Describe the moment when you finally grew up, rejected quantum mysticism...

Describe the moment when you finally grew up, rejected quantum mysticism, and accepted De Broglie–Bohm pilot wave theory?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_eraser_experiment
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem
youtube.com/watch?v=7zfnvGXpy-g
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

No such moment because I prefer Copenhagen interpretation, which is most in line with experimentally verified data.

>he still believes in quantum mysticism aka Copenhagen interpretation

pilot wave theory makes the same predictions

provide one (1) video of an experiment whereby a stream of electrons goes through a double slit then a sensor is placed to detect whether the electron goes through a slit and the electrons start behaving like particles again

Pilot wave is just slightly more in denial about the mysticism it peddles. Macroscopic superposition is where it's at.

Hey OP, why won't you describe the moment you decided you want to support a theory that completely disregards non-contextuality?
Seriously, I want to know.

>Hey OP, why won't you describe the moment you decided you want to support a theory that completely disregards non-contextuality?

It doesn't tho

John Bell was a proponent of pilot wave you fucking dumbass

No thanks, I'll stick to Many Worlds

>>Copenhagen interpretation
>>>>>De Broglie-Bohm pilot wave
If you believe in anything but the many worlds interpretation, you're literally a delusional brainlet.

Where does all the energy come from that dupes entire universes?

The power of imagination.

De Broglie–Bohm plus Chaos Theory probably gets you the same results as Quantum. The probabilities come in from the imprecision in knowing the exact initial conditions. That being said, the phenomenon of entanglement seems to evade description in De Broglie–Bohm.

>The probabilities come in from the imprecision in knowing the exact initial conditions.
>muh hidden variables
>Planck was wrong all along

The many worlds interpretation is much like how breadth-first search works in computer science.

But we are not talking about computer science, are we?

>If you aren't a Christian you must be a heretic
>If you don't believe this theory you must be stupid

>quantum mysticism
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but pilot-wave doesn't explain entanglement, so we are not really rid of the mysticism.

How is pilot wave QFT supposed to work, anyway?

Its an analogy to a phenomenon of a drop of oil in a body of water. The oil droplet can ride waves due to its different density. The oil riding the waves travels like the photons do through slits.

Yeah that doesn't answer the question.

>mfw engineers confuse local and global hidden variables

Well sorry then

I have my own theory

- Time, +Space is what? All of you draw pictures inside your heads when look in to the space everything is more in the past if that object more far away.

That's cannot use with Quantum mechanics because in Quantum everything is -Space, +Time that mean
Object stand still , space it self shrink down

The right way to unlock double slit experiment is ( no photons particles travel in space time, but space between observe screen and light source shrinking down to 0 and then photon jump.)

Pilot wave accounts for entanglement very well. The entire wave function knows the state of the particle and the wave function can be affected instantaneously. Entanglement is achieved by the pilot wave.

Pilot wave doesn't account for relativity. It could if people realized the things we describe as probability are actually movement through extra spacial dimensions.

ITT: People pretend to understand quantum mechanics. Good job fellas, you are very smart.

>I prefer Copenhagen
Good goy

Heretics are "non-orthodox" Christians, though. Non-Christians are called "heathens."

Entanglement is just conservation of "angular momentum" for lack of a better term. If you split a photon, the two resulting lower frequency photons contain the same energy as the original. This includes spin. So its not that one experimental outcome instantly changes the state of the other photon. Both of the split photons had their respective spin when they were created. We have no way of knowing which one has what spin until we measure one of them. If you measure the spin of one, you know the spin of the other simply because if the spin was opposite of what our theories predict you would be creating or destroying energy. Its like if i have 2 boxes, and two cards. One card is red, the other is green. The cards are put into the boxes at random and closed. One box is shipped to the moon, upon its arrival there, i open the box on Earth. It contains a red card, therefore the one on the moon must be green. Quantum teleportation achieved!

Eh your analogy Judy fails in one part. The cards are neither green nor red before one is measured.

How do you know if you haven't measured them?

I was reading it on sci and saw that it was a theory invented by whites instead of jews.

I immediately knew that this was the correct theory and that the (((copenhagen))) interpretation was designed to trick good goyim

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_eraser_experiment

>Not compatible with loop corrections
>Can't resolve Hardys paradox
Nice way to out yourself as a brainlet. Just accept it, the universe is explicitly non-classical.

The color of the card is decided when you measure it, and that happens seemingly instantly.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell's_theorem

Many worlds is the most retarded of all.

Maybe im just a brainlet but i dont see how either of these articles proves the entangled photons didnt already have the measured spin long before they were actually measured.

This is how I always thought it worked with pilot wave theory, and imho it makes a hell of a lot more sense than any of the other quantum theories I've seen.

what are you guys even talking about?
can this whole thread get translated into dummie language?

I don't know much about quantum mechanics, and have not done the maths, but Bohemian mechanics seems more profound, because it turns a weird world full of excitement, ambiguity and grant money into yet another boring, predictable part of physics, which is the natural step in every kind of knowledge extraction process.

If the wave function guides particles, what is it made of? Is it another different field? Is it the same EM field? Is it a third field component perpendicular to E and M fields? Is it a scalar that somehow interacts with the E and M fields? Is there an experimental setup to stir the wave function into a desired direction? What kind of material do you use to guide it? These are the questions that should be asked, at least from an engineering background.

yes it fucking is. bro do you even kochen-specker?

yes, and he believed in quantum contextuality. so what is your point?

youtube.com/watch?v=7zfnvGXpy-g

>yes it fucking is. bro do you even kochen-specker?

engineer pls go. Pilot-Wave is completely compatible with Kochen-specker

it's not about compatibility - I never said that the theorem says it's wrong. it just says that it has to be a contextual theory, which means it's pretty much useless.

>proof
>bells theorem
good try brainlet

>introduce invisible hidden variables because you're scared of mysticism
>introduce invisible pilot field because you're still scared of mysticism
>still get mysticism
>???
>it's not scary anymore?
Why not accept mysticism instead of clinging desperately to outdated quantum-objects-as-classic-particles interpretations?

Because most STEMfags aren't actually smart so any explanation that isn't "durr firs dis happen den dis happen" makes them poop their baby pants. Any results that point toward a non-deterministic reality CANT be true because THAT'S SCAWWYYY!!!

Stemfags are literally like animals, only able to understand what they can physically sense with their sensory organs, much like how animals operate. Mathematicians and philosophers exist in a higher cognitive plane which is why they are able to describe reality so much better than any animal-like scientist.

Funny, that's what you said every other time

Find the argument.

funny, that joke is not funny in this universe

I rejected Copenhagen bullshit from the get-go. I also don't default to always needing a position, and therefore selecting the "most right" seeming from the overall set. As is the clear case for lazy, weak, dishonest thinkers like: