Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Quantum mechanics

Rubikx
Posts: 226
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2015 6:00:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
So i'm currently in physics 30 and we're learning about quantum mechanics primarily lights wave-partical duality. From what i know we can't actually observe/measure the path of light in the double-slit experiment because that would change the movement of the light itself. The analogy used was if you have a basket ball and the only way to measure how far away it is is by throwing another ball at it and measuring the time for it to come back, but that ball caused the basketball to move thus making the information wrong. But couldn't you just throw another ball at it in the exact opposite way making so the forces on each side are equal and so the basketballs path doesn't change. Would this work with quantum mechanics?
Philostotle
Posts: 15
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2015 8:29:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
"throwing" particles at something in the exact opposite directions in order to measure it's location, is quite different from throwing basketballs in the exact opposite direction at something in order to measure its location.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2015 8:41:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/7/2015 6:00:21 PM, Rubikx wrote:
So i'm currently in physics 30 and we're learning about quantum mechanics primarily lights wave-partical duality. From what i know we can't actually observe/measure the path of light in the double-slit experiment because that would change the movement of the light itself. The analogy used was if you have a basket ball and the only way to measure how far away it is is by throwing another ball at it and measuring the time for it to come back, but that ball caused the basketball to move thus making the information wrong. But couldn't you just throw another ball at it in the exact opposite way making so the forces on each side are equal and so the basketballs path doesn't change. Would this work with quantum mechanics?

Instead of saying something and having the ever pedantic UndeniableReamity say something:

Here are some interesting articles.

http://physicsworld.com...
http://arxiv.org...
http://physicsworld.com...
http://physicsworld.com...

And my suggestion in particular http://readingpenrose.com...
baddebater
Posts: 200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2015 11:29:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/7/2015 6:00:21 PM, Rubikx wrote:
So i'm currently in physics 30 and we're learning about quantum mechanics primarily lights wave-partical duality. From what i know we can't actually observe/measure the path of light in the double-slit experiment because that would change the movement of the light itself. The analogy used was if you have a basket ball and the only way to measure how far away it is is by throwing another ball at it and measuring the time for it to come back, but that ball caused the basketball to move thus making the information wrong. But couldn't you just throw another ball at it in the exact opposite way making so the forces on each side are equal and so the basketballs path doesn't change. Would this work with quantum mechanics? : :

Some teachers can't teach. You should be looking for a different teacher if he's using basketballs as analogies to discuss quantum mechanics.

There are some awesome youtube.com videos about quantum mechanics that use graphic representations to help you understand it better.
Rubikx
Posts: 226
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2015 9:04:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/7/2015 11:29:25 PM, baddebater wrote:
At 5/7/2015 6:00:21 PM, Rubikx wrote:
So i'm currently in physics 30 and we're learning about quantum mechanics primarily lights wave-partical duality. From what i know we can't actually observe/measure the path of light in the double-slit experiment because that would change the movement of the light itself. The analogy used was if you have a basket ball and the only way to measure how far away it is is by throwing another ball at it and measuring the time for it to come back, but that ball caused the basketball to move thus making the information wrong. But couldn't you just throw another ball at it in the exact opposite way making so the forces on each side are equal and so the basketballs path doesn't change. Would this work with quantum mechanics? : :

Some teachers can't teach. You should be looking for a different teacher if he's using basketballs as analogies to discuss quantum mechanics.

There are some awesome youtube.com videos about quantum mechanics that use graphic representations to help you understand it better.

its not that She is using basketballs as analogy for quantum mechanics it was just to show that our method of observing it makes the information invalid.
baddebater
Posts: 200
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2015 11:59:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/8/2015 9:04:18 AM, Rubikx wrote:
At 5/7/2015 11:29:25 PM, baddebater wrote:
At 5/7/2015 6:00:21 PM, Rubikx wrote:
So i'm currently in physics 30 and we're learning about quantum mechanics primarily lights wave-partical duality. From what i know we can't actually observe/measure the path of light in the double-slit experiment because that would change the movement of the light itself. The analogy used was if you have a basket ball and the only way to measure how far away it is is by throwing another ball at it and measuring the time for it to come back, but that ball caused the basketball to move thus making the information wrong. But couldn't you just throw another ball at it in the exact opposite way making so the forces on each side are equal and so the basketballs path doesn't change. Would this work with quantum mechanics? : :

Some teachers can't teach. You should be looking for a different teacher if he's using basketballs as analogies to discuss quantum mechanics.

There are some awesome youtube.com videos about quantum mechanics that use graphic representations to help you understand it better.

its not that She is using basketballs as analogy for quantum mechanics it was just to show that our method of observing it makes the information invalid. : :

If you pretend the basketballs are particles, then you would realize that the basketballs weren't really there to begin with.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,597
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/8/2015 12:17:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/7/2015 6:00:21 PM, Rubikx wrote:
So i'm currently in physics 30 and we're learning about quantum mechanics primarily lights wave-partical duality. From what i know we can't actually observe/measure the path of light in the double-slit experiment because that would change the movement of the light itself. The analogy used was if you have a basket ball and the only way to measure how far away it is is by throwing another ball at it and measuring the time for it to come back, but that ball caused the basketball to move thus making the information wrong. But couldn't you just throw another ball at it in the exact opposite way making so the forces on each side are equal and so the basketballs path doesn't change. Would this work with quantum mechanics?

Not really, you wind up with the same problem, you still need to measure the photon.

As it travels, it changes from an electric wave to a magnetic wave (electrodynamics) orthogonal to one another, hence it's exact position cannot be measured, that is, until it hits a detector and is absorbed as a particle. The same applies, but in reverse when you want to measure it's momentum.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/11/2015 9:26:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/7/2015 6:00:21 PM, Rubikx wrote:
So i'm currently in physics 30 and we're learning about quantum mechanics primarily lights wave-partical duality. From what i know we can't actually observe/measure the path of light in the double-slit experiment because that would change the movement of the light itself. The analogy used was if you have a basket ball and the only way to measure how far away it is is by throwing another ball at it and measuring the time for it to come back, but that ball caused the basketball to move thus making the information wrong. But couldn't you just throw another ball at it in the exact opposite way making so the forces on each side are equal and so the basketballs path doesn't change. Would this work with quantum mechanics?

There are a ton of issue, which impact measuring at the quantum level.

Imagine you had the technology to shoot two particles at a third particle you are trying to measure. The first problem is that the two particles you are shooting at the third are also "governed" at the quantum level. That in turn means you have no guarantee that they two particles will negate each other out in terms of impacting the third particle. You could eliminate data where when the two particles bounce back in a weird way which suggests they "hit" the third particle in a manner which did not negate each other out and run the experiment many times and use the average. But in reality you don't really know how they hit the third particle and you could be eliminating empirical data that means something else.

You are kind of getting into weak measurements with your idea. One needs to understand the math to really get weak measurement, but the technique involves repeated experiments where you try to not disturb the quantum state. It is very limited though as far as what data you can get and it requires throwing out some of the data and averaging to get some idea on the quantum state. It is questionable whether it is even a valid method of measuring a quantum state. Google weak measurements and go from there.
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,730
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/14/2015 10:16:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/7/2015 6:00:21 PM, Rubikx wrote:
So i'm currently in physics 30 and we're learning about quantum mechanics primarily lights wave-partical duality. From what i know we can't actually observe/measure the path of light in the double-slit experiment because that would change the movement of the light itself. The analogy used was if you have a basket ball and the only way to measure how far away it is is by throwing another ball at it and measuring the time for it to come back, but that ball caused the basketball to move thus making the information wrong. But couldn't you just throw another ball at it in the exact opposite way making so the forces on each side are equal and so the basketballs path doesn't change. Would this work with quantum mechanics?

You're being taught the "easy" version of QM, which is basically that we can't observe particles because we don't have particles smaller than them to use to detect them. If a basketball was the smallest particle imaginable, then we'd have a hard time detecting particles by being limited to throwing other basketballs at them and observing where they all land!

The truth of QM is so hard to swallow that a) they feel they probably cannot hope to teach it to you and b) they probably haven't even fully-accepted it themselves. And that is this: let us assume that there is an omniscient deity that rules this universe. He knows every fact there is to know. Even he will be governed by the rules we just discussed with the basketballs; in other words even if he could know everything there was to know, the position and velocity of said basketballs/particles are INHERENTLY UNKNOWABLE and he would only "know" about the probabilistic distributions/sum over histories that we ourselves are limited to knowing. Photons, electrons, and quarks are nothing like grains of sand and learning QM is nothing but the process of discarding these preconceived notions!

If you learn about the position of a particle, then you have given it's velocity an intrinsic property of unknowability. You can know 100% position/0% velocity, 50% position/50% velocity, and so on but these aren't technical limitations, they are, again, intrinsic properties of the matter itself and even God would have to sacrifice half of that information. There is no getting around this, developing better technology/understanding... it's a fundamental property of all matter. This property is more fundamental than just about any other aspect of the particle, and is perhaps the MOST fundamental aspect of said particle. This is why conscious-centric theories have been gaining steam in recent decades, a so-called "Kantian Revolution" in philosophy is underway in which matter and energy are taking a back-seat to consciousness as to what is most fundamental. The universe was previously thought to be matter and energy which gave rise to conscious beings, and now it would seem it is consciousness itself which has given rise to matter and energy. Perhaps the most convincing aspect of this paradigm, to me personally, is that spiritual thinkers (particularly Eastern) have already supposed this centuries ago and science is just now catching-up to them. Every fundamental property of matter, time, and space leads to the inescapable conclusion that there is really no matter, space, or time. It can be demonstrated that the quasar you are looking at 13 billion light-years away from you in the telescope isn't any farther away from you than the telescope itself (and so on).
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.