News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Bell's Theorum.

Started by Solitary, May 02, 2014, 12:27:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Moralnihilist

Quote from: Casparov on May 06, 2014, 08:28:31 PM
^^^^^ This Question is still unanswered.


So is the request that you actually PROVIDE PROOF of the bullshit you post, or shut the fuck up.
Science doesn't give a damn about religions, because "damns" are not measurable units and therefore have no place in research. As soon as it's possible to detect damns, we'll quantize perdition and number all the levels of hell. Until then, science doesn't care.

Jason78

Quote from: Solitary on May 06, 2014, 01:43:01 PM
And what did you learn? Casparov is mental, or not? Solitary

All I learned was that things still exist even if you're not looking at them.  But I already knew that.
Winner of WitchSabrinas Best Advice Award 2012


We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real
tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. -Plato

Berati

Quote from: Casparov on May 06, 2014, 11:29:16 PM
that a random generator chooses to erase or not has nothing to do with the fact that when it erases we get an interference pattern just as we do when there is no observation made.
It has everything to do with the fact that a human is not necessary to cause or not cause the interference pattern.

QuoteThe only logical conclusion one can come to is that wave function collapse happens only when a conscious observer obtains the which-path information. sigh....
Wrong conclusion! The correct conclusion is that the waveform collapses when the which-path information is obtained by a device. It doesn't matter if a conscious observer is present or not.

Like many religious people you would rather believe a comfortable lie than accept a hard truth.
So here it is Casparov: The material universe doesn't care what you think.



Carl Sagan
"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

josephpalazzo

#78
Quote from: josephpalazzo on May 04, 2014, 09:08:42 AM
For those interested in Bell's theorem and the EPR, I have a series of blogs on this;

Three Degrees of Spookiness in Entanglement

Quantum Entanglement Demystified

Spooky Action at a Distance and Bell's Theorem Revisited

Description of Reality - The EPR Paper Revisited



I also have a blog on entanglement.

http://soi.blogspot.ca/2011/02/two-slit-experiment.html


Also, I have another blog on the Machâ€"Zehnder interferometer, which is NOT the standard Delayed-Choice-Quantum-Eraser experiment, but comes close to it.

http://soi.blogspot.ca/2013/05/machzehnder-interferometer-particle-or.html



If anyone is interested in the physics, let me know. No funking question on the philosophy - that's for the fucking morons who need to fill their empty lives. :pirate:

Casparov

Quote from: Berati on May 07, 2014, 08:09:20 AM
It has everything to do with the fact that a human is not necessary to cause or not cause the interference pattern.
Wrong conclusion! The correct conclusion is that the waveform collapses when the which-path information is obtained by a device. It doesn't matter if a conscious observer is present or not.

Like many religious people you would rather believe a comfortable lie than accept a hard truth.
So here it is Casparov: The material universe doesn't care what you think.

oh jeez you win i never thought of that. okay have a nice life.  :wall:
“The Fanatical Atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures whoâ€"in their grudge against traditional religion as the "opium of the masses"â€"cannot hear the music of other spheres.” - Albert Einstein

Icarus

Quote from: Casparov on May 07, 2014, 02:12:43 PM
oh jeez you win i never thought of that. okay have a nice life.  :wall:

You say it sarcastically, but I'm sure that is the case.

Berati

#81
Quote from: Casparov on May 07, 2014, 02:12:43 PM
i never thought of that.

No kidding.

QuoteFirst line in the wikipedia entry on Wave Function Collapse:

In quantum mechanics, wave function collapse is the phenomenon in which a wave functionâ€"initially in a superposition of several eigenstatesâ€"appears to reduce to a single eigenstate after interaction with a measuring apparatus

QuoteFirst line in the wikipedia entry on Observer (quatum physics):

In quantum mechanics, "observation" is synonymous with quantum measurement and "observer" with a measurement apparatus and observable with what can be measured.

The only reason I can see why you would not have thought of that is that you are far to preoccupied with confirmation bias instead of accepting what can and cannot be proven by these experiments.
Carl Sagan
"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Casparov

Quote from: Berati on May 07, 2014, 10:04:47 PM
No kidding.

The only reason I can see why you would not have thought of that is that you are far to preoccupied with confirmation bias instead of accepting what can and cannot be proven by these experiments.

What I can tell you is that these wikipedia entries are at variance with experimental evidence. If you want to believe wikipedia over the peer reviewed papers themselves then go ahead. You are looking so hard to find anything and anyone to agree with what you want to hear, and now you've found wikipedia, I typically reliable source of information. You are looking every where except at the evidence itself. It is obvious I am not going to be able to convince you via the actual experiments and the actual results of those experiments as recorded in the scientific papers themselves, so there is no use arguing with you.

What I can tell you is that I for one don't believe everything I read on wikipedia, and if wikipedia says something that disagrees with hard evidence, I go with the hard evidence. If you do not have the intellectual capacity to assess and understand the evidence itself, it makes since that you look for wikipedia and youtube users to do the assessing for you. That you believe them over me is not a surprise. I am telling you that the evidence does not agree with your world view, obviously you will look for any reason to dismiss me entirely. It seems you have found it in several places.

My only hope to convince anyone is to have a conversation about the evidence itself and come to a common understanding of what the conclusions of the experiments mean. If you are not willing or able to consider the actual experiments then I have no reason to speak with you. I'll present to an experimental result, you'll look up a definition on wikipedia or tell me to watch a youtube video by some girl from Australia. There is no hope in this conversation. So uh...

