Which part are you having difficulty processing, or what is it you consider inconsistent with any evidence?

>>16883070
why is there a collapse to begin with, what causes it (what exactly is an observation in terms of a wave function collapse), how does it happen. none of it makes a lick of sense

To observe it you interact with. Photons or whatever you're using - electros, protons, photons, etc. you can't observe it otherwise.

>>16883064
>at the fundamental level everything is just a wave function
No it isn't. You don't understand QM.

things are not wave functions
they are just described by wave functions, at the fundamental level it is either pseudorandom or chaos

>>16883064
Ill save you some time and headache. no one knows why or how it happens. the top physics minds dont know. they can only calculate the results, but no one knows why, and at a certain point they threw up their hands and pretended they never cared about why and its not their job. and then theres a bunch of cope interpretations that try to address it, and none of them have a shred of evidence behind them to back it up. its a simulation, theres a jillion multiverses, its an 11d string universe. pick your cope, but theyre all shit.

>>16883079
well no shit I dont understand you fucking faggot thats the entire point of the thread

>>16883074
Assume nothing

The universe is not a simulation right now

Q.E.D

Oh wait, this is /sci/ and you DO need more.

I'm fucking around but the simple answer is you don't have an intuition for what is, is not, might be, could possibly, etc., a simulation. Trying to start like you are owed knowledge from every corner of the universe is garbage enough of an assumption I physically chose to ignore another thread tonight.

Assume there is a consistent background field. Assume a wave you see in a macroscopic environment can scale down.

There is no collapse of any real function, there is YOUR resolution limit as your internal sense of representation tries to manage. You want a science related answer, and you want it in enough detail to pick apart like you are a vested owner of the universe, and this is totally comprehensible and outright understandable. Consistent, even

People call things particles when wave mechanics are difficult for others to "disembody" from their source.

More advanced explanations can falsify monadic ideals.

>>16883064
>what is the physical mechanism behind this collapse?
There is no physical mechanism behind this "collapse". It's literally completely made up. An injection from outside the theory. There is no "collapse" for all anyone knows.

>how is this not a dead ringer for simulation theory?
It has exactly zero logical connection to your mentally ill sci-fi drivel.

>>16883087
>there is no collapse
then what is the double slit experiment?

>>16883084
Quantum mechanics, like all of physics, is a model. It makes no assertions about the nature of things at that scale, it is simply math that can predict the outcome of experiments.

>>16883091
In what way does the double slit experiment imply anything collapsing?

>>16883092
>Quantum mechanics, like all of physics, is a model.
And?

>It makes no assertions about the nature of things at that scale
Yes, it does. You're literally 80 IQ.

>>16883080
>pseudorandom
You mean actually random. Superdeterminism is a meme invented by Sabine because her autistic mind can't handle true randomness.

>>16883093
nigga do you really need me to explain the double slit experiment to you like a fucking high school freshman? have you ever taken a physics course in your life?
>single photon (or any particle) passes through one of two slits at a time and creates an interference pattern on the screen behind it, implying a wave like nature
>if detectors are placed at the slit, the photon becomes discrete and the interference pattern disappears
its the most textbook 101 example of wavefunction collapse there is. if theres no collapse, then what happened to the interference pattern? why did the photon stop behaving as a wave upon observation?

>>16883082
Correct. Cope is the natural antidote for non-omniscients. Quite possibly the single most compassionate word in any la–

I'm fucking around, still, the fuckup people want me to resolve is where cartoon physics ends and real physics begins. I actively research this using literally every kind of tool. You hope to run your ancestor simulation? Curious as this should never nest

Something has to accurately simulate me for the simulation to have accuracy, I end up acting like some backwater horcrix for tons of superstitious bullshit and at some point calling it magic makes more sense. "Haha, you guys, look! I found a new kind of string theory whi—" Dropping all rigor, math can contrive infinite complexity models, and then you need philosophy again to decide if it actually maps to anything.

But hey, guess what?

