Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Another protip:

Attempting to use sexual preference as a guide-point to how much any given person knows is pretty ridiculous

Anyone could look up shit in a split second, and I can promise you, I don't care what you considered as a career choice, I know more about quantum mechanics than you do. There is no way to prove it, but I've been into this stuff for over a decade, and you learn some shit after 10+ years of doing anything

Okay, I'll tell you what - Answer this for me, and I'll admit I was underestimating you.

What was the purpose of the Schroedinger's cat thought experiment?

At 10/9/12 08:46 PM, Cordyceps wrote: Okay, I'll tell you what - Answer this for me, and I'll admit I was underestimating you.

What was the purpose of the Schroedinger's cat thought experiment?

Why wouldn't you ask a difficult question?

At 10/9/12 08:46 PM, Cordyceps wrote: Okay, I'll tell you what - Answer this for me, and I'll admit I was underestimating you.

What was the purpose of the Schroedinger's cat thought experiment?

It was to see if quantum mechanics applied to everyday things, in this case a cat. He basically had a cat in a room that could be alive or dead at any given moment acording to an earlier event, I think it had something to do with poison.

It had to do with quantum entanglement, when he opened the box, he then became entangled with the cat, and weather or not the cat was alive was up to him.

Or so the theory goes. It's like, if no one was looking at the moon, would it still be there?

At 10/9/12 08:55 PM, Xenomit wrote: Or so the theory goes. It's like, if no one was looking at the moon, would it still be there?

Actually, it was an example to show that the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics was flawed, since the scenario of a cat being both alive and dead at the same time is nonsensical.

At 10/9/12 08:51 PM, 24901miles wrote: Why wouldn't you ask a difficult question?

Because Schrodinger's cat is the most commonly misunderstood thought experiment in quantum mechanics. Getting this one wrong shows that even at a surface level, his knowledge is still lacking.

RIP scifi philosophy thread.

I hardly knew ye.

At 10/9/12 09:14 PM, 24901miles wrote: RIP scifi philosophy thread.

I hardly knew ye.

Huh, were you referring to me? Nah, I didn't plan on responding, he's acting high and mighty, and that's hard to respond to, because no matter what your answer is someone can make you look bad.

At 10/9/12 09:21 PM, Xenomit wrote:

At 10/9/12 09:14 PM, 24901miles wrote: RIP scifi philosophy thread.

I hardly knew ye.

Huh, were you referring to me? Nah, I didn't plan on responding, he's acting high and mighty, and that's hard to respond to, because no matter what your answer is someone can make you look bad.

From my perspective, it looks like your 10+ years of pastime reading were out-shined by a solid education which emphasized the historical development of the theories at the base of today's equations.

At 10/9/12 02:27 PM, Ahnimal wrote: About the parallel universe thing, I personally don't think the world is like that at all, or at least not as simple as people put it.
First, if a universe is based on our choices, wouldn't that hint at the universe being aware of us, or there being some undiscovered force linked directly to our minds? It would be ironic if the truth were as such, because science normally disproves such ideas.
Second, I don't believe that people actually have genuine choices where all possibilities is a possibility. There will always be something making you choose one thing over another, whether it's your personality or some outside influence.

Just my thoughts on the topic

well what about quantum physics saying anything and everything can happen...we are probably not going to make the same choices in different universes with that rule so every other possibility has happened and we are left with only one possibility which is our reality.

I guess it doesn't matter if parallel universes exist anyway because you can sort of time travel with gravity for instance time is slower at your feet compared to that of your head not by much really but if you pull you feet up to your head wouldn't they have traveled through time? There is also mass distortion of time from black holes.

At 10/9/12 10:30 PM, Gr3ySock wrote: well what about quantum physics saying anything and everything can happen

Nah, that's not what Quantum Physics says, that's just Quantum Mysticism, aka, misinterpretation of quantum mechanics using the logical lessons in juxtaposition with important elements of your own daily life. Like Deepak Chopra.

At 10/9/12 09:21 PM, Xenomit wrote:

At 10/9/12 09:14 PM, 24901miles wrote: RIP scifi philosophy thread.

I hardly knew ye.

Huh, were you referring to me? Nah, I didn't plan on responding, he's acting high and mighty, and that's hard to respond to, because no matter what your answer is someone can make you look bad.

-User discredits every aspect of your posts and shows that you lock average knowledge on Physics/Quantum Mechanics
-User also showed that you don't understand physics by pointing outt that you fell for one of the largest scientifical misconceptions out there.

"NAH IMMA IGNORE HIM SINCE HE'S ACTING HIGH AND MIGHTY"

Let's ignore everything Einstein said because he's acting weird and suspicious.
Let's ignore everything Copernicus said because he's acting high and mighty about his position

never change NG BBS.

At 10/9/12 10:51 PM, Gagsy wrote:

At 10/9/12 10:42 PM, DarkShadowblade wrote:

never change NG BBS.

You just became my favourite poster.

Just realized you altered your sig for Halloween. Christ, you've had that sig for years.

meh

At 10/9/12 10:42 PM, DarkShadowblade wrote: -User discredits every aspect of your posts and shows that you lock average knowledge on Physics/Quantum Mechanics

I lacked the complete understanding of a specific experiment, if you look through you'll see that I was right, I just misconstrued a few details

-User also showed that you don't understand physics by pointing out that you fell for one of the largest scientifical misconceptions out there.

I don't understand physics because I got a few details of a scientific experiment wrong? Did you read anything?

"NAH IMMA IGNORE HIM SINCE HE'S ACTING HIGH AND MIGHTY"

I never said I was gonna ignore him, to begin with there was nowhere to go with what he was saying, not to mention I was referring to the fact that Miles foreshadowed me turning it into a flame war, which I didn't see the reason to do because he acted like me being wrong about a few details of an experiment was reason enough to act like he was superior.

Let's ignore everything Einstein said because he's acting weird and suspicious.

Why would I ignore Einstein? I mentioned him more than any other physicist. More proof you didn't read.

Let's ignore everything Copernicus said because he's acting high and mighty about his position

No, Copernicus had every right to act arrogant. Just because I, as I've said several times, misconstrued a few details, he feels the need to act like he's better than me. I used context clues to find this out. "So as you can see, he very obviously is lacking in understanding of quantum mechanics"

never change NG BBS.

Fuck you

I know I'm like two days late but whatever.

At 10/9/12 02:02 AM, Gr3ySock wrote: There is quite a lot of supporting theories for parallel universes to exist but yes they are just theories i guess, although so is gravity.

Gravity may be a theory but at least it's a testable one.

Also i don't see how conservation of energy and mass has anything to do with the other universes seeing as it has nothing to do with ours apart from being parallel and a universe.

The first scenario involves the creation of a new universe when a choice is made.

Why would a new universe just form when a different decision is made. I'm saying what if they already exist just with different possibilities...I'm not saying they cant form but what if they already do exist and every other possible situation that could possibly happen has happened and we are left with our reality.

Because of this snippet from the OP:

If all of this is true then technically time travel should be possible because you are only skipping forward and backwards through the 1/infinite situations/possibilities that has to have happened already.

Traveling through these universes at any efficient speed would be impossible because you would have to travel faster than light.
Traveling through these universes at a non-efficient speed... well, the edge of the (observable) universe is about 45 billion light years away.
Furthermore, by the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics (which is similar enough to what you're thinking of), each of the parallel universes would be incapable of communicating with each other.

However, what you (theoretically) could say is that there are an infinite amount of parallel universes already in existence, and every event that's ever happened has a different outcome in a different universe. That, however, doesn't allow for time travel, doesn't change anything about our universe, and still isn't testable.

At 10/8/12 12:02 AM, Gr3ySock wrote: Ok so if there are an infinite amount of different universes to the one we live in right now, then there are an infinite amount of possibilities.

"Do I dare disturb the universe?"

At 10/9/12 11:05 PM, Xenomit wrote:

At 10/9/12 10:42 PM, DarkShadowblade wrote: -User discredits every aspect of your posts and shows that you lock average knowledge on Physics/Quantum Mechanics

I lacked the complete understanding of a specific experiment, if you look through you'll see that I was right, I just misconstrued a few details

The Heisenberg discussion is day 1 of Quantum Physics. It's in the second paragraph of every paper. All Cordyceps proved is that you know the fantasy and scifi of physics, but, you lack the education, math, and concrete knowledge.