it's a proof a single particle can go through both holes and that the "particle" is actually a wave

>>16557613
>it's a proof a single particle can go through both holes
And then what, interfere with itself? How does that make sense?

>>16557707
It doesnt. Thats the point.

>>16557708
nta but why does it do that if it's not entangled with us? or between themselves? wouldn't that happen only for particles that are entangled?

>>16557609
The word is MEASURED, you dumb pop sci fuck boy

>>16557609
post the experimental setup OP

>>16557733
Observed. The acquirement of the knowledge of the state of the particle by a conscious mind. You dumb Sabine cuck.

>>16558992
Isn't it interacted though? Any particle ruins the entanglement upon interaction. Doesn't have to be a conscious observer for fucks sake. A conscious observer CARES about the outcome. But the observer itself is never the observer but some interaction that the observer observers and proceed to fucking CARE about it.

>>16558999
>Isn't it interacted though?
Doesn't have to be, like the Stern-Gerlach experiment.
Particles are passed through a non-uniform magnetic field. Particles, previously in superposition, collapse into either spin up or spin down. No other particle hits them in this process.

>>16558999
>Isn't it interacted though?
Or just a slightly modified double slit experiment. No particle actively hits the observed photons. They're either observed on the receptor screen as a interference pattern, or observed in one of the two detectors

>>16558999
The conscious mind is certainly part of the information chain that collapses the wave function, but it is unknown whether conciousness causes collapse, because there's a lot of other events on that chain.
The important part for /sci/ to understand though, is the concept of superposition. It cannot be reduced to a mere classical phenomena. It is an entirely quantum concept, inexplicable with classical physics.

>>16559005
hmm ok that's interesting. but isn't the magnetic field the "observer" in this case? although that's abstract af

>>16559009
in Experiment B position of receptors matters? are they where constructive interference bands would be? does their position matter?

>>16559014
it is part of the measurement process, but it isn't the observer in the quantum sense.
The entire setup, including the detector that records the final position of the particles, contributes to the measurement.
According to the mainstream interpretation (Copenhagen), the act of detection is the key event that counts as observation, ie. when quantum superposition collapses to a definite state. Who or what makes this detection is deliberately left out of the interpretation, whether it is the detector itself or a conscious mind that sees the result from the detector.

>>16559028
well for one whatever does the detection must not be entangled with the system. observer as in human is always second hand in measurements. I don't see how caring about it makes any difference. the whole idea is it collapses when there is a way to know. a "conscious observer" could extract the info somehow.

>>16559037
Yes, Zellinger said something similar. Perhaps it collapses when it becomes "knowable" using the laws of our universe.

>>16559022
This is just a different way to present the double slit experiment so retards don't go "b-b-but the detector sents a particle to hit the photon at slits so your experiment doesn't count and can be explained classically"

>>16559041
huh, mindfuck. imagine your entangled system keeps shitting itself for no reason and it's actually because unbeknownst to you it leaks info somehow. through ways you are not yet aware of. that would be funny

>>16559041
in a weird way it's like the whole universe is aware of all the possible moves at any time. it never expects something being where it shouldn't be. and if it "knows" how things collapse that would be something like superdeterminism?

>>16559060
They have shoddy work. The configuration space is just what they can say about the particle/wave with the information they have. When they gain different information, they can say something different.

>>16559081
>le QM is incomplete
I've watched this episode already.

>>16557609
What happens when the holes aren't equally big?

>they're waves
>but how interact with self
>waves
>but
Go to your fucking bathtub. Just go play in water. This isn't difficult to understand.

>muh consciousness
I'll end this once and for all. EVERYTHING in the universe has some degree of consciousness. "Knowability" doesn't require humans.

>>16559329
Explain to me how a tub filled with trillions of trillions of molecules is in any way similar to a lone quantized particle, beyond the most simplistic of elementary school demonstrations

>>16559400
I like the part where you angrily didn't understand my comment. The goal was to match ripples interacting with each other to the pattern shown in OP's image.
>Explain...in any way similar
Simple pattern recognition.

>>16559329
In QM, the wave function isn't a mechanical wave like the ones in classical physics. It is a probability wave that indicates where the particle would would be at if observed.

>>16559345
You don't know this.

>>16559345
>consciousness
what do words even mean
consciousness is strictly tied to human brains. anything else is bullshit or trying to hijack the concept for various reasons. like redefining what a woman is.

>>16560021
>consciousness is strictly tied to human brains
it's not
>like redefining what a woman is.
oh you are a pol retard i see

>>16560169
>it's not
it's brains dude. there's no other thing linked to the concept. we use it to refer to self-awareness. which is in brains. the stories the brain is telling itself are a different thing.

>>16560188
>only humans have brains
fascinating

>>16560194
it's still only brains you moron

>>16560188
>>16560196
retard

>>16560222
not the point retard

>>16559833
>The goal was to match ripples interacting with each other to the pattern shown in OP's image
And how exactly does a single particle do this?
>"ripples," plural
You fundamentally don't understand the logic behind your own argument.

>>16560007
>it isn't a mechanical wave
Correct. You misunderstanding my comment too?
>it's a probability wave
Correction: the actual funciton of the wave is unidentified, and gets handwaved as probability.
>>16560372
>how single particle
Cue mocking laughter.
>you fundamentally don't understand the logic
>how do waves interact
>look at waves interacting
>see thing
>see other similar thing
>understand nothing because apparently you're not allowed to see two similar things as similar
Still saying the same thing, by the way. Wave propagation looks like wave propagation. This is barely logic.

>>16560466
>Correction: the actual funciton of the wave is unidentified, and gets handwaved as probability.
The actual function of the probability wave is to calculate the probability of a particle's location once observed. It's not a handwave, it is exactly what it does.

>>16560540
>the mathematical tool of evaluation is a literal physical process
This is why we can't have nice things. Probability is not literal.

>>16560547
How do you know this? By the mainstream interpretation of QM, our universe is indeed probabilistic and mathematical.

>>16560547
The "physical process" of which you speak is meaningless without observation. It's indeterminate until we use measuring devices or gain knowledge with things like functions and eyes. In QM, math and probability aren't just abstract tools; they’re fundamental to the physical process itself. They don't just describe reality, they are reality. We're engaging with the core logic that governs the universe’s behavior. The base code, if you will.

>>16560565
No, I won't, because it is clear you are being retarded on purpose.
>>16560550
Electromagnetism is a literal physical process. That it can be predicted via probability does not change this.

>>16560616
Only boomers read ai slop. Not even gonna lie. I have put in 200 hours programming with AI in the last month and I haven't read the AI for 5 minutes. When you start looking at blog posts, and shitter posters, etc. You will find that it is only boomers that try to appeal to AI.They are enamored with an unthinking slop generator - probably something to do with lead in the water.