Science!! Fucking magnets, how do they work?

Thread starter Flunklesnarkin_sl
Start date Dec 17, 2012

Lendarios

Trump's Staff

<Gold Donor>

Jan 2, 2015

#2,381

Furry_sl said:
You can make a very basic polarizer by stretching fine lines in a uniform direction across a gap. The light will be polarized in the direction perpendicular to the direction of the lines. This is a very basic and well understood concept that you can find plenty of references on.

No, you find them, that is how science works, find me anything that says that the two slit effect is due to polarization. I'll be waiting.

Burnem Wizfyre

Log Wizard

Jan 2, 2015

#2,382

lendarios_sl said:
Wait.. I am arguing against proven theory, and u are not? Is this an alternate universe provided by quantum mechanics?

Don't need QM to tell us we aren't in a universe where this guy is right about QM.

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA

<Banned>

Jan 2, 2015

#2,383

Furry_sl said:
I assumed you guys knew how double slit experiments work specifically in regards to quantum entanglement when I made that statement. I realize now that this was very wrong for me to do.

So I'll explain some basics. What is a polarizer, it is basically a series of lines that breaks up light. Two slits is basically an extremely minimal polarizer. Now in reference to quantum entanglement specifically, photons are entangled through typically a crystal that divides each photon of light into two separate photons of different intensity, essentially a doubled image. The two images are then sent onto different courses and subjected to tests remotely to each other. The crystal in these experiments, or gas in some versions, acts as a polarizer. It inherently taints all results, because you can't know if the result you are reading is because of entanglement or because of the polarizing effect of the crystal on the light.

This is just one specific example of a loophole that has made every quantum entanglement experiment that has ever been devised inconclusive.

I fail to see how the existence of Malus's law and the polarization effect on photons (other eletro-magnetic radiation) disproves quantum entanglement.

Edit - you are basically ignoring all the progress which has been made because of that experiment to fit your own beliefs because feels datas.

Lendarios

Trump's Staff

<Gold Donor>

Jan 2, 2015

#2,384

I was wrong separating light from electromagnetic wave. You were using light in the context of physics, I was referring to visible light. Now that was my mistake, I was wrong, as the context of this thread is physics. Now please enlighten me on how a slit on a wall using air, is a polarizer.

Furry

WoW Office

<Gold Donor>

Jan 2, 2015

#2,385

ZyyzYzzy_sl said:
I fail to see how the existence of Malus's law and the polarization effect on photons (other eletro-magnetic radiation) disproves quantum entanglement.

Edit - you are basically ignoring all the progress which has been made because of that experiment to fit your own beliefs because feels datas.

progress from quantum entanglement? I'm still waiting for someone to show me where its been proven as true.

Kirun

Buzzfeed Editor

<Gold Donor>

Jan 2, 2015

#2,386

khalid_sl said:
Fuck. Even Tanoomba isn't that stupid.

Furry may be supremely stupid for arguing that QM is a fallacy, simply because his college algebra course confused him, but Tardnoomba didn't even believe in the moon landing. That's a completely different tier of retard.

Mudcrush Durtfeet

Hungry Ogre

Jan 2, 2015

#2,387

I highly recommend putting Furry on ignore - he's just trolling and doesn't actually have anything interesting to say. I recommend putting Rhuma on ignore list also (also a troll).

Lendarios

Trump's Staff

<Gold Donor>

Jan 2, 2015

#2,388

Yeah I'll do that. I still highly recommend those two channels, minute physics and veritasium. They are highly informative.

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner

<Gold Donor>

Jan 3, 2015

#2,389

I like 60 symbols

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor

Jan 3, 2015

#2,390

wormie_sl said:
I like 60 symbols

Yes, me too. Speaking of Sixty Symbols...Here is a video about what I was talking about. (And about this subject, or more precisely, Furry's issue of the universe changes when we observe it.)

From most of the physicists I have seen which make videos or write books (Interact with the public). They seem to be just as concerned with Furry for answering the "why"--and it's a hotly debated topic too, as you can see, this guy says it's embarrassing. So it's not like they believe this is a religion that just "is"--no one is resting on their ass and saying "that there be god that did it.". Rather they've made a set of rules which correctly predicts behavior, but they don't know enough to answer the why.

Furry

WoW Office

<Gold Donor>

Jan 3, 2015

#2,391

Lithose_sl said:
Rather they've made a set of rules which correctly predicts behavior, but they don't know enough to answer the why.

I've met professors at every end of the spectrum from full on hate QM more than me to how dare you defile my temple of worship. There are grave concerns in QM, and its important for anyone who appreciates the math to understand what those grave concerns are and why. Taking the stance that its fully true and every professor studying/researching it loves it is just ignorant. It's popular to make shows of, because common people want to feel that they understand some of the toughest concepts, when in reality nobody understand them- thats why they're the toughest concepts.

khalid

Unelected Mod

Jan 3, 2015

#2,392

There is a difference between striving to know more and simply dismissing something because its "absurd". You have no interest in learning more, you already know the correct approach. It's obvious, anything else is "absurd".

This blatant ignorance and attempt to feel superior to other people was shown in your attack on negative numbers. Also in your constant "Einstein said, and I agree" attempt to associate your idiocy with Einstein.

Lendarios

Trump's Staff

<Gold Donor>

Jan 3, 2015

#2,393

So furry doesn't believe in negative numbers, nor irrational numbers, nor imaginary numbers?

khalid

Unelected Mod

Jan 3, 2015

#2,394

lendarios_sl said:
So furry doesn't believe in negative numbers, nor irrational numbers, nor imaginary numbers?

He was kind of vague, but I think he doesn't believe we should use them. They don't exist in the real world or something and only exist when humans give them a frame of reference.

This of course ignores all kinds of common sense ways to think of negative numbers. Maybe he could retake college algebra, the professor might fill him in on these.

Asshat wormie

2023 Asshat Award Winner

<Gold Donor>

Jan 3, 2015

#2,395

He seems to lack an understanding of what a system of numbers actually is and thinks that since negative numbers do not exist in nature, they are not real. Shit is derpy.

ZyyzYzzy

RIP USA

<Banned>

Jan 3, 2015

#2,396

Wait, college algebra? I was a bio guy so highest math I ever took was diff eq and multivar calc. Is furry referring to like intro algebra? Like wasbhe stupid enough to not have known those concepts in high school?

Furry

WoW Office

<Gold Donor>

Jan 3, 2015

#2,397

wormie_sl said:
He seems to lack an understanding of what a system of numbers actually is and thinks that since negative numbers do not exist in nature, they are not real. Shit is derpy.

Existing in nature is my criteria for something being real, yes. Call me crazy for that all you want.

I can believe in all of those numbers as human concepts, because that is what they are.

khalid

Unelected Mod

Jan 3, 2015

#2,398

You can describe things in the real world with negative numbers. You might want to go back and retake pre-algebra. They will explain it to you.

Furry

WoW Office

<Gold Donor>

Jan 3, 2015

#2,399

khalid_sl said:
You can describe things in the real world with negative numbers. You might want to go back and retake pre-algebra. They will explain it to you.

Of course you can, but you can not describe negative numbers with real world. Concepts are more flexible than nature, and that is why you must be careful with them.

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!

<Gold Donor>

Jan 3, 2015

#2,400

I still can't tell if furry's level of understanding of math and physics is way below mine or way above mine but I know it is no where near!

Reading his posts is sometimes like reading legitimate astronomers and physicists trolling in flat earth societies forums.

Show hidden low quality content

You must log in or register to reply here.

Share: