Can somebody here red pill me on the double-slit experiment, and its implications?

If light is a corpuscules, like bullets shooting from the light source, how do they spread in all directions simultaneously?

How generally accepted (within the scientific community that actively pursues this kind of stuff) is one of these explanations as opposed to the others?

DO YOU MEAN TO SAY THAT YOU HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA WHAT WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITY IS?

Multiverse? Not well at first, but now gaining ground.

Simulation? Massively popular with computer scientists (no surprise there), but still marginal.

Spookiness? The status quo.

Remember user, don't judge a hypothesis based on whether it has been accepted by the majority of scientists in the field or not.

That would be basing your decision on group think and prestige, and would be a very human thing to do.

Be smart, think logically.

> be smart
> think logically
> multiverse
> simulation

babbys first troll ?

Ignoring what most scientists say because you think you are smarter or more logical than them is a very human thing to do.

There is no duality you buttsickle. They are particles that emit waves, simple as that. You would have known that if you read a single scientific paper rather than just the title of it.

If you ask 10 scientist, you could get 10 different answers

youtube.com/watch?v=ZacggH9wB7Y

>think logically
good luck with that in quantum mechanics

so what does copenhagen interpretation say about the quantom sp00kyness ?

Multiverse and simulation hypotheses are logically viable, however they are not currently falsifiable, especially due to a lack of technological development.

The math for many of said theories, is also still in development.

>Ignoring what most scientists say because you think you are smarter or more logical than them is a very human thing to do.

I don't think that.

I just don't base my decisions on ethos, but rather on logic, and ultimately on science, which is essentially just falsifiable logic.

You've misinterpreted me.

I was being sarcastic to our new friend, hence the CAPS.

I was being sarcastic, on account of our new friend.

it is actually the least spooky interpretation, I think

Well, it's the closest to the experimental data.

So you could say it's the most scientific.

It's still pretty spooky.

There is no explanation whre those probabilities/wave functions come from. Thus physics is incomplite.

>MUH WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITY
this is a hack

Yes, that's the point...

So, our eyes interact with this mysterious particles or waves caued by that particles?

> our eyes
read up on it for fucks sake you dumb faggot. The observer in the experiment is not a conscious being, it's a measurement device which when interacts with the particle causes it to collapse, there is no human element let alone eyes

faggot

so what happens when light hits a measurement device (like my eyes)?

Or was the goal of physics NOT to explain life as we perceive it?

>red pill me
gtfo you pill-popping /pol/esmoker

If the light doesn't hit the surface for you to measure it, then you can't measure it.

>Or was the goal of physics NOT to explain life as we perceive it?
pretty much
It should be as objective as possible. There is also no way to perceive quantum mechanical effects without any kind of measurement device

no, it's result of oversimplification

>Or was the goal of physics NOT to explain life as we perceive it?
No. Our perception is completely subjective. Physics deals with the objective reality of the universe.

But what if math is literally magic and explains shit literally? So if we have wave-function, untill it is collapsed photon is in real superposition. But not becouse math explains it like this, but becouse math is magic, and in universe everything obeys math. Therefore if there is math for it, it IS reallity in the way math shows it.

im no quantum physicist but i figure this is whats happening.
i think one of the few methods of 'observing' the particle is letting it pass through a polarized lens.
the lens or observing device screws up the information about the particle like usual so you can never observe it without screwing it up at the same time.
the spooky part is that this acts like a safeguard built into the universe so we can never see what slit it went through.

all """quantum"""" problems are just ass pulled.

>"""quantum""""
what do you think is wrong with that term?

Despite being a meme pseudoscience? Absolutely nothing wrong.

>meme pseudoscience?
what the fuck? what doest it have to do with memes and why is it a pseudoscience?
just because we dont know the answers yet, doesnt mean these problems are ass pulled

I think the idea is that there are probably smaller particles which if we could see, would not be probabilistic in there location.

>De Broglie-Bohm
>0%

What mooks did they survey for this.

we can already use those quantum problems in quantum cryptographyand shit, they are real whether you like it or not

It's just a visible wave that oscillates particle density.

>In physics, complementarity is both a theoretical and an experimental result [1][2][3] of quantum mechanics, also referred to as principle of complementarity, closely associated with the Copenhagen interpretation. It holds that objects have complementary properties which cannot be observed or measured at all at the same time.

how convenient

>objective reality of the universe
Shiggy diggy

>how convenient
That you dont know what you are talking about, but do it anyway? yeah

guys this thread is very spooky can we close it?

let's just make up things so that our theory works

thats not what happens and the theory doesnt really work yet either

isn't it just heisenberg's uncertainty principle? When the photons are going through small slits the uncertainty of their position decreases, so the uncertainty of their momentum must increase. That's why they spread out as they go through the slits, and then depending on phase difference they either re-inforce or cancel one another when they reach the other screen.

Well you see, the particle's final destination is determined by its initial destination being put through a piloting wave equation.

>There is no duality you buttsickle. They are particles that emit waves, simple as that.

>mfw failed at the first hurdle
>mfw a photograph "emits" a human being when a camera detects them

Through the work of Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Louis de Broglie, Arthur Compton, Niels Bohr, and many others, current scientific theory holds that all particles also have a wave nature (and vice versa).[2] This phenomenon has been verified not only for elementary particles, but also for compound particles like atoms and even molecules.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave–particle_duality

It's like no one has read a quantum mechanics textbook. Here's an excerpt from Shankar's text.

non-quantum non-science fag here, i've heard you can only really "understand" quantum mechanics if you know the maths behind it, because trying to picture or understand it a posteriori is impossible.

is quantum mysticism bullshit or is discounting all of that a bigger meme than quantum mysticism itself

Some like to conflate legitimate conceptual problems in quantum mechanics with "mysticism" as a way of dismissing the notion that there are any interpretational issues at all. It's basically science's biggest false flag. That said, the formalism is important in understanding the concepts behind it.

No longer a thing:
phys.org/news/2015-03-particle.html

Otherwise, you can't measure a wave without collapsing it, because there's no more fundamental particle for which to measure it with. It's as if you're trying to measure the surface of a balloon with a needle.

The measurement is done by machines in any case - consciousness doesn't enter into it.

Hollywood just ran off with a statement taken out of context, as it so often does. The angel will get you, whether or not you blink.