All we can know of things is how they change.
Whatever doesn’t change cant be known.
Well I was talking about neurons. Neurons we’ve seen and observed their actions. More than can be said for these alleged particles.
There are no particles in QM, only measurements.
The measurements depend on assuming the “particle” cannot be known, yet we are all supposed to be amazed at that the measurments only work if the “particle” cannot be known. Nah.
To me, QM= raw data waiting for a hypothesis
These “particles” remain hypothetical. But even by definition lol
What was Elegant about Einstein os that he only did maths once he had somewhere for rhe maths to go
The cruciap thing to understand is that light is not as complicated as most would have us believe. “Is it a ray? Is it a wave?” is a false freak-out.
The obvious answer is: it’s too fast to be either.
And most of these tests giving these “paradoxes” involve measurements so indirect as to make any allegation of knowing even what exactly is being measured disingenuous.
Fuck it, I’ll go a step further: I think QM is a con.
In as far as its maths do not work with Relativity it must be wrong because Relativity is proven - I suspect I have overestimated the discretion of QM.
The uncertainty principle is not a prinviple of subatomic scale, it is a principle of the measurment techniques of quantum mechanics.
Quanta.
Quantifications.
Quantity, not of, but as.
Quantum state is not a state of being, but a state of measurment.
It doesn’t work with relativity because they lie about what they consider matter to be.
Well they don’t necessarily have a conception of matter, rather of information.
But indeed this is at the best pointless and at worst misleading.
Values are very discreet but not categorical.
Insofar as it can make accurate calculations with very complicated numbers and very tiny timespans, I still believe it can and will make excellent computers.
But a much more effective and even faster computer would be built if someone bothered to endeaver to figure out what is there at the subatomic level.
A lot like astronomy got easier when gravity was understood and thus eliptical orbits.
That’s exactly right. To compare a conception of information to a conception of matter is so disgusting… That only a postmodernest could endeavour it.
The reason they lie about it is that it sounds way less cool to say you figured out some really cool information analysis techniques than that you proved Einstein wrong.
Anyway, what I was trying to say is that The Extended Phenotype and mirror neurons pointed to a new direction science would have taken if not for one of the most horrible unexpected comebacks in history: the global take-over of the Temperance Movement. The fucking old hags, the puritans, the people who are disgusted by their own shit, as Garcia Marquez put it, the prissy old ladies. That’s you by the way, Zoot Allures, you are the prissy old ladies. John fucking McCain. IS THIS REALLY HOW YOU WANTED TO WIN? YOU DISGUST ME.
Lol I… I promise that’s not where I wanted it to go.
Until you secure the execution of George W. Bush, I will not take you seriously.
There is a lot of subatomic physics that is perfectly hard; to name and example, electron spin is hard physics, discovered by Goudsmit who was a friend of my family as well as of Einstein, this led to a vast array of powers, such as the power to discern hydrogen in the cosmos and thus to the power to discern the structure of our galaxy. My father worked at such a project.
The key is here that if the spin in a hydrogen atom, which has only one electron, flips, a radio wave with a particular wavelength of 21 centimetre is released. They then built a large radio-telescope configured specifically to receive these 21 cm waves. With this telescope the first great studies of the galaxy were performed and much of what we now know was mapped using this method.