Superposition in QM

No scientists have just accepted that it is both with no way of explaining how since the 1900s


"Two moments of time at once?"


HOW ABOUT THIS


Take string theory into account. Small geometric dimensions with strings of energy that vibrate at different frequencies which make up all aspects of quantum physics. 20 or so numbers.

So because of these dimensions, rules are rules and probability is a result of these rules.

So even when you shoot photons and watch them act naturally they follow their cancellation patterns. BUT when we observe these light particles within the confounds of our dimension the particle act as a particle and we can only watch it go through 1 of 2 slits.


Think of it like this, the string theory dimensions are a pond. when we start observing light infinitely near the pond, it acts like a particle but once dropped into the pond we can no longer observe the way we did before and the light acts as a wave.

Our technologies allow us to observe at the quantum level so could it be possible that we are just very close to observing these small dimensions i.e. hadron collider?

I knew two moments of time sounded a little fishy.

But according to special relativity, events may not occur simultaneously from he standpoint of one observer even if they do to a different observer. Perhaps we are observing two non simultaneous events as simultaneous.

Heisenberg's measurement = creation principle says that no physical property exists for an atom until we observe it, meaning the wall behind you isn't there until you observe it. I am in no way agreeing with it, only showing the absurdity of some of the theories from the same people that created QM and superposition; this dude really believed that.

this actually explains my opinion on the particle they claim to have put into superposition that you posted the article about, i've read other articles on it.

sorry,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMqtiFX_IQQ

I think the mistake we've all made in this thread is that we're trying to translate math into conceptual images in our minds, and it is much too soon to do that when even the math/statistics/probability is not fully understood.

no this stuff is made to be translated into conceptual images e.g. Vectors

Yes. What I mean is that any descriptions of quantum mechanics that are not mathematical in nature are, at best, approximate descriptions of what's occurring, and more likely baseless conjectures. From what I know the math says this: particles exist as wave functions. Wave functions exist in multiple states. Wave functions collapse into a single state when observed. Why wave functions collapse when observed is not agreed upon. Based on that knowledge, the scientific community largely rejects the idea that the interference pattern is due to the properties of a particle in a single continuous state.

Photons are a multipurpose, multi dimensional particle. when observed the particle takes on a different state. when not observed the probability of it becoming that state or not still exists.


So before the photon hits the 2 slits, there are a number of possibilities as to where that photon is going to end up, we shoot it and it ends up somewhere on the spectrum randomly. we can observe where it ended up but we can not see the path it took, because it is random, because the universe is random.

Now WE look at it. Before, it randomly veered off due to the interference WE created(the actual experiment), but when we look at it before it hits the interference, WE eliminate the possibility of randomness because we are simply observing. Basically cheating the universe.

The conundrum was only created once we had the ability to observe single photons passing through the two slits. WE created that ability therefore we created our own path of probability in the pool of randomness that is The Universe.


So my argument is that Quantum decoherence is directly caused by mans mechanisms.

Its easy to believe to. If the big bang is real, a infinite point of energy burst like a seed with a blueprint already setup in order for an infinite universe to grow, then why are things so diverse? If fate is real than it was all planned from the beginning, correct? But if fate doesn't exist then what? Then it is all just random. and if there were no randomness then it would have been a completely uninteresting universe.
randominity is thrown into the equation. Not as Super Position explains it but more as A completely irregular force that "bumps and pushes" a uniform universe into infinite diversity. This bumping and pushing eventually created the "classical" world me and you see everyday, Assuming String Theory is correct.

String theory suggests that there are small, tight dimensions of geometry inside of our own that move in specific ways, in turn, creating our classical world. Randominity exist in those dimension, as the driving force that creates the world around us. The geometry in those dimensions creates the forces that make up our universe. The small, tight dimension with geometry in them, the geometry could move in a "random" way, which in turn, creates diversity. So we will say that those dimensions emit "rules" in the form of the dynamics that make our quantum universe, which in turn makes our classical world, how do we connect them though? Randominity in the dimensions that string theory suggests exist.

Randominity as we know it, is the idea that nothing happens for reason, only by chance.

SO in QM it is the factor which creates diversity, diversity in a universe with rules.

the cats fucking dead thats all i have to say about superposition

like