L&FP, 65: So, you think you understand the double slit experiment? (HT, Q & BA77)

_{kairosfocus
February 5, 2023

Academic Freedom, Logic and Reason, Physics

1}_{Categories
Academic Freedom
Logic and Reason
Physics}

Share: Facebook; Twitter/X; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

So, here we go:

And, the rise of solid state laser pointers makes this sort of exercise so much easier, BUT YOU MUST BE CAREFUL NOT TO GET SUCH A BRIGHT SOURCE INTO YOUR EYE AS THIS MAY CAUSE RETINAL BURNS THUS BLIND SPOTS. (I recall, buying and assembling a kit He-Ne laser to have this exercise for my High School students. We had a ball, using metre sticks stuck to a screen with blu-tack, to observe and measure effects from several metres away.)

So, now, what about, electrons:

Notice, the pattern here builds up statistically, one spot at a time.

Then, HT BA77 way back, here is Dr Quantum:

Now, if you think you have it all figured out, think again, and again, and again. KF

Comments

Thanks for the examples at #46, Origenes. However, it seems to me that it is a perspective that is largely an ideological holdover from classical physics that there is some kind of dividing line between ordinary macro experiences and what is going on in the subatomic world under special conditions. I've read where there is no known dividing line even in principle or theory. It's more like a habit of thinking that there is must be some kind of fundamental difference. How Quantum Mechanics Lets Us See, Smell and Touch https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/how-quantum-mechanics-lets-us-see-smell-and-touch If reality is fundamentally informational, then everything we experience is a form of informational transactions and representations, whether micro or macro. Perhaps the reason we don't think of the macro world being a collection of quantum effects is because scientists haven't thought to test it out from a different perspective, or perhaps it's because testing it out might look too much like mysticism or psi research.William J Murray_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
05:34 AM
5
05
34
AM
PDT}

WJM @44 Here are some examples of quantum effects that are observable in larger objects, with an explanation of how improbable their occurrence is.
If the quantum wave natures of the individual bits of matter can be aligned into a coherent state, then quantum effects will become evident on the macroscopic scale. Below are some examples of macroscopic quantum effects. Superconductivity. When a conducting material is cooled enough, its conduction electrons spread out into large-scale coherent wave states. These coherent wave states are able to flow past impurities and atoms without being perturbed, so that a material with zero electrical resistance results. Superconductivity leads to interesting macroscopic effects such as quantum levitation (the Meissner effect). Superfluidity. When certain materials are cooled enough, their atoms can spread out into coherent wave states that resist surface tension, allowing the material to flow like a liquid with zero viscosity. Bose Einstein Condensates. When certain materials are cooled enough, their atoms spread out completely into a single, giant, coherent wave state. A macroscopic chunk of matter that has condensed in this way acts like a wave and exhibits wave properties such as interference. Note that laser light is often mentioned as a macroscopic quantum effect. However, coherent light such as laser light is successfully explained by the classical Maxwell equations and therefore is not a quantum effect. However, the way laser light is produced; through stimulated emission and a transition between discrete energy levels; is a quantum effect. But, stimulated emission in lasers is an atomic-scale effect and therefore does not make our list of macroscopic quantum effects. Similarly, there are many atomic-scale quantum effects that lead to results that are observable on the macroscopic scale, like the quantum effects that make modern computers possible. These effects are not really happening on the macroscopic scale. Rather, the effects happen on an atomic scale, and then the results of the effect are amplified to a macroscopic level. [C. S. Baird]
- - - - The examples above are NOT "informationally isolated." If being informationally isolated is a prerequisite for their occurrence [according to youtuber Ash], why is it that they happen anyway?Origenes_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
04:21 AM
4
04
21
AM
PDT}

