

Take InspiringPhilosophy on YouTube, for example. I've had a couple of conversations with him and he's a nice guy. However, he admits for his primary goal being about Christian apologetics. Hmm. OK, but he's spent many-a-video explaining quantum mechanics. Well, isn't that convenient for us?

I may sound cynical - and maybe I am - for which I apologise. Still, my questions, therefore:

1) Do you study QM?
2) If you do, do you study this professionally?
3) If you don't, do you admit your ignorance OR do you contest that you're not?
4) If you contest that you're not, why?

3b) If you don't study professionally, do you gain your knowledge from the Internet?


(I apologise for my ranting and if I sound rude; I don't mean to be.)

Many thanks,
J

ABSOLUTELY! ..not
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 9:45:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
QM.........Conclusive proof that reality doesn't give a rats a@@ about how you think the world should operate nor cares what you think is or isn't possible.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
DudeStop
Posts: 1,278
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/16/2014 10:11:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/16/2014 11:49:38 AM, MysticEgg wrote:
Truly? I might sound cynical, but it's just something I've noticed.

Many people (sometimes correctly, sometimes not) say things like:
1) Evolution tells us...
2) Climate change tells us...
3) This video I have here on YouTube tells us...

Blah, blah, blah.

Now, I'm sure that the Internet can teach you good things - many things - from card tricks to basics of geology and everything in between. However, I am skeptical of philosophers delving into quantum mechanics. It's far too complex for most to understand and videos/documentaries always cherry-pick.

So, for something as complex as quantum mechanics, before people start using it to argue for idealism, can I see your understanding? Parroting is nice, but not useful. I'm not saying people do this out of spite; I'm not saying I dislike people that do. Quite to the contrary, I think people come to DDO to learn and expand their skills set. But my concern is people are seeing a couple of vids from somewhere as something as complex as quantum mechanics and making themselves look like experts on the subject.

With only a couple of exceptions; they're not.

Don't get me wrong, what they say might be accurate and true, but they've got to appreciate their own ignorance and I'm extremely skeptical of those that don't admit this, honestly.

Take InspiringPhilosophy on YouTube, for example. I've had a couple of conversations with him and he's a nice guy. However, he admits for his primary goal being about Christian apologetics. Hmm. OK, but he's spent many-a-video explaining quantum mechanics. Well, isn't that convenient for us?

I may sound cynical - and maybe I am - for which I apologise. Still, my questions, therefore:

1) Do you study QM?
2) If you do, do you study this professionally?
3) If you don't, do you admit your ignorance OR do you contest that you're not?
4) If you contest that you're not, why?

3b) If you don't study professionally, do you gain your knowledge from the Internet?


(I apologise for my ranting and if I sound rude; I don't mean to be.)

Many thanks,
J

I want to study it more now. I can tell you quantum mechanics theories, but I don't understand it most of the time.

Like retro causality...
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 1:54:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 1:45:00 AM, MysticEgg wrote:
Most are being honest; I'm glad. Does anyone know Sargon, RT etc...?

lol
MysticEgg
Posts: 524
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 2:02:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 2/17/2014 1:54:18 AM, AnDoctuir wrote:
At 2/17/2014 1:45:00 AM, MysticEgg wrote:
Most are being honest; I'm glad. Does anyone know Sargon, RT etc...?

lol

?
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2014 6:25:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
99% of physics: "I can tell you with absolute certainty that A is B"

Quantum physics: "I am pretty sure that A is B, but it is entirely possible that A isn't B and is actually C, and it is possible as well that A is actually both B and C at the same time (and/or the same place)."

Seriously, I have yet to learn of a single thing in quantum physics that is as predictable as 2+2=4. Even trying to do that very equation with quantum particles won't always yield 4. That's how quantum computers work (in an overly-generalized sense).
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown