/sci/ - Science & Math

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

>>16118129
"Collapse" is just the macroverse entangling with the sub-quantum world. It's what happens when the normally contained uncertainty of matter is given an opportunity to shotgun all of its possibilities into greater space, branching the greater universe into an infinite array, all experiencing one possibility each.

Stuff on the macro-scale is normally somewhat independent of the sub-quantum stuff, so typically we will remain unentangled.

Also I think that time is >1 dimensional. Maybe 2 dimensional. This explains why there is more than one possible future - why there are infinite futures. A 1D timeline is just a line, with one past and one future. A 2D planar time will allow a space to reach the same configuration through many different paths.

Consciousness causes wave function collapse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Qbyxg95ebw

>>16118150
This. Von Neumann was right about everything.

>>16118149

Ok. Why does reality split once we measure or observe it? You could be right, shit is weird, so many worlds theory could be correct. Any guesses on this? I'm really having trouble finding any plausible "why" when I look at this with my pea-brain.

>>16118150
>>16118153

Alright gentlemen. I suspect you might be right that is it literally just consciousness that causes the collapse. Any guesses why? I'm literally out of ideas. You got anything?

>tranny thread

>>16118178
YOU TAKE THAT BACK RIGHT NOW. I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT BUT I'M THIS CLOSE TO A REAL BREAKTHROUGH.

>>16118129
Measurement of the particle is an interaction with it, which alters the potential of the wavefunction in a way which limits its possible states

>>16118184
Yeah but aren't we traveling backwards in time when doing so? Meaning the measurement changes its behavior before measurement.

>meaning it stops acting like a wave near the slits
>the measurement happens after the light goes through the slits

>>16118150
Orch OR is straight garbage, but having quantum spin makes anesthesia less potent.

>>16118149
>Also I think that time is >1 dimensional. Maybe 2 dimensional.
Not 4+ dimensional? When I visualize time, I see the movement or sinking of 3D Space into itself, creating change.

What if time stands still (or reverses) when spacetime shrinks? What if time only moves forward if spacetime is expanding?

>>16118160
If time is mappable to a constrained number of dimensions greater than one, then it can be said that the futures are already there. Wave function collapse is just what happens when you go down a sharp fork fork in the road of possibilities.

Imagine there were an infinite continuum of (you)'s all stacked in the same position in space, all spread out across an axis of time, possibly orthogonal to our clock, and they looked down a microscope to see a particle/wave that was also an infinite continuum but all spread out over their uncertainty.

Each (you) pressed the [OBSERVE] button, which uses an array of sensory elements to touch the particle/wave, and report back to the microscope view a little ping on its 2D field of view corresponding to the view.

Except the particle is in fact *in* all the positions, and your infinite stack of microscopes felt all of them, so now the infinite stack of (you)'s gets to see all those infinite positions, but only one at a time in parallel.

>>16118202
I envision many things trying to figure time out. Sometimes 1 dimension is the forwards one, and another wraps around in a loop, forming a 'time pipe'. Sometimes I envision the infinite slight alterations, discretely separate and self containing like packets of action in the Mandelbrot fractal.

>>16118214
>I envision many things trying to figure time out. Sometimes 1 dimension is the forwards one, and another wraps around in a loop, forming a 'time pipe'. Sometimes I envision the infinite slight alterations, discretely separate and self containing like packets of action in the Mandelbrot fractal.
At some point, when contemplating topics outside mainstream awareness, it gets catch-22 weird and irrational. Maybe 1D can be expressed as time. I believe it's all subjective anyway until agreed upon. For me, 1D is more like a building block of information, 2D the information and 3D the information projected into space. Yeah, it could be that because of the "space transcending" nature of 1D, it can interact with time in ways 3D cannot. This is getting too schizo for /sci/.

>>16118226
Not schizo enough. We have to go crazier. You get a shitload of unbounded ideas, one or two of them might be right. Many of them may be right

>>16118226
I've been hunting all my life for the conceptual vocabulary to attempt to explain for myself what the fuck this physics shit really means. It becomes schizo as soon as I erroneously assert that I know the truth with no interest at all to verify my saliency.

In my struggles to understand spacetime, I've noticed a lot of things which demand explanation, but for which there are none clear - and I've noticed in my forays in conceptual exploration, a lot of things which seem prospective to explain them.

For example, explaining time as more than 1D seems to pretty easily explain the quantum superposition stuff, to me. What about all that other shit?
Why is there quantization?
Why is there uncertainty?
Why is there a least action principle?
Why is there matter?

Well, I got my head full of ideas as to why, and maybe the truth contains some combination of them, but I don't know until I know, and math is gibberish to me until I understand the geometry, so I can't understand quantum physics until I've done by myself what schools of people who must be smarter than me haven't - which is to produce a geometric analogy.

Excuse me for my enormous hubris, but I'm going to keep trying.

>>16118160
>Alright gentlemen. I suspect you might be right that is it literally just consciousness that causes the collapse. Any guesses why? I'm literally out of ideas. You got anything?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xP22qvdF8YY

>>16118129
not an experiment

post the actual experimental setup and results before discussing further

>>16118286
Wavefunction collapse has been proven. You can look at the double slit experiment and the many experiments they follow it. I'm literally a layman and I'm not here to prove by experimentation why the wavefunction collapses.

I would be fucking famous if I could do that anon.

>>16118286
This is wild guess or theory land. Or feel free to post actual experiments if you wish. I'm just here to listen to crazy shit or see if someone magically comes up with something great in this thread.

