this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
364 points (94.4% liked)

Science Memes

11441 readers
811 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

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

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



Research Committee

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
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 94 points 1 year ago (5 children)

"observing changes the result" doesn't mean conciousness attempting to look at it changes the result, there is nothing special about conciousness (in quantum mechanics)

"observing changes the result" means we try to measure atoms and fields but unfortunately our measurement tools are also made out of atoms and fields which interact with the atoms and fields we are trying to measure, giving us a different result than if we don't attempt to measure it

It does bring up interesting questions about what the "real" behavior of reality is tho, since anything we observe is technically different than what it would be if left alone. We can only ever know what a slightly altered state of reality is

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Think of it like this:

You can use a tennis ball machine to measure how far away a house is by firing the tennis ball at a constant velocity, timing how long it takes the tennis ball to come back to you, multiplying that time by the velocity, and dividing by 2 (since you measured the distance for a round trip). This works pretty darn well for measuring the distance to houses.

But now try this same trick to measure the distance to another ball. When your measuring ball hits the ball you want to measure, it doesn't stay resolutely planted in the ground like that nice friendly house. The energy from your measuring ball bounces the ball being measured off into the distance. Even if you could get your measuring ball to return, the ball you measured isn't in the place you measured it.

Replace that tennis ball with a photon, and you have the basic picture. There's no such thing as passive observation. Measuring something interacts with that thing. Conventional measurement is like in the case with the house, the thing being measured is so much bigger and more stable than the thing we're measuring with that the effect is negligible. But once you start trying to measure something on the same scale as your measuring tool, the ensuing chaos makes it basically impossible to get useful measurements.

[–] chitak166 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What happens if you try to cut a photon in half with a knife?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The edge of a knife has to be thinner than the thing it's cutting, and we haven't found anything thinner than a photon

[–] chitak166 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Clearly you haven't seen my penis.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

By that implication it's fundamentally impossible for anyone to see it.

[–] chitak166 3 points 1 year ago
[–] Wilzax 1 points 1 year ago

I've found plenty of things thinner than photons, it's just that the photons they're thinner than are extremely low energy.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This analogy is really well thought out. It really helps my brain understand the weirdness that goes on with measurements on the quantum scale. Thanks for taking the time to type it out.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

Every road leads to Plato's cave

[–] bouh 8 points 1 year ago

My teacher had a good comparison for this: observing macroscoping reality like we do microscopic reality would be like throwing a car at another car to measure its speed or position. Obviously you alter the course of events this way.

Fortunately light doesn't do much in the macroscopic world, so we can use it to observe stuff.

[–] chitak166 3 points 1 year ago

Great distinction.

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

What if you just measure the ambient particles

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

Then you are measuring something with matter still and it then affects it. Literally causing interactions to measure means altering it's state even at a nonchalant glance.

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

hmm, I can get how that might cause the measured item to say, change its velocity, but not how that would cause a wave to collapse into a single point.

[–] Feathercrown 1 points 1 year ago

It's not a physical wave. A wavefunction describes how likely something is to have different values for one of its properties. For example, an electron might have a wavefunction describing how likely it is to be in different locations. By observing if it actually is in a certain location or not, you force the electron to decide where it is concretely, "collapsing" the probability function into one value (its newly decided location).

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

Right but how do you measure the things around what you are trying to measure and get any data from it unless you expect them to also interact with the things you are measuring.

You have to have an interaction to measure even if you are measuring the outcome and steps away from the original interaction.

It's like measuring dark matter where the easiest way to prove it's existence was to wait and capture the decay of it but not the particle itself. But that means the particle was already gone when we got the measurements to prove it was there.