>> ^messenger:

...I thought that it was an absolute fact that you cannot determine both the speed/direction and position of anything, no matter how it's measured by definition of the measurement of speed/direction requiring more than one position. That's to say, I'm under the impression that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle has nothing to do with technology and will always be true under any conditions with any equipment in the areas where it applies, world without end, Amen. Am I wrong?

That is a combined 'yes' and 'no' answer.

Yes: Measuring exact values of electron is really hard. They don't even show up as precise values when we look at them, simply because they are so small and move so fast. We see that as a sort of 'smear'. (A Fourier transform.)

Heisenberg's equations for determining more precise values don't commute. (i.e. You cannot shuffle the variables around and still have it work.) This implies that it should be mathematically impossible to determine the velocity and position at the same instant.

No: Because all of the above is still based on the assumption that that our current method of measuring particles is all there is. If they could be measured more accurately or without adding energy to the system, the Uncertainty Principle should no longer be relevant.

Of course, science is pretty sure that's impossible. (Hell, they didn't even have that in Star Trek.) But we've proved ourselves wrong a lot of times in the past.

Soulmonarch, first, thanks for the excellent answers above. They were just enough for me to understand that something real was being measured and why I didn't understand the rest of the concept.

Now, you clearly know oodles more than I do about this stuff, but I thought that it was an absolute fact that you cannot determine both the speed/direction and position of anything, no matter how it's measured by definition of the measurement of speed/direction requiring more than one position. That's to say, I'm under the impression that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle has nothing to do with technology and will always be true under any conditions with any equipment in the areas where it applies, world without end, Amen. Am I wrong?>> ^soulmonarch:

>> ^Payback:
When "they" talk about being able to see velocity or position, but not both... that's just a failure of technology right? There's not some weird universal law making it impossible?

You refer to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. (The more accurately you measure a particle's position, the less accurate you are regarding momentum. And vice-versa.)
And yes, the problem is primarily technological. If someone ever invents a way to peer in and measure tiny particles without some kind of energy exchange with the particle (via light or electron scatter), the whole argument pretty much becomes a moot point.
And man would THAT ever screw with quantum physics.

>> ^Payback:

When "they" talk about being able to see velocity or position, but not both... that's just a failure of technology right? There's not some weird universal law making it impossible?


You refer to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. (The more accurately you measure a particle's position, the less accurate you are regarding momentum. And vice-versa.)

And yes, the problem is primarily technological. If someone ever invents a way to peer in and measure tiny particles without some kind of energy exchange with the particle (via light or electron scatter), the whole argument pretty much becomes a moot point.

And man would THAT ever screw with quantum physics.

I think lots of people believe "high level science" consists of 3 or 4 ideas:

1. In Schrodinger's thought experiment, a cat in a box could be seen as both alive and dead until an observer collapses the waveform
2. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle says you can't know both the exact position and momentum of a particle
3. General relativity states time slows and mass increases for objects at relative high velocity
4. Light's behavior exhibits a wave/particle duality, as demonstrated by interference experiments

Know those 4 things? Have you watched Star Wars once? Good, you're now equipped to understand pretty much all "oh wow that guy's a crazy brainiac nerd" humor. Somehow if you reference things like that, you get a pass to do a comedy routine without any jokes. You're stroking people's ego enough that they don't care you're not funny.

I think people would just get pissed off if he left the "nerd humor" script, though. People don't want to be challenged, or hear pop culture references they don't know. Anyone who's the tiniest, tiniest bit interested in Greek mythology knows Pandora opened a jar, not a box - but nobody wants to hear a joke involving Pandora's jar. They want the same reference that 1000 previous pop cultural references have prepared them for. They want affirmation that they're part of the special club that knows about stuff.

So, to do "nerd" humor the plan is to avoid anything actually nerdy. Stick to the most often recycled bits of pop culture and pop science, mix in some clumsy, senseless double entendres so that people know when to laugh, and you're good to go.