YOU WIN!!! I WAS WRONG!! I completely misinterpreted all of those scientific experiments and what they were actually saying was that "observation" by a measuring device always causes the collapse of the wave function and even when the which-path information is erased it still collapses the wave function every time! Duh! pfft what was I thinking? Locality was never violated. Causality was never violated. Both Bell's and Leggett's inequalities have never been violated. Realism should not be abandoned and Naive Realism is compatible with all of the results. All of these experiments actually prove that the entities described by the theory exist independently of all measurement and observation. Realism is true!! Materialism is totally compatible with Quantum Mechanics Predictions!! You win!!

So here's what we should do: I'll leave you alone and you can continue to believe that Materialism is true and 19th century Newtonian physics is all you need to know about the world.

And while you continue through life as Naive Realist I'll move on with mine? Cool? Cool.
“The Fanatical Atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures whoâ€"in their grudge against traditional religion as the "opium of the masses"â€"cannot hear the music of other spheres.” - Albert Einstein

Moralnihilist

Quote from: Casparov on May 07, 2014, 11:10:14 PM
So here's what we should do: I'll leave you alone and you can continue to believe that Materialism is true and 19th century Newtonian physics is all you need to know about the world.

And while you continue through life as Naive Realist I'll move on with mine? Cool? Cool.

Why don't you just go ahead and provide PROOF THAT THE BULLSHIT YOU ARE PEDDLING IS TRUE. Otherwise why don't you go ahead and take a long walk on a short pier.
Science doesn't give a damn about religions, because "damns" are not measurable units and therefore have no place in research. As soon as it's possible to detect damns, we'll quantize perdition and number all the levels of hell. Until then, science doesn't care.

stromboli

Have we got to the point where Caspaorov actually shows us the emprical and undeniable evidence god exists? No? Later.

Hijiri Byakuren

Quote from: Casparov on May 07, 2014, 11:10:14 PM
So here's what we should do: I'll leave you alone and you can continue to believe that Materialism is true and 19th century Newtonian physics is all you need to know about the world.
http://boldblade.deviantart.com/art/Hopeless-Cirno-157008060
Speak when you have something to say, not when you have to say something.

Sargon The Grape - My Youtube Channel

Hakurei Reimu

Quote from: Moralnihilist on May 07, 2014, 11:23:19 PM
Why don't you just go ahead and provide PROOF THAT THE BULLSHIT YOU ARE PEDDLING IS TRUE. Otherwise why don't you go ahead and take a long walk on a short pier.
He can't, because all he has is the limp-wristed results of a couple of experiments that are elaborations on an old problem in quantum mechanics that do not offer anything beyond what has already been suggested by people way smarter than him (all his quantum eraser and delayed choice malarkey are simply elaborations on the double slit experiment). No puzzles are really solved by his "theory" â€" it's just admitting defeat and consigning oneself to forever be unable to understand. Nuts to that! Furthermore, even his "idealist" alternative reduces his god to a mindless number-cruncher running the universe, a position that is at best only cosmetically different from the materialist world he rails against.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

stromboli

Have we got to the point where Casparov actually shows us the emprical and undeniable evidence god exists? No? Later.

Berati

Quote from: Casparov on May 07, 2014, 11:10:14 PM
What I can tell you is that these wikipedia entries are at variance with experimental evidence. If you want to believe wikipedia over the peer reviewed papers themselves then go ahead. You are looking so hard to find anything and anyone to agree with what you want to hear, and now you've found wikipedia, I typically reliable source of information. You are looking every where except at the evidence itself. It is obvious I am not going to be able to convince you via the actual experiments and the actual results of those experiments as recorded in the scientific papers themselves, so there is no use arguing with you.

What I can tell you is that I for one don't believe everything I read on wikipedia, and if wikipedia says something that disagrees with hard evidence, I go with the hard evidence. If you do not have the intellectual capacity to assess and understand the evidence itself, it makes since that you look for wikipedia and youtube users to do the assessing for you. That you believe them over me is not a surprise. I am telling you that the evidence does not agree with your world view, obviously you will look for any reason to dismiss me entirely. It seems you have found it in several places.
You're rant here might make sense if I hadn't already referenced the experiment you listed.

Quote from: Berati on May 06, 2014, 09:12:45 PM
It's been in front of you all along. Nowhere in that paper does it say a human observer must be involved. You just assumed that part as you do every time an "observer" is mentioned. Detectors are not people.


QuoteSo here's what we should do: I'll leave you alone and you can continue to believe that Materialism is true and 19th century Newtonian physics is all you need to know about the world.
And while you continue through life as Naive Realist I'll move on with mine? Cool? Cool.

Uhh no, not cool. I will not sit idly by while you spread lies that science has proven your wild interpretation of QM as "The Truth"

Everyone can see the results of these experiments but the INTERPRETATION of what goes on is no where near proven. Understand?
And there are a great many interpretations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics
While all the greatest minds in science are debating these interpretations you arrogantly declare the whole matter resolved. No one is buying it and no one should.

QM raises as many questions as it answers but you simply steam roll over all of that with your consciousness of the gaps argument. Not one of these experiments proves that a conscious observer is necessary for QM to function the way it does. Not one.


Carl Sagan
"It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

stromboli

Have we got to the point where Caspaorov actually shows us the.......... never mind.