I just discovered something very disturbing: The whole idea of quantum mechanics is nothing more than an elaborate ruse to keep intelligent people busy with irrelevant made up bullshit.
Those in power fear intelligence. They fear people who can think for themselves, and who would consequently threaten their power. Hence they created a meme field with seemingly complicated mathematics and spread the rumour of QM being the hardest and most scientific field in existence. They literally made up some quasi-mystical aura that compels the brightest minds to waste their time with it, only so that said bright minds don't ever think about questioning that which is really important and never threaten the status quo. QM is complely made up and the books on QM, RQM, QFT, QED, QCD, ST and whatever other bullshit theories they invented are written intentionally convoluted in order to keep up the illusion of being intellectually challenging and to take away more time from the gifted people who read them. Now look at the names of textbook authors in QM. "Coincidentally" these "researchers" happen to be named *berg, *stein, *blatt, ...
Let's be serious: Have you ever seen a proof of quantum mechanics existing? Of course not, because the whole theory is supposedly about things which cannot be observed ("uncertainty principle").
So, if you're reading this and you consider yourself scientifically inclined and intelligent, don't fall for the QM meme. Remain a free thinker and don't get trapped by those who have bad intentions for our society.
intredasting but you're not giving anything concrete, just broad sweeping statements. relativity is pretty much jewish fraud bullshit designed to stifle fundamental physics research and i'm willing to believe QM is as well but i need more down on the ground data for that
>QM being the hardest and most scientific field in existence
It's actually very simple: you just calculate.
Sorry you are too retarded to understand quantum physics.
Kayden Powell
How did you come to this conclusion? Also can you back it up somehow with something other than your words?
Aiden Gomez
What should our greatest minds be doing? Studying holocoust denial? Doing skull measurements on black people? Constructing a complex algorithm to explain why anime is degenerate? By the way, I would say most of our smartest people are going straight into finance after school not Quantum Physics.
Jonathan Rogers
>pic name is wobbling >GameCube controller
Mason Roberts
>I just discovered something Wow. You're fucking Christopher Columbus.
Adrian Barnes
>something dosent exists because i cant see it even when it explains a lot of things that couldnt be explained before I bet you also think evolution is hoax, electricity isnt real and there is no gravity and the only thing that keeps you from flying off the planet are the evil jews. Without QM things would turn invisible if they would just be hot enough, e.g. the sun would be invisible and certain effects of light couldnt be explained, e.g. Newton stuck a needle into his eye in an desperate attempt to explain light just being particles.
Xavier Moore
I still don't get a good answer when I ask why the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate
Jack Brooks
> Have you ever seen a proof of quantum mechanics existing.
I've had to do several experiments of it myself and write very pain-in-the-ass lab reports.
Eli Foster
Or how the speed of light is the speed limit, but light from the beginning of the universe is hitting it's right now... meaning that the earth got here 13 billion light years before the light from those stars did
Blake Perry
It's because we observe it accelerating but we don't have a good grasp of what dark energy is that's accelerating it.
Lincoln Ross
A neet trying to hold a lecture about quantum mechanic not knowing the relation between photons and electrons. kys
Easton Brown
are you mentally retarded?
Jason Bailey
Sup Forums bait is getting increasingly sophisticated.
Isaac Brooks
>mfw wobble through my weekly to first place every time
Robert Lee
Spot on. Jewish physics are just talmudic numerology played to an absurd extent. It's to keep the goym brain working on completely useless bullshit. Real aryan physics have died out. Early NASA only used non einstein physics because everyone was a nazi. Now all their rockets explode and everything goes wrong.
Dominic Richardson
People's faith in Dark Matter/Dark energy is no diffident than another's blind faith in God
Aiden Davis
...
Colton Gonzalez
>doesn't know why his computer works >doesn't understand the concept of "scientific theory"
Aiden White
That's becasue space itself is expanding.
Jack Sullivan
Moshe Carmelli has it right. Dark energy and dark matter are fudge factors. His equations did not need them because he went up a dimension.
Gavin Sullivan
Hoo-fucking-rah for the doublethink bait you're employing here.
> I just discovered something very disturbing: The whole idea of quantum mechanics is nothing more than an elaborate ruse to keep intelligent people busy with irrelevant made up bullshit.
You're trying to argue that this flat earth-tier bullshit isn't a ruse and your incredibly infantile understanding of physics, let alone quantum mechanics, is correct.
Grayson King
I'm not sure if Einstein formulated his general relatively the empiric way, maybe only partly. It only turned to empiricism when they looked for confirmation.
OP's pasta sounds like a hardcore empiricist
Evolution can be proven with empiricism. Electricity and gravity is also proveable with pure empiricism.
I'm not sure how much of everything related to QM is done with the "proper" empiric way.
Noah Gomez
You didn't discover anything.
To realize that QM is garbage, you have to study it first. You can't know that its wrong without trying to understand it first.
I am sure, judging by the nature of your post, that you haven't read a word of it. So what makes you such an expert?
Ian Cook
Kys. QM is everywhere. You wouldn't be able to type this shit if it wasn't for QM.
Michael White
The intellectual elite need their bread and circuses to be a little more sophisticated. But it's still just more bread and more circuses.
Jeremiah Edwards
>I'm not sure how much of everything related to QM is done with the "proper" empiric way.
Quantum effects are observed all the time in computer chips. Both in production (lithography) and in the way they work.
Ryan Rivera
evolution is a theory, electrons don't "exist", gravity is still a theory explaining a force we can't see.
>So is it like general relativity? >Empiricism only came along once confirmation was sought?
No.
Weird effects were observed first. Like interference patterns in optical systems, that should not happen according to classic physics. Quantum physics was invented to explain those.
Jace Sanchez
Live would have been better under Newtonian/Classic physics. Prove me wrong, heh.
But QM things like uncertainty principle can't have empirical proof.
Jordan Martinez
Well experiments like Stern-Gerlach can show that spin can take on only certain discrete values, this can be explained via QM. But its important to understand that spin was a bit of a surprise, it had to added to qm in a ad hoc fashion (cf. Pauli matrices). It was only with the Dirac equation that a complete theoretical description of spin emerged.
There's also equipment, like MRI machines, that a based on spin (and something called the Rabi flopping frequency), again its qm that is needed to explain these things.
Parker Price
finally another physicist ...
OP i dislike QM for other reasons (how they use pertrubation theory to "explain" everything larger than helium or how when they extend it in molecules etc) Theories usually are spot on on certain domains where they are conceived. classical mechanics is perfect for predicting most of the phenomena around the human/planet scales, GR is fantastic on the galactic/cosmological scale and QM is pretty damn good for hydrogen nuclei. it's how theories interconnect when transitioning from one domain to the other that shows their value. GR->CM is a beautiful transition, therefore it adds truth to both theories. QM->anything is mostly crap at the moment. also for fucks sake. the posted videos are just plain idiotic. learn some basic physics before you start fantasizing that you found flaws in differential geometry (cause that's all that einstein said ;p)
Daniel Turner
You might be on to something.
Alexander Robinson
If they're experiments they're of course done the empiric way, that's a given because of the definition of an experiment.
Jacob Rogers
Then I don't really get your objection.
>how they use pertrubation theory to "explain" everything larger than helium or how when they extend it in molecules
Applying qm to molecules is done using the variational principal, you can't really use perturbation theory on molecules since the repulsion of the electrons is on a similar order of magnitude to the central potential, so the perturbation is too large.
But other than that what do you have against perturbation theory?
Colton Turner
Drink your meds schizo, QM is the ultimate red pill.
Robert Hughes
>Live would have been better under Newtonian/Classic physics. >Prove me wrong, heh.
No micro transistors, so no computers, so yeah you would be out in the sun being happy instead of wasting your miserable life on Sup Forums.
Jason Perry
I never made an objection.
And I wasn't talking about expiriments.
The scientific method simply is not always 100% empiric.
>QM is literally the only way for micro transistors to exist even if laws were drastically different If our universe was one where classical physics were true it would be different beyond comprehension so it's not like you can make a claim like that.
Wyatt Martinez
yes the whole variational principle on very hard spheres and the math that follow leading to monstrosities like LCAO implies to me from it's non constructive ugliness that it's not right. approximations on those beasts with pertrubation theory may give us some results but i know of a few cases (and i suppose there will be more) that the result doesn't even hold mathematically (sometimes they don't even check for convergence on their solved models). of course feel free to shoot, i've stopped working in anything related to QM methodologies for at least 10yrs now and it was never a field i enjoyed.
Nathaniel Ramirez
>If our universe was one where classical physics were true it would be different beyond comprehension
No it wouldn't. Because in that case small particles would act exactly like larger objects do. And there is just no way to make larger objects do interesting stuff.
We would basically be stuck to using mechanical computers.
Hunter Davis
Physics PhD student studying for their qualifying exam here: Believe me when I say I hate quantum mechanics as much as anyone. I hate normalizing wave functions, I hate solving the TDSE for hamiltonian after hamiltonian, I hate commutator relations, I hate doing degenerate perturbation theory, I hate transmission coefficients, I hate it all. It's frustrating, irritating, and unlike E&M or mechanics there's very little physical intuition for the results you get.
... and the only thing more frustrating and irritating than all of that is the fact that quantum mechanics objectively, unequivocally works.
Relativity and quantum physics were developed as a response to phenomena and experimental results that classical physics COULD NOT EXPLAIN. These models have survived more than a century of criticism, scrutiny, and scientific inquiry and have been demonstrated valid time and time again. It's easy to scoff at how ridiculous quantum mechanics is until you see a discrete emission spectrum or a superconductor suddenly levitate with your own eyes.
Incidentally, this is my day off and I've got nothing on my plate today, so if anybody's got any pressing physics/astronomy/etc questions, I'll answer them to the best of my ability.
Alexander Adams
But the speed of light would be infinite and objects wouldn't have a speed limit either and there'd be no time dilation. Surely that's interesting enough.
Nicholas Evans
This is where the right-wing starts being faggots. When they hinder technological progress.
Parker Brooks
Fair enough then. I've got to say I don't like the field much either, it's often just a hodgepodge of mathematical methods loosely strung together with clear disconnects between them (contrast that with something like GR). But I don't doubt it's "correctness" nor how "right" it is.
I can see what you're saying, and if I'm honest I agree, personally I've always thought that at some point in the future a more rigorous and generally better approach to doing QM will be discovered. But just because I don't like it's approach, doesn't mean that I doubt it's correctness.
>i know of a few cases (and i suppose there will be more) that the result doesn't even hold
I'd be interested to see these cases.
Dominic Hughes
I assumed relativity would still apply.
Evan Nguyen
>Live would have been better under Newtonian/Classic physics. Prove me wrong, heh. Without Pauli Exclusion there would be no atomic/chemical behavior. There would be no life.
A classical universe would be a very very boring place.
Austin Nguyen
Just an undergraduate here but basically this.
Imo if op was ranting about string theory he'd be pretty close though.
Brody Jenkins
nigga pls >speed of light is the limit but space can expand faster than that
Lucas Wright
Why have i not heard of this before? And what's with that whiny man derailing the q&a with the many worlds and poincare time?
Austin Reed
>There would be no life. Thanks for proving me right
Newtonian physics was superseded by relatively. So relatively wouldn't be.
But maybe I should have been been clearer
Jason Fisher
what's your view on determinism ?
Jason Cook
Have you ever seen proof of me existing aside from this only post you're going to get from me?
John Garcia
Dude, I'm behind you.
Parker Scott
Damn. That explains a lot actually. Anyone know what Space X has to say a bout Jew physics? Musk is an Afrikaner.
Cooper Bennett
Ak-47 was internally closer to an M1 Garand.
Cooper Taylor
i'm sorry bro i tried to find it but i can't after so many years. what i had in mind was a paper by economou and soukoulis in the early 90s that luckily a nobel prize winner that was a master in the field sent a correction to the journal on the next volume so it got retracted.
i'm watching that ron garret google techtalk video that the other user posted above and it's very interesting indeed (nothing to do with the baiting title of it of course...) so i think i'm off the thread. all the best.
Adrian Campbell
>Have you ever seen a proof of quantum mechanics existing? Yes, I've done experiments verifying basic quantum effects before. Kill yourself Ahmed.
Samuel Perry
Exactly. Dark energy is the stupidest shit ever.
True scientists dont ask WHAT you know, they ask HOW you know. In the case of Dark Energy, it's pretty embarrasing.
1) Einstein's E=mC^2 seems to be a promising theory, explains some observations 2) Suddenly, it fails to explain how quickly the universe is accellerating. 3) IF einstein is right, there MUST be more mass than we're observing 4) SO since einstein must be right, there must exist that which we cannot observe, ie. Dark Energy 5) Dark Energy exists
What's that? The model doesnt explain the data? Well it cant be the model!! Must be the data!
>mfw you can literally use this type of Modus Tollens inference to infer ANYTHING that you have no evidence for, so long as you assume a principle. ie. you can "prove" God with this type of reasoning
>2016, still believing the "Scientists are smart" meme 5)
Lincoln Wilson
Prove you weren't psychotic.
Tyler Lopez
>ruse to keep intelligent people busy with irrelevant made up bullshit Intelligent people don't fall for ruses QED motha fucka
Lucas Rodriguez
We have observed that the universe is accelerating in its expansion, so therefore there must be additional energy causing this acceleration. We literally don't know anything other than that.
>muh model The big bang is a very robust theory that has some problems, but has tons of evidence supporting it (cosmic microwave background, homogeneity of space, and so on).
Camden Cox
>muh Jewish science
Come on, Hans.
Jackson Moore
Models only have to be consistent with data and be useful.
Hunter Bennett
You are kind of right and wrong at the same time. QM and its extensions to fields are legit models, but since they require fairly advanced mathematics for laymen, the field's mystery(to laymen) does contribute to the pseudo-metaphysical cult of science as a way to legitimate the Ivory tower of academia and shut down everything that doesn't fit inside said reductionist view. But it's a collateral effect, not deliberate, QM is complex because of its genesis and because of how far has mathematics advanced.
Ryder Morales
so now that you figured out this big "conspiracy" to stop you from learning knowledge...
...what is this now going you to enable you to accomplish in life, and if anyone else listens to your bullshit thesis, what will it allow them to accomplish?
Your words seem without worth. They dont seem to add any efficiency to a person's life
Justin Ortiz
Go on....babby's first logic class
1)Universe is accellerating 2) Accelleration must be caused by more energy 3) E=mc^2, thus there must be more mass 4) Yet we dont observe any other mass, so there must be "Unobservable Mass" 5) Let's call it Dark Energy 6) Thus, that which we cannot scientifically observe must exist, because muhh einstein.
Once you start allowing unobservables into your model, you've gone full retard
Michael Watson
Please go on however.
I'd love to hear your take on why "Background Radiation" apparently proves the big bang theory. Unless what you mean is that its CONSISTENT with the big bang theory, which is different, but perhaps valid.
Carson Morgan
You are a moron that is mixing up Dark Matter and Dark Energy.
>unobservables Completely false. We observe the effects of both Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Educate yourself.
Matthew Phillips
The sun is 4,000 miles away and is a transformer and the moon makes its own light. All the shit in space has always been there. The earth is 6000 years old. Earth is flat with ice wall and hell is underneath. PLANEt
Nathaniel Sanders
That's getting into philosophy and that's way outside my area of expertise. I don't know if free will exists or if things are predetermined.
My own personal opinion is that it doesn't matter - any sufficiently complex system will display chaotic and dramatically different behavior based on its boundary conditions. If we do live in a deterministic existence, it is an existence so complex and chaotic that there is no observational difference between the illusion of free will and free will itself.
Short version - don't worry about it.
Levi Lopez
So your claim is that the universe is expanding at 13 billion times the speed of light.
Do you care to repeal or elaborate on that claim or are you just going to be proven a fucking idiot right here.
Jacob Edwards
OP is fucking right.
The earth is flat and you don't have the proof to disprove it. Seriously look at the earth. It is as flat as a pancake.
Hah, fuck you new science. The old science was better anyways.
Thomas Cox
I never said "prove." Don't put words in my mouth. Literally everywhere throughout the universe, we see a constant, homogeneous background radiation. This implies that at one point in time, the universe was in thermodynamic equilibrium and thus that all of the universe was confined in a small space at one point in time. The big bang theory explains all of this as well as other effects such as the distribution of galaxies.
Brandon Robinson
And some people claim they have spoken to god. Hard to disprove someone claiming something he believes that happened to him.
This desu. Cosmic expansion versus distance predicted by Hubble was found not to conform to uniform expansion with distance.
Thus a fudge factor by an unobservable phenomenon was introduced "dark energy". Wtf is it? Why can't we measure it on the macro scale instead of relying on galactic redshifts?
Fudge factors are usually a sign that a theory is fundamentally flawed.
Aaron Wood
>I just discovered something very disturbing: The whole idea of quantum mechanics is nothing more than an elaborate ruse to keep intelligent people busy with irrelevant made up bullshit. genius
Liam Hall
pretty sure this is also why governments fund phd scientists.
but quantum mechanics is real...otherwise how do you explain diffraction? how do you explain the delayed-choice double-slit experiment?
Logan Cox
why does it imply that?
i'm honestly interested to hear it from someone who is confident in their understanding of it.
Many of the things we "know" are based off of this "cosmic background radiation". I think thats how the astrophysicists try to "date" the universe.
So why exactly does the presence of this radiation imply that everything was in one spot? is it just the diffraction pattern or what?
Adam Johnson
I love how all these electronics can just go through van allen
Hudson Jenkins
>I don't understand quantum mechanics >Therefore it's a big Jewish conspiracy.
lol. Fucking retard.
Brandon Rivera
Density?
Brandon Martinez
This merely shows that light behaves as a wave as well as photonically.
Juan Harris
DFT researcher here have fun surviving without catalysts, Mohamed
Physicist checking in. An exited electron in an ion loses it´s energy be emitting a photon and this can easily be detected and veryfied, including measuring the energy of said single photon.
This is quantum physics.
>OP is retarded
Jason Russell
Excited by what? Radiation?
Samuel Wright
Thermodynamic equilibrium means that there is no net transfer flow of energy within a system. A property of this is the system has a constant temperature everywhere.
Now obviously, the universe right now isn't currently in thermodynamic equilibrium (energy flows from the sun to us for example). However, there is a constant background radiation that exists literally everywhere we look in the universe. That does not happen by accident; that means space had to have been in thermodynamic equilibrium at some point otherwise this nearly homogeneous background radiation would not exist. The big bang theory explains why the CMB exists.
Joshua Morgan
The ideas presented in quantum mechanics are fairly simple when you discard the idea of determinism.
"Pop science" just makes it look all magical by fluffing it up with all kinds of horse-shit conjecture by people who are desperate for funding so need to make it look all "woo-woo" for the camera so people are like "OMG WE NEED TO RESEARCH THIS BECAUSE THEN WE CAN PROVE/DISPROVE GOD"
Even though the reality is much more boring.
And of course they deliberately use terminology that confuses ameritards who are incapable of juggling more than one definition for the same word. Such as "observation".
Ryder Hughes
there's no "meaning of life" in the equations, right?
i mean, there's not a reason to avoid ruthless power-seeking (since it worked for today's evolutionary winners)?
i'm asking you because you understand more of the world than philosophers/religious people.
Ayden Martinez
Allahu Akbar!
The U.S. must take Monroe Doctrine now. The U.S. must withdraw American Forces from all Foreign Countries now. I love American99% and the U.S. Japan, Germany and China are evil empires.