Well, de Broglie couldn't get past the fact that in Quantum mechanics, the wave-particle behaves differently if there is an observer. Schrodinger's cat confused a lot of physicists, but it was there to prove a point. When people conducted the double-slit experiment, they confirmed Schrodinger's theory, de Broglie's wave theory, and Heisenberg's theory. Here's the cartoon version of the double-slit diffraction experiment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc&feature=related

>> ^jmzero:

Meh - not very nerdy.
A little nerdy maybe - but you don't have to be much of a nerd to have taken high school math/chemistry, bumped into some pop-sci physics (Heisenberg and what not), read Harry Potter, or heard some pop philosophy. And "show you my natural log" is the polar opposite of nerd humor - it's a locker room snigger about a math term. It isn't a clever reference to some property of e... it's just giggles cause he said "log".
When I think nerd humor, it's more like this - it has some exclusivity about who will get it, it works on a couple levels, and yet is still very much a groaner (which is fine - I think nerd humor is more about demonstrating some cleverness, and the meta-joke that "you could think that was funny" than it is about actually making someone laugh).
That said, "her Patronus is a cake" is pretty funny.


You think most of the jokes aren't nerdy enough and then you laugh at a Harry Potter joke? What the fuck is wrong with you? Seriously.

>> ^jmzero:

Meh - not very nerdy.
A little nerdy maybe - but you don't have to be much of a nerd to have taken high school math/chemistry, bumped into some pop-sci physics (Heisenberg and what not), read Harry Potter, or heard some pop philosophy. And "show you my natural log" is the polar opposite of nerd humor - it's a locker room snigger about a math term. It isn't a clever reference to some property of e... it's just giggles cause he said "log".
When I think nerd humor, it's more like this - it has some exclusivity about who will get it, it works on a couple levels, and yet is still very much a groaner (which is fine - I think nerd humor is more about demonstrating some cleverness, and the meta-joke that "you could think that was funny" than it is about actually making someone laugh).
That said, "her Patronus is a cake" is pretty funny.


Sadly enough of these jokes—which should be understood by anybody with at least a high school diploma—are not understood by many. The topics complicated? No...not at all, but still those that get it, are unfortunately in the minority.

Meh - not very nerdy.

A little nerdy maybe - but you don't have to be much of a nerd to have taken high school math/chemistry, bumped into some pop-sci physics (Heisenberg and what not), read Harry Potter, or heard some pop philosophy. And "show you my natural log" is the polar opposite of nerd humor - it's a locker room snigger about a math term. It isn't a clever reference to some property of e... it's just giggles cause he said "log".

When I think nerd humor, it's more like this - it has some exclusivity about who will get it, it works on a couple levels, and yet is still very much a groaner (which is fine - I think nerd humor is more about demonstrating some cleverness, and the meta-joke that "you could think that was funny" than it is about actually making someone laugh).

That said, "her Patronus is a cake" is pretty funny.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Heisenberg principle, wave function, particle, carbon life' to 'Heisenberg principle, wave function, particle, carbon life, quantum physics' - edited by kulpims

I seem to read too much mathematical theory and then apply that to life...


Examples: Gödel's first theorem of incompleteness, Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle. Stew on it and get back to me.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I LOVE TNG. But we all know his fetus should have been a transporter malfunction. Stupid Heisenberg compensators.

Upvote for Heisenberg reference. Pure comedy gold.

LOL, loved the mention of Heisenberg.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'double slit, Heisenberg, wave, particle, quantum uncertainty, Cassiopeia' to 'double slit, Heisenberg, wave, particle, quantum uncertainty, Cassiopeia, exspearmint' - edited by therealblankman

70- Mentally Disabled
80 Borderline
90 Low Average
100 Average
110 High Average
120 Gifted
130+ Genius / Very Superior

Revised

70-Christian/Muslim
80-Assholes that cut you off on the freeway
90-Your boss at work
100-The hot girl that you know is way dumber, but you feign interest in because she's so hot
110-The kind of cute girl that reads books and likes culture and shit but is a few pounds over weight so you hang out with the "100" IQ girl
120-Your friends
130+-You, Einstein, Schrodinger, Heisenberg, etc.