>>16118295
There is no need for any collapse. There is the wave, a threshold when a particular event occurs, plus noise. When the wave adds up wuth the noise to overcome the threshold, the event occurs. Which gives an impression that there was a particle, but there is no particle.

>>16118295
There is no need for any collapse. There is the wave, a threshold when a particular event occurs, plus noise. When the wave adds up with the noise to overcome the threshold, the event occurs. Which gives an impression that there was a particle, but there is no particle.

Well something happens there. Its physical reality, not magic. We don't understand it, we need better theory.

>>16118295
double slit is explained by pilot wave theory

there's fuckery afoot innit?

>>16118160
>Ok. Why does reality split once we measure or observe it?
How do we know it does though? If observing changes the result then how do we know what the result is in the absence of observation? It's literally unobservable. There is no way to measure a system without interacting with it, and there is no way to interact with a system without changing it.

>>16119232

How do you know its not magic that built reality? I'm not claiming that it is, but do think the invisible hand of God has a hand in this?

>>16120105
Is there any reason (that can't be explained with the above >>16118332
or sonething similar) why we need particles at all?

>>16118190
There’s no good answer that addresses this fact.
The only one that makes sense based on these experimental results is that the photon “knows” that it will be measured.
Which of course is impossible based on everything we know about particle physics, but there’s no other explanation for it.

>>16120449
I still wouldnt count Gods doing as magic but historically, everything we didn't understand turned out to be physical reality, I see no reason why it should be different in this particular case.

With the magic approach you might as well give up trying to understand it, why would you right, its magic.

>>16118129
superdeterminism is correct. the wave function doesn't collapse, because it's merely an epistemic distribution of hidden variables.

>>16118129
the wave function doesn't collapse

>>16118149
>"Collapse" is just the macroverse entangling with the sub-quantum world.
The rest of your post reads like schizo nonsense but this point above is actually the current accepted dogma. It's called "decoherence"

>>16121917
Superdeterminism is cringe and only appeals to the "but I did eat breakfast" crowd.

>>16122101
This, multiverse theory is true

>>16122505
Multiverse is cringe, only complete moron would believe that there are countless universes being created at every stupid choice he makes.

But its good one for media and there are plenty morons around, so it got pretty far.

>>16118129
Wavefunction collapse violated the Schrodinger equation. This was said by Penrose, i figure one could just accept that both mechanisms are valid ways of changing the quantum state.

>>16118184
>Measurement of the particle is an interaction with it, which alters the potential of the wavefunction in a way which limits its possible states
This is just saying the same thing without adding any information.
Yes, measurements change the particle, this is known and the changes are not random but have precise mathematics, including that of of types of observations that do not cause changes

>>16118129
this is why I think string theory is wrong, because it can't explain this

>>16122560
just... don't call it that

>>16122505
no, you simply got filtered.

>>16118129
please just study the math before talking about QM i beg you
it is completely trivial "why the wave function collapses"

what's with all the highschooler threads today
is there some kind of spring break?

>>16118129
personally im a fan of pilot wave theory and global hidden variables :)

relevant
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcqZHYo7ONs

>>16123588
If its so trivial surely you can explain it right here anon.

>>16123607
It usually fills an entire undergrad course for a reason.

>>16123797
"If you can't explain it simply,you don't understand it well enough" - Einstein.

>>16120449
>gawd left a GLITCH in our Universe

>>16124473
Einstein was wrong about this unfortunately.
And it is fairly simple, the issue is that there is a lot of it.

>Quantum Mechanics claims to preserve information
>Measuring a wave function destroys information

Uhh something aint right chief

>>16124757
>Quantum Mechanics claims to preserve information
QM never claimed that.

This is how I view reality. Everything is in a various degree of abstraction.
There's not so much individual "air molecules" as there are abstract portions of air with some values of mass, area, temperature, and so on. These values are vague unless observed. This is not necessarily human dependent, as this world-view relies on pan-psychism. Reality observes itself to some small degree, obeying rules called physics. It seems insane to suggest that matter obeys laws and principles totally unknowingly, by happenstance; especially when the highest level of scrutiny indicates that matter is an abstract following mathematical rules.

Observing the abstracts more closely gets you a zone where reality has enough and gives you the indivisible constituents. This isn't so much seeing the atoms in the void bumping into each other, as it is seeing and understanding the rules that a blurry smear of air obeys. The air or matter is real, but any electron microscope still just shows mathematical or geometric abstract that describe some properties. The air is usually mostly "formless," in potentia. A water molecule isn't to the left or right, but both places at the same time. It doesn't look like a jar of marbles, it doesn't act like a jar of marbles.

I'm not a physicist or mathematician but I supposed that to a scientist, "collapsing the wave function" is the mathematical reasoning behind electron microscope images. To me, it is qualia, or the sensations of everything. Materialists will die before they accept consciousness as fact. For all the paradoxes in physics it resolves - what they should be concerned about - it poses too many problems to the usual materialist philosophies.

>>16118149
I like this post except for the time bullshit, that all seems made up to me.

>>16124792
wow neat
you described statistical thermodynamics
now go take a class on it

>>16124796
I want the knowledge that physics would offer but math is a weak subject for me. I think some of my ideas could push science forward but it's not even worth it. Being taken seriously means I would have to crunch number bullshit for like ten years and that's like chaining an octopus to an ox cart.

>>16124796
Don't compare phase transitions to phenomenology retard. Your field from the get go presuposes time as a quantity, and thus is disqualified from the start. We care about ontological priority here

>>16124807
>math is a weak subject for me
then study
nobody is born good at math, contrary to nonsense people will try to sell

>>16124813
>Don't compare phase transitions to phenomenology retard
you don't even know what statistical thermodynamics is