Why does observation collapse the wave function of a particle?

Why does observation collapse the wave function of a particle? Are you telling me particles are aware of humans?

  1. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >observation
    This single misnomer has been the biggest source of physics pseudery in the 21st century.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      physics fags are all to blame for this, they couldn't develop nomenclature like chemchads.
      yeah call it spin, braket, blackbody, dark matter, force, strange, bottom, energy, heat and jerk. the public is definitely not going to confuse these for the definitions they used before and use daily.

  2. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    There is no real wavefunction collapse. You (the measuring device) just get entangled to the system you're measuring.

  3. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    quantum mechanics proves particles are aware.

  4. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Are you telling me particles are aware of humans?
    not only are particles aware, but they are omniscient. they can know weather a particle they were entangled with during the big bang is spin up or down any number of galaxies away.

  5. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    The universe is a product of your mind, and you suffer from social anxiety.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Stop manipulating people who don't understand quantum physics into believing obviously retarded hippy bullshit.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >t. quantum-truth-denying seether

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Thinks calling someone else a "seether" is a valid substitute for actually understanding the science.
          ngmi

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Sadly, that's like 50% of the "arguments" on LULZ.

  6. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Consider the collapse of the wavefunction for a single particle in the double slit experiment.
    There is a certain amount of information encoded in the particle waveform, but by observing which slit it passes through a lot of that information is passed from the waveform itself to the measurement system, thus there is not enough information left in the waveform to do anything other than go through one of the slits like a point-like particle. On the other hand, when not measured, the information has nowhere to go, and thus it must be encoded by the angle the particle exits the slits, with certain bands being more likely

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      *some good comments.

  7. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Observation doesn’t mean “a living being looked at it,” it means anything by which information could be determined about its state.
    If you have a particle floating around in a box how are you going to determine, for example, where in the box it is? You’d have to bounce something off of it like photons (light) or other particles and infer its location from that. And it’s that interaction that causes a wavefunction collapse.
    There is no “hands off” way to observe the properties of particles.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      The weird thing is why that entangled particle outside of the box also has its wave function collapse

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        That’s definitely a weird aspect of quantum mechanics. Einstein himself was never satisfied with that “spooky action at a distance.”
        The one thing that lets me tentatively accept it is that it is impossible to actually transmit any information across arbitrary distances using this property. Measuring an entangled particle before or after it has been collapsed by its partner gives indistinguishable results without corroboration from whoever has the partners.

  8. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    At the quantum level, observation IS interaction. It is literally impossible to measure any results at that scale without "destroying" the state you were trying to measure.

  9. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    [deleted post]

    >It is conjectured by many that the particle is aware and this is not too unreasonable.

    not just aware, tho. the particle is omniscient. particles know other states of all other particles at all times in the universe instantly.

  10. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Photons are timeless, they are instantaneous ray traces in the environment. When the photon is created it knows if you observed it because its already ray traced its path through space and imparted momentum on your observation medium

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      thats actually an interesting result in classical physics. I think it's called Fermats principle or law or whatever. The principle is a ray of light through a heterogeneous medium takes the pat that minimizes time. so a ray of light somehow knows the distributions of different materials everywhere around it.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        I think another way to look at it is length contraction.
        As any observer approaches the speed of light relative to another object, the length of that object as seen by the observer approaches 0.
        So for light, which can travel at c, all distances are 0 for it. It arrives at its destination the moment it leaves.

  11. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    I am surprised that there are actually good comments on anything bio/chem related ppl are usually retarded.

  12. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    people always choose simple sentimentalist anthropocentric supernatural explanations instead of rigorous materialistic ones. look at what people used to think about the sun, gravity, earth, etc.
    same thing with QM, there is probably an underlying mechanisms behind the weird observations that we don't know yet but people like quantum mysticism fags and the like will always tell you it's magic and justify irrational beliefs by god of the gaps (e.g. soul exists because of QM)

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >there is probably an underlying mechanisms behind the weird observations that we don't know yet
      I mean, no shit?
      A significant motivating force behind QM (and similarly nuclear science, on a more macro level) is that we don’t know how the “true” underpinnings of these things work, so we instead build our understanding around statistical observations of what we CAN see.
      We can’t peer deep enough into an unstable atom to see when it will decay, but by observing large populations of them we can still get ranges/averages that we can actually use.

  13. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >people always choose simple sentimentalist anthropocentric supernatural explanations instead of rigorous materialistic ones. look at what people used to think about the sun, gravity, earth, etc.
    same thing with QM, there is probably an underlying mechanisms behind the weird observations that we don't know yet but people like quantum mysticism fags and the like will always tell you it's magic and justify irrational beliefs by god of the gaps (e.g. soul exists because of QM)

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >same thing with QM, there is probably an underlying mechanisms behind the weird observations that we don't know yet but people like quantum mysticism fags and the like will always tell you it's magic and justify irrational beliefs by god of the gaps (e.g. soul exists because of QM)
      Bell

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        Does not do anything to disprove non-local hidden variables.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        what about this?

  14. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Are you telling me particles are aware of humans?
    Haven't read the thread yet, but I hope somebody else has already said this:

    "Observation" in QM has nothing to do with a person looking at something. It's about a wave or particle interacting with something else.

    Muh double-slit experiment:
    Huh, that's weird, if I pass photons through a double slit WITHOUT interacting with anything first, I get one result, but if they DO interact with something else first, I get a different result!
    Woooowwww, totes spooky!

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      >"Observation" in QM has nothing to do with a person looking at something. It's about a wave or particle interacting with something else.
      While true the fact that particle B can know that particle A was interacted with at a speed faster then light and possibly instantaneous is quite spoopy.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        I might be totally off-base with this but I imagine it as one “stretched” quantum system describing two particles rather than two distinct particles.
        So when it’s observed, the whole system assumes a fixed state.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >quite spoopy.
        You DO understand that quantum entanglement's "spoopy action at a distance" is a straw-man argument intended to critique the Copenhagen Interpretation, right?
        Just like Schrodinger's cat?

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Quantum entanglement has been tested and confirmed. Actual brainlet.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Quantum entanglement has been tested and confirmed.
            "spoopy action at a distance" remains a mystery.
            And I'm not wrong about the straw-man aspect.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_entanglement
            >Einstein and others considered such behavior impossible, as it violated
            >the local realism view of causality (Einstein referring to it as "spooky action
            >at a distance")[4] and argued that the accepted formulation of quantum
            >mechanics must therefore be incomplete.

            Let me know when the "accepted formulation of quantum mechanics" is complete.

  15. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    particles be dropping pocket spaghetti since dawn of time

Your email address will not be published.