Was hoping for an actual experiment.

You cannot both "detect" a photon/electron before it "enters a slit" and have it go through and "detect" it again at the back. That part is (probably) hogwash.

Detection at this scale really means fatal crash or at least deflection.

From what has been observed it would appear that in such an experiment an individual electron takes all the possible paths through both slits and the "waves" that "interfere" are waves of probability of the particle passing through detection points.

While it might as well be magic, really, QED does have observable rules, and this video might make it appear as though one could change the outcome by blinking an eye, which is not the case.

To make any headway stop thinking about tiny marbles. Think about tiny cartoon characters moving so fast they are smudged to invisibility whirring their tiny appendages around - you can only tell which particle and where it is if you swat it or it hits a wall and stops moving. There is no "detect but keep going as if nothing happened".

An interesting experiment, but I'm more interested in how many people get through the intersections per minute, not how many cars.

If you have 3 people in a car only getting 333 cars through per minute and one of the super complicated ones (1,000 cpm) with only 1 person per car, it's the same throughput, as far as I'm concerned.

And, get 2 bullet trains in there with the intersection just being 2 tracks over 2 tracks with 500 people inside each one, that's much more efficient.

Cars are stupid. QED.

Very appropriate title.

Eric did mean everyone on camera is a dummy, right? I like Penn, I like his schtick, but the man's an idiot. Teller's the brains. Penn's a Libertarian! QED.

QED

Drummers shouldn't sing.

Phil Collins.

QED.

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:

>> ^charliem:
....why didnt the big bang need a cause?

The theoretical physicist who most recently takes this question head on is Lawrence Krauss, you can see him do a lecture on this topic here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo
He has also written a book about this subject since the video drew a lot of attention: http://ww
w.amazon.co.uk/Universe-Nothing-Lawrence-M-Krauss/dp/145162445X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1337434114&sr=1-1


Quantum mechanics is still a cause, even if the universe itself was born from a quantum strangeness, its still SOMETHING. This is vastly different from no cause at all.

Krauss' talk is to lamen understanding of nothing....ie apparently empty space with still yet something there (the laws of nature have particles and anti particles popping in and out trillions of times a second!!!) This is still not nothing.

Still havnt explained it well enough to qualify that as saying - there was no need for a cause. QED is still a cause.

>> ^Spacedog79:

It's funny that we actually have loads of easily accessible rare earth minerals in Monozite sands, but we don't use it because there is so much Thorium in it. A Thorium reactor also produces a significant amount of rare earths as a byproduct. Problem solved QED.


Except it's not about what makes sense for the nation or even the world. It's about what makes bankers more MONEY.

Nb. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/mar/14/goldman-sachs-director-quits-morally-bankrupt

It's funny that we actually have loads of easily accessible rare earth minerals in Monozite sands, but we don't use it because there is so much Thorium in it. A Thorium reactor also produces a significant amount of rare earths as a byproduct. Problem solved QED.

>> ^rebuilder:

The human mind is morally compromised. My proof? The entirety of human history.

This seems like a lazy copout to me. There is plenty of good in the history of humanity, for one, but most of all, the human mind is the basis of humanity's morality. To say someone is morally compromised you need to compare it to moral standards, that are derived and developed by the human mind over time.
>> ^ghark:

I loved how he quickly dealt with the guy that yelled out "it's fictional" - that quieted down what I sensed was an air of religious zealotry in the room.

I really like that too, in fact he makes it clear from the beginning that both scenarios are fictional, in order to refute in advance the "it's okay cuz it's just a story/metaphor" excuse. This always reminds me of Luke 19:27, the end of an absolutely terrible parable Jesus is telling, and I quote: "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."
Whenever I use this example to argue that Jeebs isn't all love and peace either, I am told "well it's a parable". Yes, but what are the moral principles it is trying to convey? That God is a like a tyrant who will destroy anyone who does not obey or refuse his rule.

As for you apologists, no matter which way you twist it, God clearly gives his assent for Job to be tortured and tormented for no reason. Omnibenevolent and omnipotent? Then evil. QED.

read the first sentence of the first post on this video
http://videosift.com/video/OWS-Wayward-Mom-reacts-angrily-to-NY-Post-article

QED

Utilitarianism provides a rational non-absolutist basis for a moral code that is based upon scientific methods. It is deeply flawed but 100 times more rational than religious deontology and requires no leap of faith. Pain and pleasure in their most basic incarnations are universal ergo absolute. QED.

Why I should be a republican:


Republicans are rich.
I want to be rich.
QED.

My big problem with mind is how does mind exist when elements of mind happen simultaneously and the seemingly corresponding elements of brain happen asynchronously, and never join in the entire brain. Or in other words, Mind seems to be a complete stream of all the senses at the same time, but never in Brain is there a spot where all elements of brain meet to cause a simultaneous mind. Or to say it in another way, mind seems to defy space. Causal interactions, not counting for QED, happen adjacently. How does mind exist the way it does if all brain interactions that seem to make up mind are not adjacent? Mind has to be able to be traced down to one spot in brain, or mind is a very odd thing, indeed.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by critical_d.