« on: 21/11/2015 23:45:46 »
You are, literally, beginning to see the light.
The following users thanked this post: Zer0
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
The following image shows the interference pattern build up over time for electons.The key here is "build up over time". A single electron can't provide an interference pattern because, unlike a wave, it is indivisible. What we actually detect, whether electrons or photons, is individual particles hitting the detector with a spatial distribution that looks like wave interference.
According to the Copenhagen interpretation, physical systems generally do not have definite properties prior to being measured,No. That is a misleading formulation. It is true that we don't know anything about a particle until it interacts with another particle. The fact that I don't know whether you are wearing a hat until I see you, has nothing to do with whether you are or are not wearng a hat: I can't draw an accurate picture of you until we have met, but that meeting doesn't determine your appearance because you must have put the hat on before we met.
and quantum mechanics can only predict the probabilities that measurements will produce certain results.Yes
The act of measurement affects the system,Yes
causing the set of probabilities to reduce to only one of the possible values immediately after the measurement. This feature is known as wavefunction collapse.No. What happened is what you measured. Waveform collapse is a mathematical model of what happens.
Photon, Elementary particle, Particle physics, Physics, Natural science, Science, Knowledge, Awareness, Consciousness, Quality (philosophy), Philosophy.It all makes sense until you get to "consciousness", a term which is never defined by its users: everything thereafter appears to derive its place in the thread, from a meaningless word. Philosophically, a photon must be a wave or a particle, so the properties of electromagnetic radiation depend on some notion of duality and observer-dependence...what utter rubbish! We scientists use the term photon to denote the cause of a number of linked phenomena: it doesn't "have to be" anything other than itself, and we admit that we don't have a unique mathematical description of all its properties. That is a far more mature, and far less arrogant and athropocentric way of looking at the universe.