ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]

  • 0 Posts
  • 6 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 21st, 2023

help-circle
  • Ah, I see what you mean - that the superposition is a model of our uncertainty of unobserved actions, rather than the actual state of the particle. While that was my understanding initially too (because it makes sense) our testing, things like the double slit experiment, has shown behaviours that only make sense if they do occupy both states simultaneously. Quantum computing is actually reliant on qubits being in a 0/1 superposition for it to work. It’s what makes the entire thing so maddening, because experimental evidence has disproven every attempt to make it make sense.

    First thing my quantum mechanics professor told us was that if you think you understand quantum mechanics you definitely do not understand quantum mechanics. He was at the time one of the world’s leading experts on quantum applications, and had just proven the existence of an additional state of matter that quantum theory predicted, and straight up told us to our faces that he didn’t understand it, he just knew that it works.



  • Quantum superpositioning. Schrödinger was right, it’s absolutely ridiculous and the cat can’t be alive and dead at the same time, box or not.

    The problem is it provably does work that way, or at least in a way that is indistinguishable from it, ridiculous or not, and we don’t really know why. We’ve learnt many of the rules, managed to trap particles in superimposed states, even discovered that plants take advantage of it to transport energy more efficiently, and it’s just a thing that happens, an apparently fundamental rule of existence. And it doesn’t make any fucking sense.


  • “I didn’t say there’s any brigading going on, I just said there’s some brigading going on - look, this incredibly popular post has more engagement than any of our other posts!”

    The absolute brazen dishonesty you’re engaging in the whole way through this thread is disgusting, and why you get piled on to. The fact is that you’re pretending a racist term isn’t racist (in the same way as calling stealing “jewing” isn’t racist, I suppose (just to make sure you understand, it’s very racist)), and your only real argument is “all the hexbears are piling in and being mean :(”, not some justification for why taking a racist term for improving the look of a car without improving its performance isn’t racist when you apply the exact same term, without altering the concept in any way, to computers.