- YouTube – Shut up Woman Get on my horse! tiki god
- Say What Again tiki god
- Beatles’ Hey Jude with FLOW CHART! nyokki
- Glenn Beck is PWND! nyokki
- rogerebert.com give The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day a single star tiki god
- Deer loses head-butt with Wisconsin lawn ornament tiki god
- Dita Von Teese and the Striptease nyokki
- Must See: Clash Of The Titans Trailer Puulaahi
- Michael Jackson: The Live Seance nyokki
- Beer truck dumps load « Bits & Pieces tiki god
Many Worlds Interpretation - January 7, 2008 added by tiki god | Images
|
|
Disclaimer: Unless specifically mentioned in the post, we have no clue where this picture came from. Know where it came from? Post the link in the comments, and reap the glory that is knowledge. All comments are the sole possesion of the commenters and do not reflect the opinions or values of MCS. Related Posts |
17 Comments - “Many Worlds Interpretation”
Latest Posts
-369x500.jpg)
Sorry, no. Unless she’s making up her mind based on the outcome of a single quantum event, such as the decay of a radioactive atom.
@ reboot : Welcome to the wonderful world of women.
you’ve got a good point there, unknown
That makes less sense than an episode of Lost.
Makes you wonder…
i was playing hacky sack in the living room with my 10 year old daughter, when the bag rolled under the television.
a couple of minutes later, the 2 year old boy threw the hacky sack up in the air, where it landed behind the TV in exactly the same spot as it had been 2 minutes earlier.
my daughter commented on how it took 2 different trips to the same spot. So i took a moment to explain to her the double slit experiment that is at the heart of Quantum Physics…
@natedog, I’m just wondering, what does a hacky sack landing in the same place twice have to do with the double slit experiment?
isn’t the double slit experiment a part of some sex position?
well, the hacky sack can represent the photon, and the 2 paths it took to get behind the TV can represent the 2 slits in the screen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment
Oh, I know what the double slit experiment is (besides a 3-some sex position
), but a hacky-sac really doesn’t have any of the properties of a photon. In particular, its doesn’t have any wave-particle duality behavior and the outcome of the experiment isn’t changed by the method of observation. It’s as non-quantum as you can get.
Not trying to criticize your parenting, I just think its funny that you would be randomly trying to teach your daughter about QM principles that you yourself barely understand.
@reboot, come on.
for one thing, every particle has wave properties, and vice versa. Duality is a central concept in Quantum Mechanics.
A hacky sack, like all matter, has wave/particle duality, it is just that the wave aspect is so small.
and it was a game of hacky sack, not an experiment.
and i didnt say the hacky sack was a photon, i said it represented one. and since it took 2 different routes to get to the same spot, i was reminded of Young’s experiment.
and i totally didnt take your post as a critique of my mad skills as a daddy, i took it as you misunderstanding me.
but you’re totally right in criticizing a parent that tries to use real life situations and to inspire a love & fascination with the universe in their 10 year olds.
and i think it is funny that you assume to know the level of understanding that someone you have never met has of the Quantum world.
ass.
You sound like a good dad, but its just so non-sequitur that’s its funny. Like if you were playing frisbee and suddenly started explaining statistical mechanics. Sure, the principles apply, but in such an abstract way that its hard to draw a connection.
And what remarkable about wave-particles is not that they take two different paths, but that they take two different paths at the same time.
I guess I’m making an assumption about your understanding, and that’s rude,but from our previous conversations I kind of doubt you have a profound grasp on QM.
of course the wave particles travel at the same time.
the example is not perfect, but it was just a thought i had at the time.
and you’re wrong about my grasp on QM. it was profound to me when i learned the quirky way subatomic particles work.
I am hoping the Many Worlds interpretation is correct. Somewhere out there, I’m banging a Victoria’s Secret Model or similar.
/giving that quantum iteration of me a high five
//ignoring the quantum iteration of me getting buttraped in prison
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_immortality
don’t bother natedog, reboot is an insufferable know it all who is so incredibly insecure he feels the need to trumpet his education to anyone that doesn’t post observations at the level of Stephen Hawking. But then, I guess when you spend the majority of your life immersed to the eyeballs in the fast paced, exciting, glamorous world of quantum chemistry it doesn’t leave much room for developing a fucking personality.
Everything that garbledxmission wrote is true, especially the insecure part. Every word I write is a cry for your approval.