Science Memes

10923 readers

2327 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
Keep it rooted (on topic).
No spam.
Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

[email protected]

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1563

Double-slit (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

131 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I mean, magic is just weird shit that isn't fully understood yet.

That being said, you might as well look at it as branches.

Each state is a possibility, thus both exist.

The "magic" isn't that the probabilities of either state being in effect suddenly collapsed and became reality. The magic is that by observing the result, we collapse our own probability and are suddenly aware of the branch that we exist in. But we also exist in that other branch, suddenly aware that we exist in it. But "both" of us are incapable of viewing that other branch.

Which is all mumbo-jumbo, but I'm a fiction writer, so I don't have to be rigorous :)

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology." -Mercedes Lackey or... maybe Larry Dixon. Unclear.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I thought it was Clarke since it's known as Clarketech.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Clarke said "Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

As far as I know, the detectors need to be able to interact with the photons, which redirected(or consumed) the outer "branches" that were landing in the outer slits. This left the only two slits untouched. It shows the fallacy of using detection equipment without considering their impact on the environment or experiment, especially when the extremes of our physical world are being tested. In the experiment, the detection equipment, or sensors, were placed in the two slits.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks for this. Was getting tired of seeing people claim that our eyeballs change the photon path somehow and was getting ready to type.

For anyone familiar with circuits, it's the same concept as understand why connecting an ammeter or voltmeter changes the value you measure. That is, a miniscule resistance must be attached in series or in parallel, respectively, to observe/measure the current or voltage, which inherently changes the current or voltage.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've never heard it as an analogy of branches, but I like it

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

MWI, multiple worlds interpretation