Is the double-slit experiment a proof for God or some kind of creator?

absolutely

You u derstand that photons are particles and electons acting similarly to them in some situations isnt shocking or enlightening

Brainlet.

Double slit is just simple geometry. If the distance between slits would be increased, electrons wouldn't interfere.

This "observe" bullshit is the chimp-to-man drawing to illustrate evolution all over again... or the word "theory" and it's reception outside scientific communities

Scientists name things in really dumb and misleading ways
Just fucking say interact you imbeciles, what do you mean observe!?

I can't. Neither can anyone else currently.
This has exactly nothing to do with "God".
A long time ago, humans could not explain why rubbing 2 sticks together makes fire. Was that a proof of God then?

it still is a proof of god...
you may explain the mechanism of producing fire via stick rubbing but in the most fundamental we don't have further info beyond these two things:
things is nature tend to favor:
-lower energy
-higher entropy

and these are pretty much as valid as "god exists" in explanation-level

this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever

It is proof that the universe uses ocular occlusion to save on processing power.

you logic is the following:
>why does everything happen?
>because god exists
now the question: why does god exist?
and we're back to square 1. you solved exactly nothing.

yes, it does

I'm saying at the basis of science lies axioms which by definition aren't falsifiable
Therefore they have the same argumentative quality as "it was god"

My argument wasn't a god defense
It was an offense against both god and scientific dogmatism
See

Yes.
It shows he has a sense of humor

The act of observing an electron makes it appear differently, that's all.

If you were the universe, wouldn't you act differently with everyone looking at you all the time?

Yes -- it's called "God of the Gaps" and is a common error in theology and attempts to prove the existence of God.

Evidence of God is not to be found in things we do not understand, but in the things we do.

The existence of ostriches and the flaccid penis already proved that.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed_choice_quantum_eraser

A creator can't be the unmoved mover. Something had to have created him. Certianly, this thing is not going to be a sentient intelligence.

What if the thing responsible for the effect observed is inscrutable and we can never know it?

But that's been proven to be false. Stop spreading these lies.

bump

It's proof that people still fall for pop/sci/ when it caters to their degeneracy

"Observation" entails physical processes you fucking mongoloid

>at the basis of science lies axioms which by definition aren't falsifiable
P1. The universe exists
P2. The universe is observable
P3. The universe is governed by laws which are invariant over time and space
P4. These laws can be approximated by models with varying degrees of predictive capability through the use of observation
Wow, such fragile epistemology! It's just as bad as assuming a divine creator!

Although you clearly were confusing the predictive models themselves with foundational dogma

GTFO, "Dr Quantum".

>If you were the universe, wouldn't you act differently with everyone looking at you all the time?
A-user-kun, please stop staring at me like that... >///

Is the word observation hurts your feelings? I could say measurment and that would mean the same.
Also read this and this en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler's_delayed_choice_experiment

Yes.

If we're in a quantum MWI situation, then eventually pic related's theory of an Omega Point (AKA God) will come to pass.

>a proof
Lrn2proof fgt pls

Yeah, "measurement" also entails physical processes

Then all you need is to show us is how the measurment collapses the wave function. Especially in the more sophisticated dobule slit experiments. No need for hostility though, I'm not a popsci fag.

>what is photoionic emission?

epistemic relativists get out!!

everything you listed have alternatives

No. Literally watching the lines appear alters the pattern, no electron beam required.

Go ask /k/, they would be happy to run this for you

So? I wasn't implying they didn't. Not sure what you're after here.

Is this true? I always assumed the method of watching it interfered. Does literally watching it change it or is that a meme?

So is it the instruments of Observation that change it's outcome or literally a human observing the event?

youtube.com/watch?v=U7Z_TIw9InA
I can't even begin to comprehend the math it would take to begin to understand this and yet the people who study the math for decades still don't understand this.

explain or you're talking bullshit

It's proof that free will is real.

>The universe is governed by laws which are invariant over time and space
Prove it.

It's proof that you are God. You make miraculous things happen with particles just by looking at them.

If there was a god he would be observing the particles :^^^)

here
youtube.com/watch?v=yOwTV-HgDUo

>The universe exists
Prove it.

Obviously you don't know what the word "assumption" means
Besides, it's implicit from just the existence of some rule set at every point. For instance, if the rule set R applies for 0

>proof of god

No, the concept of proof can barely hold phenomena.

This reminds me of the doublevslit experiment I perform ed on ops mom last night.

hurr durr

Photons are timeless things-they experience zero time due to their speed. When you understand that,it makes this kind of stuff a bit easier to understand.

>Photons are timeless things
Electrons aren't, and all this applies to them too.

fuck you're right

christ I'm an idiot

>b-but god cannot exist without devil
>0 cannot exist without 1
>logic cannot exist without emotion/willingness ?
>then whats not irrational and logical
>maybe 0 is 1 at the same time
>is maths real ?
>is real maths?
>is zero even or odd ?
>when dose value of pie end
>who is snake ?
>why are we still here ?

i dont believe in religion btw

Chim el-Adabal.

why did you made me listen a elder scrolls song ?

Is an electron a conscious being which is insecure and has weak character and afraid to be it's true self when people are watching? like a weak Stacey who isn't popular?

That's exactly the way I am thinking. No matter how far we reach there will be some axioms, some based rules that can't be explained. Universe is bound to have a start and this indicates the existence of a God.

I don't have a horse in this race religiously speaking, but without an unmoved mover, you're just arguing "Turtles all the way down" which is just as unfalsifiable.

The best straight answer we can give is "I don't know."

From there we can pick faith in one or the other, but both are just as good or bad critical thinking. It's two sides of the same coin.

>What made the universe?
>A prime mover: God. He's a pretty cool guy that creation and doesn't afraid of anything.
or
>Another universe made it which was made by another universe which was... ad infinitum

sen otistikmisin orozbu coccuu sg mal kafanı sikim

Fuck off, cuckroach

Undergraduate chemist detected.

The DSE along with the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser are proof that our reality is a very, very complex thing.

It seems that our reality is well aware of all information that exists within it and this information interacts with itself and regulates itself.

I've used this analogy recently to explain this phenomenon, hope this helps:
Let's say the sun is shining on a building and you're at the side of the building that casts its shadow. You have no shadow at the moment, even though the sun is shining (or you could say your shadow has no direction or is everywhere on the shadowside of the building), but once you walk to the edge of the shadow, where the sun shines, you will cast a shadow yourself. You will be determined by something that acts upon you, even though there doesn't seem to have been a huge change.