>Scientists be like: Measuring stuff is the only valid type of knowledge, we should measure everything and build our entire ideologies on that>Quantum mechanics be like: Actually you can't measure everything, there are many things in the universe that can't be measured or knownDAMN, YOU SCIENTISM BELIEVERS GOT PLAYED LMAO!!!!!!
>>17080157>Quantum mechanics be like: Actually you can't measure everything, there are many things in the universe that can't be measured or knownnope. every person who genuinely believes in quantum mechanics would agree that if something exists in the universe, then it must have a measurable presence in the universe.What you are presenting is at best a word game argument (about whether quantum quantum state vectors in Hilbert space are physical things in this universe [they’re not] or whether quantum indeterminacy aligns with whether a thing is measurable [it does])but more likely you’re contrarian fool who hasn’t actually thought about nor studied these things and would rather cook up rage bait threads for whatever anti-science agenda you harbor
>>17080160you are a pseud acting like I'm the pseud retardI'm not just talking about superposition, there are literally physical quantities that don't have observable matrices associated to themfor example, you can't measure the position of a photon, there's no wavefunction, no observable, no possible experiment you could do to find out where a photon is, no probability distribution, nothing
>>17080162> for example, you can't measure the position of a photonum, have you heard of a “photodetector”? A vacuum tube, CCD. SiPM. these are literally some of the most common measurement devices in contemporary physics, that do precisely what you are in denial aboutheck, your phone most likely has a CCD in it
>>17080164you are retarded beyond hope, and I can tell you never read a booka photodetector measures the probability of detecting a photon, not where the photon is. photons can go through any detectors without interacting, so not detecting a photon doesn't mean the photon isn't therethis is basic qft bro, look it up
>>17080169Wow bro, getting real personal there. Let’s try to step back from emotional outbursts OK?CCDs and SiPMs are pixelated, meaning that there are many photodetectors covering different patches of the space they cover. When they detect light, what happens is that a particular pixel gets lit up, meaning the photon hit the pixel at that one spot, and its neighbors do not light up. Therefore you know the photon hit the spot of that pixel, and thus it is measuring the position of the photon by identifying which pixel got lit up. How is this not a position measurement of the incident photon?
>>17080171because the CCD does not have an efficiency of 100% and the photon can go through it without interacting? you can't build an experiment that will tell you where a photon is, directly or indirectly, it's just not possible
>>17080174Modern SiPMs can have very high quantum efficiency, easily over 90% Even so you are not making any argument here except for resorting to extraneous false “gotchas” that fail to address my point
>>17080176sister, what part of "the detection observable is not the position observable" can't you understand?also this is just 1 example, you can measure collapse time either, and there are many many other examples
This is surely a bait thread
