Forum menu
Well that pretty much melted my brain. It started a little gimmicky but picked up, and also gave a good visual representation of some famous experiments. I think I was with the good Dr. until the final laser experiment. Then my mind collapsed.
Any real physicists in here? I've got a question....if, according to the Copenhagen Interpretation nothing 'exists' until observed, would we the world end if we all closed our eyes? 😀
Wife said she's not buying it, well her words were "Load of ol' shit, int it"
My wife made me turn it over. She is a physicist, although I think it was mainly because she wanted to watch something about gypsies.
I was enjoying it, but there were too many gimmicks. They seemed to spend about five minutes talking about the great war and flapper girls during a bar scene.
according to the Copenhagen Interpretation nothing 'exists' until observed, would we the world end if we all closed our eyes?
You laugh now but for nearly a century now there's been a prolonged debate - albeit in philosophical circles - as to whether this would actually happen and whether the universe requires conscious observation to exist.
I failed at the same point as you eightyeight. I found the description that a single photon can generate the light and dark wave pattern unless it has other photons to react with as witht he experiment with water earlier. Either that or my noggin capacity topped out at that point and the shutters came down. a little too flakey Thoroughly enjoyed it though. It was a bit of a step up from the GCSE level earthquake program on before.
I also had to turn over pretty sharpish to avoid Top Gear Oaf number 2.
Is the basic conclusion of our fundamental understanding of physics (the building blocks of all science) "Umm, we're not really sure how it does that"?
When was it on I missed it?
Although maybe its impossible to know the time if you know the channel
"Umm, we're not really sure how it does that"?
Oddly enough, there's a lot of that in 'science'.
If you didn't watch it, did it actually air?
It was on BBC4 so should be on iPlayer.
It was on BBC4 so should be on iPlayer.
Ta!
Although maybe its impossible to know the time if you know the channel
🙂
Was Al talking about his many wives and did he hit Ziggy lots?
I think it was a decent attempt to bring a highly complex and non linear subject to a wider, less expert audience. I liked the way Jim used simple props like balls and a wave tank, rather than do the modern cop out of using some wizzy on-screen graphics like so many other science shows.
In a way, it is not possible to "understand" in a conventional sense Quantum theory as it exists as a largely abstract and non physical (on a human scale) science.
In a way though, all science is like this, we have just come up with methods to help us humans visualise and understand it.
Take the concept of 2+2=4. A 5 year old understands this, but think about it more deeply, and it's possible to gasp that "2" is just a avatar, a non physical representation of an abstract Mathematical token. "2" doesn't exist any more than "4" does.
Only when you apply it does it exist, ie; "oh look, there are two sheep over there" etc And if you add in "zero" to the equation, things get even odder, as this token represents nothing at all! (it's a non existent token that only gains existence when applied to a separate none existent entity............ 😉
Yet, everyday, people count using numbers they pay no attention too what-so-ever.
Quantum theory really isn't much weirder than that if you think about it 😉
Begone sorcerer!!! Stop trying to control our minds with your fancy double-talk
Burn him for witchcraft. After a flotation test naturally.
I thought it was pretty good, until the final experiment with the laser beam when he went a bit hand-wavey.
according to the Copenhagen Interpretation nothing 'exists' until observed, would we the world end if we all closed our eyes?
Things still exist when not observed, but their quantum state can't be known. (This is where Schroedinger puts his cat into a box.)
"Umm, we're not really sure how it does that"?
Oddly enough, there's a lot of that in 'science'.
Its the people that are certain of the answers that you need to be wary of.
Depends on your definition of observed, it doesn't just mean your eyes receiving light that'd changed the quantum state.
"Umm, we're not really sure how it does that"?
Oddly enough, there's a lot of that in 'science'.
Not odd at all. What is odd is making up some fairy story to explain something you don't understand.
Maybe I'm the strange one but if someone asks my opinion on something I have absolutely no knowledge of, I tend to answer "No idea" rather than "Well I reckon..."