what the FUCK are the implications
explain
>>16828513it would be anti semitic to explain
>>16828513>what the FUCK are the implicationsThe implication is that you shouldn't pretend inherently unobservable things constitute an actual, physical state of affairs.
causality is fake and gay just like our simmied "universe"
>>16828513(((coincidence))) counter
>>16828513Nothing? It doesn't demonstrate anything new
>>16828513ITS THE HISTORY ERASER BUTTON!!!!
>>16828513I know you probably thought there were some actually smart anons in here who could properly explain this to you but this board is just as retarded as the rest of 4chan. sorry anon
>>16828513Deboonked and explained by normal wave behavior, some scituber has a video on it
>>16828513Humans are getting super clever at trying to trick physics, we will figure everything out eventually, trust
>>16828513It's yet another experimental verification of quantum mechanics. Some brainlets thought it would break down and were once again proven wrong.
This proves universe is deterministic right? We are probably in a some sort of super position in our 4 dimensions.
>>16828513The implications are that you get all sorts of morons talking about it. Like the ones ITT.
>>16828513Just do the Math. The no cloning theorem doesn't allow perfect copies, and you need perfect copies for all the magical stuff to happen. Imperfect copies accumulate errors too fast, so you need even more imperfect copies that only makes everything worse. In the end is not better than guessing, so no instantaneous communication and no information sent to the past.
>>16828513Did you watch the video? It was debunked. The issue was that when fuckers explain the quantum eraser, they leave out all the fine details of the experiment and only gave us the interpretation, which was wrong from the start. In the actual experiment, the actual data had to be processed after the experiment was done, and then interpretation of the process was made. This data processing fact isn't something most people knew.In the experiment, there are 2 screen separated by distance that record the particle impact locations. When the eraser is off, the clone of the particle that hits screen 1 either goes into one of two detectors corresponding the left and right slit. This is true. They then tell you that on screen #1 you see two distinct left and right areas, as if the universe was yanking your chain and they stop treating them like waves. This is somewhat misleading. In reality, what you see is a huge blob of dots on screen #1, and it is only after post data processing from the two detectors that the blob of dots can be divided into two skinnier distributions whose centers are a distance apart. Something most people probably never considered was that those two skinnier distributions are both single slit diffraction (SSD) patterns - hugely important.When the eraser is turned on, then instead of the two detectors, the clone hits screen #2. They then say that screen #1 has a double slit diffraction (DSD) pattern. This is true. They then say that it's as if the universe was yanking your chain and now they're treating them like waves. The yanking concept is misleading. In both experiments with the eraser on and off, the distributions on screen #1 are basically the same! >As it turns out, it seems all DSD patterns are the same as the sum of two SSD patternscont.
>>16831282Suppose that screen #2 and the two detectors are very close so particles hit screen #1 after their clones. They would then say that since you know which way the clone went, say the left, you know which area on the screen the particle hit. But this is misleading, because it literally could be on the left or right side since the two SSDs overlap each other greatly! Instead, for each particle you can only give a probability of where it lands based on the left SSD.Then suppose that screen #2 and the two detectors are very far away so particles hit first before their clones. They would then suggest something crazy like since screen #1 was hit first, it seems that the future impact on the left or right detectors seems to be affecting the past impact on screen #1! This turns out to be false. As each particle hits screen #1, you can give a probability based on the two SSDs overlap whether the clone is going to hit the left or the right detector.Voila, QM is still annoyingly based on probability, but the universe is not laughing at you.
>>16829159A JOLLY CANDY LIKE BUTTON
read this
>>16831282Somehow no high school teacher seems to be aware of single slit diffraction
>>16831282>>As it turns out, it seems all DSD patterns are the same as the sum of two SSD patterns