All I claim right now is trivial programming acuity.
- this message is in the current foreground
+ whoops haha does this line of code make the foreground and background flip???

File: feyngod.jpg (45 KB, 850x400)

45 KB JPG

I can fucking guarantee you none of the schizophrenic einsteins on this board are smarter than feynman so you might as well just shut up and calculate

>object A exists in ten different places at once
>observing object A splits reality into ten different universes, one for each spot it can exist in
somehow this is the LEAST schizo interpretation. yeah, shit is fucked.

>>16883100
Notice how nothing in your post explains how the experiment actually implies muh wave function collapse. Then try again.

>why did the photon stop behaving as a wave upon observation?
Your question is total nonsense.

>>16883117
>youre wrong, because you are wrong. I win, haha!!
have a nice day retard

>>16883121
Notice how you're failing again to explain how the experiment implies wavefunction collapse. Asking smoothbrained rhetorical questions is not a substitute for the reasoned justification you will repeatedly fail to offer.

>>16883064
>how does the wave function know its being observed
The act of interaction, the collision with the photon or the detector's mechanism, transfers energy and momentum to the quantum particle.

>>16883125
>The act of interaction
That just entangles more stuff with the system creating a more complicated wave function.

>>16883127
Which is a transfer of energy, the wave is focused not destroyed.

>>16883064
Wave function and collapse are not real things, they're just mathematical aspects of things we are unable to observe with our current methods. Are numbers physical objects? No, they're just concepts

>>16883112
But in reality these places are just the object vibrating and jumping position really fucking fast so it looks like it exists in all 10 at the same time to our limited observation methods

>>16883196
>Wave function and collapse are not real things, they're just mathematical aspects of things we are unable to observe with our current methods
You can observe wave functions in roughly the same sense you can observe a normal distribution using a Galton board. The mathematical aspects of a system don't manifest as their own independent objects, but they do manifest physically. "Wave function collapse", on the other hand, has nothing to do with the math behind QM. The closest thing that's mathematically justifiable is quantum decoherence.

>>16883096
No, it's a set of equations that satisfies observations.

>>16883272
>it's a potato
>>ACK-CHUALLY, no
>>it's a starchy vegetable that satisfies my appetite for complex carbs
You're a complete and utter retard.

>>16883210
This. Wave functions are a useful and reliably predictable model for handling statistics for a system that we can't directly observe. Reading anymore into it than that is why so many laypeople get frustrated with quantum.

>>16883292
Anon, is it really so frustrating for you that the map is not the territory?

>>16883064
Take the superdeterminism pill

>>16883399
>Anon, is it really so frustrating for you that the map is not the territory?
You're regurgitating. Any map presupposes its description of landmarks and features would be recognizable as such to the reader exploring the real landscape.

>>16883272
The big deal with quantum mechanics is that what would be quirks of a model (probability distributions can be thought of as an error) do have an interpretation and aren't a quirk of observation that can be refined with better equipment. This is what OP is confused about
>what is the physical mechanism behind this collapse?
Implies that it is a physical process and not just a theoretical one.

>>16883064
always believe the opposite of what the jews say

>>16883082
The separation of science and philosophy was a mistake

>>16883447
>You're regurgitating
I apologize for assuming you were familiar with baudrillard.

>>16883513
I apologize for assuming you're able to form any thoughts on your own at all. I'm not surprised only the first sentence is accessible to someone on your "intellectual" level. Since you think your basic-ass map vs. territory argument originates with Baudrillard, I can safely conclude you're a 80 IQ American public highschool dropout. Explaining the absurdity namedropping postmodernist social critics in a discussion about physics seems moot at this point.

Quantum Mechanics is proof the Buddhists were right about almost everything about the condition of reality (everything is mind and formlessness etc.)

File: 1200348415.png (55 KB, 184x184)

55 KB PNG

>>16883064
>>at the fundamental level everything is just a wave function
Wrong, retard, the wave-function is epistemic not ontic

>>16884206
>Buddhists
Whats the Buddhist word for Quantum?

>>16884210
>wave-function is epistemic not ontic
Particle Fag

>>16884210
>wave function is epistemic
that depends entirely on your interpretation of QM, none of which are more valid than the other. settle down retard

>>16884218
>Whats the Buddhist word for Quantum?
He's right, you know. You're asking a stupid question because you don't get the point and circle back to reifying human abstractions as real objects.

>>16884220
You sound more retarded than him. A wave function isn't an independent object (it describes the potential outcomes of an interaction) and isn't a property of any particular object (a system's wave function changes depending on how many things you drag into the equation). If wave functions exist, there should be an infinity of them out there to account for every possible perspective every possible subset of the universe. Alternatively, you could say there is only one universal wave function, but then the whole thing about wave function collapse goes out of the window: everything is a part of it and there's nothing external to collapse it.

File: Baseline.jpg (115 KB, 1024x768)

115 KB JPG

Cells
Within
Cells
Within
Cells
I
N
T
E
R
L
I
N
K
E
D
Cells
Within
Cells
Within
Cells

File: Inverse_square_law.svg.png (175 KB, 1280x854)

175 KB PNG

You look like a good Joe

>>16884551
bassline

>>16884567
Lol.
Lmao, even.

>>16883064
>at the fundamental level everything is
No. Natural science does not tell you what is or why something is, it provides quantitative models that work well.
At some point you will outgrow the over idealistic academic mindset, dont worry.

>>16884576
>No. Natural science does not tell you what is
Elaborate. (Protip: you can't, you're just regurgitating)

>>16883105
feynman is dead, thus everyone alive right now is smarter than him for surviving

>>16884576
QM tells you about the structure at the bottom of reality as far as anyone knows. Maybe it's provisional and incomplete, but if you don't believe it captures the actual features of reality (at least the way it manifests under human instruments) why are you using it?
>b-b-because uuhh... shut up and calculate!
>i just wanna make predictions!
Dumb academic wagies (soon to be replaced by ML models) just love running their mouths about what they think science is.

>>16884568
That video was created by Levi Magony.
He's from Budapest, Hungary.
Gemini and Grok told me so.

>>16883064
The tardfuckery is in the language.
Its scientists who know what they mean trolling everyone with vague retard language
No, the wave doe NOT collapse when you look at it, its already collapsed becasue it was hit by some photons which have now reached your eyes.
Its like saying someone was killed becasue they looked at a bullet. No. They died because the bullet was fired from a gun, ricocheted off a wall, and hit them in the fucking head.

File: timespace river.png (1.53 MB, 939x935)

1.53 MB PNG

>>16883064
It's all One at The Source, my friend.

Always has been, always will be

That's it. That's the whole "secret"

File: schizo.png (10 KB, 228x221)

10 KB PNG

I always assumed particles are just distortion in space-time shrinking it up defined by a wave function which then defines a quantum field which.. leads to superstrings, which leads to "particles" because this distortion of shrunken space-time gives us the illusion of particles due the topological folding of the shrunken space-time distortion

But then again.. what the fuck is space-time even made of

i think the core issue is this idea of wave function and particles. the best way to think of it as state vectors. if that state vector is described as a wave function so be it, but a better model might come around, but it will always fundamentally be a state vector and that's what matters.
>not a wave
>shrinks down to a particle
imo all of this is more an issue of the semantics of using the terms wave and particle to describe things at the quantum level, since it brings its own baggage of preconceived notions from the macroscopic world like propagation and arbitrary precision/extent.

>>16883064
It's a simulation retards, simulation solves all the paradoxes quite easily. Just embrace the truth anons. You'll feel better for it.

>>16883064
Why did I have to get stuck in the simulation to test how long a civilization can survive while everything becomes fake and gay?

>>16883064
This is literally how they optimise video games to run on hardware. Everything that isn't displayed on screen is downscaled to save processing power. 411 yeah reality is most likely a simulation, or some boson flying out of your eye just screws with the wave function and they don't have a accurate messurement of it.