The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Non Life Sciences
  3. Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology
  4. QM is wrong - I can prove it
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

QM is wrong - I can prove it

  • 5 Replies
  • 5282 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DoctorBeaver (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12653
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
QM is wrong - I can prove it
« on: 07/06/2007 13:02:06 »
Bin liners. They are what debunk QM. No matter how many times I try to tear 1 off the roll & open it, I never get it right. Probability? Forget it... it's a dead cert I get it wrong!  [:(!]
Logged
 



Offline DoctorBeaver (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12653
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
QM is wrong - I can prove it
« Reply #1 on: 07/06/2007 13:02:46 »
And tents. They invariably go wrong too.
Logged
 

Offline lightarrow

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 4605
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 16 times
QM is wrong - I can prove it
« Reply #2 on: 07/06/2007 19:30:12 »
Quote from: DoctorBeaver on 07/06/2007 13:02:06
Bin liners. They are what debunk QM. No matter how many times I try to tear 1 off the roll & open it, I never get it right. Probability? Forget it... it's a dead cert I get it wrong!  [:(!]
It's a quantistic prepared state [;D]
Logged
 

Offline DoctorBeaver (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12653
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
QM is wrong - I can prove it
« Reply #3 on: 07/06/2007 19:59:24 »
Quote from: lightarrow on 07/06/2007 19:30:12
Quote from: DoctorBeaver on 07/06/2007 13:02:06
Bin liners. They are what debunk QM. No matter how many times I try to tear 1 off the roll & open it, I never get it right. Probability? Forget it... it's a dead cert I get it wrong!  [:(!]
It's a quantistic prepared state [;D]

 [???]
Logged
 

Offline lightarrow

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 4605
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 16 times
QM is wrong - I can prove it
« Reply #4 on: 08/06/2007 13:41:34 »
Quote from: DoctorBeaver on 07/06/2007 19:59:24
[???]
It means that you get the same result every time you performe the same measure.

If you make a beam of silver atoms go through a strong inhomogeneus magnetic field (e.g. near the tip of a pointy magnet), the beam splits in 2. If the field's inhomogeneity is along the vertical axis, one beam goes up, the other goes down.

This effect is attributed to a property of the silver atom's electrons, called "Spin".
So the silver electrons are "Spin UP" in the beam which goes up and "Spin Down" in the beam which goes down (this is, in effect, the Definition of the property called "Spin").

If you take the "UP" beam and perform the same experiment on it, with a vertical inhomogeneus mag. field, you will obtain again an up deflection of the beam.

If you repeated the same (it's the "Spin Measure" of the silver's electrons) for a million times or more, you would always obtain the same result.

That beam is called "Prepared" in the sense that it has undergone an interaction with a magnetic field SO THAT the result of the same measure will always yeld the same result.

So, it's not true that the result of a measure is always indefinite, in QM.
Logged
 



Offline DoctorBeaver (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12653
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
QM is wrong - I can prove it
« Reply #5 on: 08/06/2007 13:45:44 »
Oooh, I never knew that. Thank you  [:)]
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.505 seconds with 38 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.