Science proof inadvertently explains this season of LOST

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Matt²

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/04/05/freaky-physics-proves-parallel-universes/

...UC Santa Barbara's Andrew Cleland cooled that paddle in a refrigerator, dimmed the lights and, under a special bell jar, sucked out all the air to eliminate vibrations. He then plucked it like a tuning fork and noted that it moved and stood still at the same time.

That sounds contradictory, and it's nearly impossible to understand if your last name isn't Einstein. But it actually happened. It's a freaky fact that's at the heart of quantum mechanics....
Click to expand...
:confused:
 
Bowielee

Bowielee

I thought lost was time travel, not quantum realities. I could totally be wrong, though, I never actually watched the show.
 
M

Matt²

yeah, this season is the result of the paradox caused by last season's events - the divergent timeline.

Doctor Emmett Brown said:
..at some point in the spacetime continuum, the timeline skewed off and created THIS alternate timeline.. alternate to you, alternate to me, but normal to EVERYBODY else!
Click to expand...
 
bhamv3

bhamv3

Wait, hang on, when they say it's visible to the naked eye, do they mean the paddle is visible? Or that the phenomenon of it vibrating and at the same time standing still is visible to the naked eye?

Because I thought observation would force it to collapse into a single quantum state, ie either vibrating or still. Therefore, according to my Quantum Theory for Beginners understanding, it would be impossible to see it vibrating and standing still at the same time.
 
T

Totally Not Soliloquy

bhamv3 said:
Wait, hang on, when they say it's visible to the naked eye, do they mean the paddle is visible? Or that the phenomenon of it vibrating and at the same time standing still is visible to the naked eye?

Because I thought observation would force it to collapse into a single quantum state, ie either vibrating or still. Therefore, according to my Quantum Theory for Beginners understanding, it would be impossible to see it vibrating and standing still at the same time.
Click to expand...
Well, keep in mind that this is an explanation of the science by a journalist, who actually has no idea what the heck he's talking about.

That said, perhaps what's important is HOW the quantum state is observed. I'd qualify that more, but since I'm just a journalist, I actually have no idea what the heck I'm talking about.
 
tegid

tegid

I can, with some effort and for the sake of the argument, accept that multiple states can be observed on a macroscopic object but, with the naked eye?
What was she seeing? It doesn't make sense.

(I couldn't read the whole article, just skimmed through it. It made me nervous).

That sounds contradictory, and it's nearly impossible to understand if your last name isn't Einstein.
Click to expand...
:facepalm:
 
MindDetective

MindDetective

That is the shittiest science article I've ever read. The author puts some much wild speculation, not to mention using "proves" in the headline, that it should be taken with a giant bag of salt. This is, at best, notable for trying to identify a boundary between quantum and non-quantum physics...and failing to do that.
 
tegid

tegid

Yesss! That's much better. It also doesn't say anything about the 'paddle' vibrating and staying still, and much less 'seeing' that (which wasn't explicitly in the other article, but I think it was implied).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top