As to: "I think the quantum events are at molecular scale", Yet,
"superposition is not limited to small systems,,," - Zeilinger Anton Zeilinger interviewed about Quantum Mechanics - video - 2018 (The essence of Quantum Physics for a general audience) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z82XCvgnpmA 5:10 min:,,, superposition is not limited to small systems,,, 17:30:,,, In quantum mechanics we have the measurement paradox (i.e. measurement problem),,, I think it (the measurement paradox) tells us something about the role of observation in the world. And the role of information.,, Maybe there are situations where we have to reconsider the "Cartesian cut"*,,, *Cartesian Cut The Cartesian cut is a metaphorical notion alluding to Decartes' distinction of res cogitans (thinking substance) and res extensa (extended substance). It plays a crucial role in the long history of the problem of the relationship between mind and matter and is constitutive for the natural sciences of today. While the elements of res cogitans are mental (non-material) entities like ideas, models, or concepts, the elements of res extensa are material facts, events, or data. The conventional referents of all natural sciences belong to the latter regime. http://see.library.utoronto.ca/pages/cartesian_cutdef.html
Also of note:, "the fact that quantum mechanics applies on all scales forces us to confront the theory’s deepest mysteries. We cannot simply write them off as mere details that matter only on the very smallest scales.,,, We must explain space and time (4D space-time) as somehow emerging from fundamentally spaceless and timeless physics."
Living In A Quantum World - Vlatko Vedral - 2011 Excerpt: experiments now leave very little room for such processes to operate. The division between the quantum and classical worlds appears not to be fundamental. It is just a question of experimental ingenuity, and few physicists now think that classical physics will ever really make a comeback at any scale.,,, Thus, the fact that quantum mechanics applies on all scales forces us to confront the theory’s deepest mysteries. We cannot simply write them off as mere details that matter only on the very smallest scales. For instance, space and time are two of the most fundamental classical concepts, but according to quantum mechanics they are secondary. The entanglements are primary. They interconnect quantum systems without reference to space and time. If there were a dividing line between the quantum and the classical worlds, we could use the space and time of the classical world to provide a framework for describing quantum processes. But without such a dividing line—and, indeed, without a truly classical world—we lose this framework. We must explain space and time (4D space-time) as somehow emerging from fundamentally spaceless and timeless physics. http://phy.ntnu.edu.tw/~chchang/Notes10b/0611038.pdf
bornagain77_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
04:05 AM
4
04
05
AM
PDT}

Origenes @29, You quoted this,
While quantum effects are not strictly confined to the atomic scale, they certainly are more common at the atomic scale.
Exactly how is this being demonstrated? What exactly are the "quantum effects" we are supposedly "not observing" in the behavior of the macro-world?William J Murray_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
03:40 AM
3
03
40
AM
PDT}

Origenes and Q, I think the quantum events are at molecular scale as in a laser [lasing and negative temperature], similar for semiconductor devices, the photoeffect, blackbody radiation, spectrum of a flame or gas discharge lamp, liquid He II superfluidity, superconductivity esp in interaction with a B field. . Did I miss something key? KFkairosfocus_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
03:19 AM
3
03
19
AM
PDT}

JVL, thanks, forgot the al, "the." KFkairosfocus_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
03:16 AM
3
03
16
AM
PDT}

VL asked @26,
Did the photons hitting the desert collapse and release their energy as they hit, or are you seriously saying in 17 that the temperature of the desert didn’t fluctuate until we read the recording?
I think the quantum physics answer would be that all possible outcomes of examining that recording are in a state of superposition until an observing consciousness checks the results, which then collapses the superpositions for that observer. It's another version of Schrodinger's Cat. The interesting part is that collapsing that information for that observer doesn't even collapse it for all observers. That experiment has also been conducted. It appears reality is individually collapsed per each observer.William J Murray_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
03:04 AM
3
03
04
AM
PDT}

Querius said:
Let nature teach me rather than projecting my prejudices and preferences onto nature.
Literally impossible. Every choice. every thought is an act of preference and/or programming, that programming (prejudice) supplied by figures of authority, society, media, school and culture operating across decades of time as one grows up. If the nature of reality is that it reflects back at you that which is the structure of your own mind, then it cannot teach you anything.William J Murray_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
02:56 AM
2
02
56
AM
PDT}

At 21 VL states,
"So BA’s interpretation is that the wave function collapses and the moon heats up because God observes everything.,,,"
and then VL, predictably, reverts back to decoherence even though she has been shown it is NOT a coherent explanation,
"(because one QM interpretation is that an interaction with other phenomena counts as a measurement) and too many observers, because no one is observing the back side of the moon."
First, let's just 'observe' the fact that the atheist's belief that God is not observing everything has had some fairly terrible consequences in human history,
“What Hitler did not believe and what Stalin did not believe and what Mao did not believe and what the SS did not believe and what the Gestapo did not believe and what the NKVD did not believe and what the commissars, functionaries, swaggering executioners, Nazi doctors, Communist Party theoreticians, intellectuals, Brown Shirts, Black Shirts, gauleiters, and a thousand party hacks did not believe was that God was watching what they were doing. And as far as we can tell, very few of those carrying out the horrors of the twentieth century worried overmuch that God was watching what they were doing either. That is, after all, the meaning of a secular society.” - David Berlinski, The Devil's Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions
Whereas, on the other hand, the Christian's belief that God is observing everything has been a source of great hope and comfort. As Eben Alexander stated after his Near Death Experience, "He (God) is right here with each of us right now, seeing what we see, suffering what we suffer... and hoping desperately that we will keep our hope and faith in Him. Because that hope and faith will be triumphant."
The Easter Question - Eben Alexander, M.D. - Harvard - March 2013 Excerpt: More than ever since my near death experience, I consider myself a Christian -,,, Now, I can tell you that if someone had asked me, in the days before my NDE, what I thought of this (Easter) story, I would have said that it was lovely. But it remained just that -- a story. To say that the physical body of a man who had been brutally tortured and killed could simply get up and return to the world a few days later is to contradict every fact we know about the universe. It wasn't simply an unscientific idea. It was a downright anti-scientific one. But it is an idea that I now believe. Not in a lip-service way. Not in a dress-up-it's-Easter kind of way. I believe it with all my heart, and all my soul.,, We are, really and truly, made in God's image. But most of the time we are sadly unaware of this fact. We are unconscious both of our intimate kinship with God, and of His constant presence with us. On the level of our everyday consciousness, this is a world of separation -- one where people and objects move about, occasionally interacting with each other, but where essentially we are always alone. But this cold dead world of separate objects is an illusion. It's not the world we actually live in.,,, ,,He (God) is right here with each of us right now, seeing what we see, suffering what we suffer... and hoping desperately that we will keep our hope and faith in Him. Because that hope and faith will be triumphant. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eben-alexander-md/the-easter-question_b_2979741.html
Aside from those two drastically different 'moral results', is there any scientific justification that we can appeal to justify the belief that God is watching everything? Yes there is. As mentioned previously, after discussing some problems with ‘decoherence’, the ‘von Neumann chain’ is discussed in this following video. Where it is stated,
"It was Niels Bohr that pointed out we cannot specify the wavefunction of an observed particle separately from the other particle that is used to measure it. In other words, the wave function of a particle cannot be unentangled from that of whatever is used to measure it and so on and so on. Basically what this means is when one photon is measured by another they entangle if one particle measures another it inherits part of its wave function so to speak and that particle which is supposed to be measuring cannot be fully explained without what it is measuring. So you need another measuring device to collapse that initial measuring particle to a definite state but then you need something else to collapse thatmeasuring apparatus as well and so on and so on. This creates a chain of material objects in a superposition of measuring which is known as a "von Neumann chain". Since quantum laws are what truly ascribe all material objects some other particle or measuring apparatus is always needed to collapse the next one in line you keep going back until you get to something that would be non-local outside the entire material system which escapes this chain by not being bound by the same physical laws and is able to cause final collapse of everything in the chain which is argued to be a conscious observer something beyond the material with the ability to collapse the entire physical system. So this decoherence theory the idea that physical interaction of particles and the environment will cause collapse without the input of a conscious observer cannot solve the measurement problem. Advocates of decoherence theory openly admit decoherence alone cannot fully explain why there is a collapse to one definite state or even derive the born rule for that matter - The Measurement Problem https://youtu.be/qB7d5V71vUE?t=161
And Stephen Barr states the situation as such, "If the “observer” were just a purely physical entity, such as a Geiger counter, one could in principle write down a bigger wavefunction that described not only the thing being measured but also the observer. And, when calculated with the Schrödinger equation, that bigger wave function would not jump!"
Does Quantum Physics Make it Easier to Believe in God? Stephen M. Barr - July 10, 2012 Excerpt: Couldn’t an inanimate physical device (say, a Geiger counter) carry out a “measurement”? That would run into the very problem pointed out by von Neumann: If the “observer” were just a purely physical entity, such as a Geiger counter, one could in principle write down a bigger wavefunction that described not only the thing being measured but also the observer. And, when calculated with the Schrödinger equation, that bigger wave function would not jump! Again: as long as only purely physical entities are involved, they are governed by an equation that says that the probabilities don’t jump. That’s why, when Peierls was asked whether a machine could be an “observer,” he said no, explaining that “the quantum mechanical description is in terms of knowledge, and knowledge requires somebody who knows.” Not a purely physical thing, but a mind. https://books.google.com/books?id=jP0lDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA89#v=onepage&q&f=false
And to support the claim that "the wave function of a particle cannot be unentangled from that of whatever is used to measure it and so on and so on", Charles Bennett, (of quantum teleportation fame), notes that "Entanglement is ubiquitous: Almost every interaction between two systems creates entanglement between them… Most systems in nature… interact so strongly with the environment as to become entangled with it almost immediately.”
Information is Quantum - Charles Bennett - video 39:30 minute mark: “Entanglement is ubiquitous: Almost every interaction between two systems creates entanglement between them… Most systems in nature… interact so strongly with the environment as to become entangled with it almost immediately.”… 44:00 minute mark: “A classical communications channel is a quantum communication channel with an eavesdropper (maybe only the environment)… A classical computer is a quantum computer handicapped by having eavesdroppers on all its wires.” https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/philip-cunningham-offers-information-is-quantum/
In fact, to do experiments involving quantum entanglement, and to also build quantum computers, isolating a system, and preventing entanglement with surrounding macroscopic objects, is a major technical hurdle that has to be overcome and prevented. Which is to say, contrary to popular belief that entanglement only applies in 'special cases' for microscopic systems, macroscopic systems themselves are, actually, massively quantumly entangled systems that are entangled with everything else. In short, VL's appeal to the 'far side of the moon' does not give her an escape from dealing with the non-local, 'beyond space and time', collapse of the wave function. Again, in order to explain the effect of non-locality in quantum mechanics, you need a beyond space and time cause. (Aspect, Clauser, Zeilinger).
“There’s one important message I want to say here. When you look at the predictions of quantum mechanics for multi-particle entanglement,, so you could have one measurement here, one (measurement) there, an earlier (measurement), a later (measurement), and so on. These predictions (of quantum mechanics) are completely independent of the relative arrangements of measurements in space and time. That tells you something about the role of space and time. There’s no role at all.”,,, – Anton Zeilinger – 2022 Nobel Prize lectures in physics – video (1:50:07 mark) https://youtu.be/a9FsKqvrJNY?t=6607
Christian Theists have a beyond space and time cause that they can appeal to. Atheists do not.
Colossians 1:17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
bornagain77_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
02:55 AM
2
02
55
AM
PDT}

Kairosfocus: Jim Khalili’s version is illuminating, It's Jim Al-Khalili actually.JVL_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
01:17 AM
1
01
17
AM
PDT}

Bornagain77: I went to point out how this falsification of hidden variables this NOT a minor problem for atheistic materialists, Perhaps I've missed some point but I'm not sure why you think that result is a problem for non-theists? If you could elucidate a bit that might help clear things up.JVL_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
01:03 AM
1
01
03
AM
PDT}

Querius @ 31
Why don’t quantum effects occur in large objects? double slit experiment with tennis balls https://youtu.be/YbrxK1XMmVA
In the video, it is claimed that large objects are not informationally isolated and therefore are in a collapsed state and do not exhibit quantum effects. That makes sense, and it seems to contradict the explanation that I have quoted in #29. However, no doubt you are aware, there are larger objects that show quantum effects and are not informationally isolated, so how does that fit in?Origenes_{February 6, 2023
February
02
Feb
6
06
2023
12:41 AM
12
12
41
AM
PDT}

VL, Ash puts it well, a macro object is one not informationally isolated from the cosmos as a whole. Thus, correspondence principle; once one approaches that scale where such interaction is all but inevitable, classical results obtain. Here, he points out the problem with Schrodinger's cat. BTW, double slit exercises are now up to thousand atom particles, but there are no tennis ball cases. KFkairosfocus_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
11:42 PM
11
11
42
PM
PDT}

Q, Ash makes a very good point about information/interaction isolation. Q-mech is what happens when nothing is looking. KFkairosfocus_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
11:37 PM
11
11
37
PM
PDT}

F/N: Jim Al-Khalili's version is illuminating, especially sneaking in and turning off the observing machine https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9tKncAdlHQ [Thanks, JVL for the Al]kairosfocus_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
11:22 PM
11
11
22
PM
PDT}

EDTA @27, You're very welcome. I think this book should be required reading for all engineering students. -QQuerius_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
11:13 PM
11
11
13
PM
PDT}

Viola Lee @26, The following link is to an excellent video with a good explanation. Note that the double-slit experiment has been performed not just with light, but with electrons, atoms, Carbon "bucky balls," and molecules of several thousand atoms. Also note that information is at the core of the explanation and that physical measuring devices cannot measure probability waves (a form of information) except when collapsing them. Why don't quantum effects occur in large objects? double slit experiment with tennis balls https://youtu.be/YbrxK1XMmVA There are a couple of points that I'd question and some I'd raise, but on the whole, it will provide you with the information (no pun intended) you're looking for. -QQuerius_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
11:11 PM
11
11
11
PM
PDT}

VL, a first, simple point is to recognise that quantum particles are wavicles and behave in radically different ways from things we address at ordinary macro scale. Notice, the vid with an electron beam pattern building up one by one, stochastically. Just what wave is interfering -- thus diffracting and superposing -- with what? The classic Copenhagen answer is a probability wave. Which is itself weird beyond our understanding. Others suggest a sort of ever branching cosmos, which I doubt. Then there is the correspondence principle that things must go to the classical limit as we get to classical scales, e.g. the Moon and heating its far side. Again, an observationally imposed constraint. Then, why does observing after the slits still affect what should have happened before? Then, notice the observations imposed by scattering smoke particles on the laser light exercise, and contrast say how a cloud or smoke chamber or stack of photographic plates tracks a particle path, leading to our lab scale observations. Where, such can be both quantum and relativistic. BTW, in certain semiconductor media, current carrier speeds are a good fraction of the speed of light. While we are at it, a laser itself is inherently a quantum device, and its population inversion imposes that the temperature is negative, which even more weirdly is "higher" than an infinite temperature, for the general rule that higher levels have fewer particles in them is violated by the laser. Phenomena first, math follows, talking third. Shut up and calculate. Lurking silently, the gaps between quantum and relativity. The key point is, first to recognise where the observations lead us, and that our mathematical, logic model descriptions have to address that observational reality, our forming concepts and verbal discussions is secondary. Learning that we have limited understanding is therefore pivotal. KF PS, Vivid, yes, you are right. The cartoon is vivid and makes a point, but learning to acknowledge wavicles and just plain weirdness that boggles us even as we can construct mathematical models of it is an exercise in paradigm shift; which the presenter experiences before our eyes -- itself an observation that should not be overlooked. Thence, frankly, humility. We really, really, really don't understand this stuff. Which is a key point of knowing our limitations. But better a known unknown than unknown unknowns. PPS, try to figure out accent and word use by the first presenter. My guess is, Australian, with Indian parents, long settled in the US. Layers on layers, wheels within wheels. Which points to omnidirectional wheels.kairosfocus_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
10:53 PM
10
10
53
PM
PDT}

The moon heats up. At the atomic scale, quantum effects rule, but at the macroscopic scale, they do not. I have found the following clear explanation:
While quantum effects are not strictly confined to the atomic scale, they certainly are more common at the atomic scale. Why is this? Let’s look at matter. To be a quantum effect, we have to get matter to act like waves. To be a macroscopic quantum effect, we have to get many bits of matter to act like waves in an organized fashion. If all the bits of matter are acting like waves in a random, disjointed manner, then their waves interfere and average away to zero on the macroscopic scale. In physics, we refer to an organized wave-like behavior as “coherence”. The more the wave-like natures of the bits of matter are aligned, the more coherent is the object overall. And the more coherent an object, the more it acts like a wave overall. As a rough analogy, consider a group of kids splashing about in a swimming pool. If the kids are all doing their own thing, then the water waves they create when they splash will be random. A bunch of random water waves adds up to approximately zero. This system is non-coherent and the water waves are not obvious unless you look closely. Now, if the kids line up and all splash the water at the same moment every two seconds, all of their little waves add up to one giant wave of water. This system is coherent, and the water wave in the pool is obvious. The swimming pool is only an analogy. Water waves act like waves of little solid particles, and are therefore classical and not quantum. In order to act like quantum waves, bits of matter must not just have their motions aligned, the bits of matter must also have their quantum wave natures aligned. The key here is that a large-scale coherent state is improbable as long as the individual parts are behaving randomly. There are only a handful of possible ways to have a system of pieces act in a coordinated fashion, while there are far more ways to have the system act in an uncoordinated fashion. Therefore, coordinated behavior is less likely than uncoordinated behavior, although not impossible. For example, if you roll 5 traditional dice, there are six ways to get all the numbers to be the same in one roll. In contrast, there are thousands of ways to get all the numbers to not be the same. Getting the dice to show the same number is improbable but not impossible. In a similar way, quantum coherence on the macroscopic scale is improbable, but not impossible.
Origenes_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
10:42 PM
10
10
42
PM
PDT}

VL “Really, I don’t understand what KF was intending, as his headline seemed to imply that some major clarification was going to take place, but actually the videos were short explanations of what is well-known about the double-slit experiment, as has been for decades. These videos are nothing new: I don’t get what new thing we’re supposed to get?” Maybe his last sentence that if we think we have it all figured out think again and again? A bit of humor? The cartoon doc was funny. Personally I was not expecting some great revelation but that’s just me. Vividvividbleau_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
09:11 PM
9
09
11
PM
PDT}

Q, Very interesting; thanks for the details!EDTA_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
08:01 PM
8
08
01
PM
PDT}

I did. Pink Floyd has never been on my playlist. Another scenario. We put a thermometer in a completely uninhabited part of a desert and it records the temperature of the sand for a week. Later we retrieve the recording device. Did the photons hitting the desert collapse and release their energy as they hit, or are you seriously saying in 17 that the temperature of the desert didn't fluctuate until we read the recording? And then what about the very large number of other points in the desert that had no recording device. Did they in fact not go through any temperature fluctuations? The photons had no effect on the earth because no one was there watching? Is there anything you can explain about what you think about this?Viola Lee_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
08:00 PM
8
08
00
PM
PDT}

Viola Lee, I guess you missed my Pink Floyd references . . . ;-) -QQuerius_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
07:51 PM
7
07
51
PM
PDT}

EDTA and Relatd, Here are some excerpts from Atomic Accidents.
The are now sixty five documented incidents in which nuclear weapons owned by the United States were lost, destroyed, or damaged between 1945 and 1989.
One of these incidents occurred on just after midnight on January 24, 1961 over Faro, North Carolina, known as The Goldsboro Incident. It involved the B52G bomber number 58-187, which carried two MK-39 mod 2 thermonuclear weapons of 3.8 megatons each. Each one packed more explosive power than all detonations in human history combined, including the two dropped on Japan in WW2. Due to a failure cascade involving a fuel leak and an exploding wing, the plane broke apart in the air and the two bombs dropped. Page 378 reads . . .
As it rolled out of the bomb bay, the arming rods were jerked out, and it began the detonation sequence with the actuation of the Single Pulse Generator, MC-845. Next, the MC-834 Explosive Actuator fired, then the MC-543 Timer ran down and stopped. The MC 832 Differential Pressure Switch, detecting that the correct altitude had been reached, closed all contacts. Two more steps to go and the bomb would make Goldsboro into a large inland bay. The MC-640 Low Voltage Thermal Battery was turned on and warmed up. Fortunately, the MC-772 Arm-Safe Switch had not been turned onto ARM. This would have required the radar navigator to pull out the knob on his control panel using both hands, shearing off a copper retaining pin, and turn it to ARM. The bomb did not explode.
The second bomb also armed, but its parachute did not deploy, and it reached its terminal velocity of about 700 mph, leaving a crater 15 feet in diameter and six feet deep. Flames were everywhere as the remaining jet fuel burned off. Four of the five crewmen parachuted successfully and survived the crash. The second bomb was retrieved after digging 22 feet into the crater, where they found the MC-772 Arm-Safe Switch in the armed position. The recovery team found most, but not all of that bomb at 42 feet. They gave up digging and filled up the hole. Later simulations indicated that the missing portion was likely at about 120 feet down. There's a historic marker there now that notes the crash of the bomber. I'd imagine that the force of the impact destroyed the detonating mechanism before it could activate. Anyway, the book is a thrilling read and teaches important lessons about risk accumulation and failure cascades. -QQuerius_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
07:49 PM
7
07
49
PM
PDT}

Really, I don't understand what KF was intending, as his headline seemed to imply that some major clarification was going to take place, but actually the videos were short explanations of what is well-known about the double-slit experiment, as has been for decades. These videos are nothing new: I don't get what new thing we're supposed to get? Also, the last one, Dr. Quantum one, is pretty bad. First he says calls electrons "tiny bits of matter", which no one believes. Then he use the phrase "measuring or observing", which is the big question mark in the issue, but illustrates with an eye, which prejudices the interpretation. And last, he makes the terrible remark that "the electron decides what to do, as if it were aware of being watched" ' anthropomorphizing the whole situation, and again assuming observation by a person, as opposed to just being measured.Viola Lee_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
06:32 PM
6
06
32
PM
PDT}

So BA's interpretation is that the wave function collapses and the moon heats up because God observes everything. Q writes, "However, others argue that at a macro scale, there are too many observers/measurements going on, so the “dark side” of the moon would indeed light up." First, I purposely didn't say "lights up". I said gets hot. Also, there is a difference between saying too many measurements (because one QM interpretation is that an interaction with other phenomena counts as a measurement) and too many observers, because no one is observing the back side of the moon. So saying observers/measurements slides right by one of the questions at hand, which whether consciousness is necessary for quantum phenomena to collapse.Viola Lee_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
06:29 PM
6
06
29
PM
PDT}

EDTA at 19, A lot of people do not understand the arming concept when it comes to nuclear warheads. They think it behaves exactly like a regular bomb, i.e. hits the ground and explodes. All the safeties have to be released. And for maximum effect, nuclear bombs explode above the ground. ICBM-type warheads could hit the ground or a body of water.relatd_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
06:18 PM
6
06
18
PM
PDT}

Q @ 10, >For example, did you know that the U.S. accidentally dropped a nuclear weapon on a small American town or that the warhead of an ICBM fell off the top of a missile and hit the bottom of its silo? In both cases, it was either luck or divine intervention that the warheads didn’t go off! A plutonium sphere type warhead won't "go off" unless the charges around the sphere are simultaneously detonated. Even if the conventional explosives detonated due to impact, the fissile material would be (mostly) ejected out the opposite side from where the detonation began. You may get plenty of radioactive material scattered around you, which isn't good, but I would not have expected the warhead's fissile material to have actually detonated. (And if it were a fusion warhead, therefore, the fusion reaction would not have occurred either.) (The one dropped on the town would have depended on whether it was properly armed, which it apparently wasn't.)EDTA_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
05:49 PM
5
05
49
PM
PDT}

"How do you explain that in the absence of any conscious observer?" God is not an 'absent observer' in my Christian worldview. Indeed, I hold God to be collapsing the infinite dimensional/infinite information wave function https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/harvard-astronomer-the-wonders-of-the-universe-point-to-a-creator/#comment-775090 Of related note, after discussing some problems with 'decoherence', the 'von Neumann chain' is discussed at the 3:22 mark of this following video
The Measurement Problem https://youtu.be/qB7d5V71vUE?t=200
bornagain77_{February 5, 2023
February
02
Feb
5
05
2023
05:48 PM
5
05
48
PM
PDT}

Prev 1 … 4 5 6 7 Next