Comments by "Lepi Doptera" (@lepidoptera9337) on "Veritasium" channel.

  1. Is that the trolling update from that other video that didn't go so well? :-)
    1
  2. Light isn't a photon. Light is a quantum field and the quanta of that quantum field are called photons.
    1
  3.  @sedigives  I have measured plenty of photons in my life. It's pretty easy, actually. All you need is a photomultiplier tube. :-)
    1
  4. So it's basically the most simple arithmetic halting problem. So what? We know that it's not solvable. All we need is a proof that this particular one can't be determined.
    1
  5. No. A single photon doesn't have an interference pattern. You need to think about this a little longer than Veritasium has. :-)
    1
  6.  @akashsudhanshu5420  Yes, the pattern that many photons make changes. It just doesn't change in a very interesting way in such an experiment. The average density is predicted by Maxwell's equations. These photons basically just trace out the classical theory and there is no new physics going on here.
    1
  7. You are easily distracted by the wrong details.
    1
  8. No, it's not even that. It's just a mistake. You can find it in the second sentence of Everett's thesis. :-)
    1
  9. No. :-)
    1
  10. And that is why it is not defined as either and hasn't been like eighty years. People are just totally behind their own time in science.
    1
  11. So you don't understand either life nor mathematics. OK... that's a downer.
    1
  12. 1969... yeah, there were a lot of people on drugs that year. ;-)
    1
  13.  @ronrice1931  What does that have to do with anything? Copenhagen explains this just fine.
    1
  14. The Copenhagen interpretations is 100% correct, most people simply don't understand it.
    1
  15. @ I am a retired high energy physicist and I have made trillions of quantum measurements in my life. Quantum mechanics is the unitary representation theory of the Poincare group. Eleven easy to understand words. Your move, kid. And don't worry, I will give you all the attention in the world until your Mommy comes home to feed you. ;-)
    1
  16. @ I am not good with math at all. You don't need to be good with math to understand quantum mechanics. If anything the math is a distraction. MWI is not an interpretation. MWI is a trivial logic mistake. You can find the logical error in the second sentence of Everett's thesis. Just like you he didn't understand physics. ;-)
    1
  17. @ You didn't even read Everett's paper and you didn't find his mistake, either. Worse, you didn't even read your high school science textbook. ;-)
    1
  18. @ Based on your response I am going to assume that you are a high school dropout with school trauma. ;-)
    1
  19. @ I am also an emotional vampire. I am literally feeding on your hate for me right now. ;-)
    1
  20. @ When was the last time you were honest? Please describe the exact situation. ;-)
    1
  21. @ What quest was that? I am merely here to feed on your hate for smart people. Unlike you I am always telling the truth. ;-)
    1
  22. @ I do sympathize with you, by the way. Our school system uses daily humiliation to get kids to learn. Some kids come out of that abuse with a degree in higher learning. That's the best case scenario. But imagine you were humiliated for twelve endless years day after day and at the end of it you don't even get an interesting or at least high paying job. Man... what a waste of emotional pain that was. Right? You do know what I am talking about. ;-)
    1
  23. @ Let's assume for a second that you have come to your senses and are willing to talk as a human being to me now instead of as a troll (I give that a 0.1% chance). How does being an engineer inoculate against school trauma and the desperate need to "get one in" on people who are smarter than you? Did you ever ask "your peers" how they feel about what happened in school? I did. ALL OF US, including PhDs, MDs, lawyers etc. are having nightmares about school. Most of us just don't try to get "revenge" on the internet :-) Your move champ. You want to be a real person or continue the trolling? I am game either way. ;-)
    1
  24. @ "The Copenhagen interpretations is 100% correct, most people simply don't understand it.". There are approx. 1 million physicists on the planet. Most of them don't understand Copenhagen, either, because of the horrendously poor way we teach quantum mechanics 101 in university. So that means at most one in ten thousand people understand Copenhagen. In my opinion it is closer to one in a hundred thousand. What's supposed to be wrong with that sentence?
    1
  25. @ I gave you the correct physical answer in my first reply that also had a bit of sociological information about physics embedded in it. I gave you the key to quantum mechanics in my second answer when I told you that "Quantum mechanics is the unitary representation theory of the Poincare group. " That was after YOU began insulting me. OK, sport? Notice a pattern here? That second sentence happens to be the rational starting point if you actually want to understand quantum mechanics for real. We don't start with that in QM 101 and THAT is the reason why virtually 100% of mankind is confused about it. In essence I only began treating you like a troll when you began posting troll stuff.
    1
  26. @ Nothing stops you from going into the lab where you will soon find out that Copenhagen is 100% correct. I have been doing quantum measurements in the physics lab, so I know how it works and why it works. Not a big deal. Other people know how to play the piano. I don't. I never learned it. Am I telling people that playing the piano is impossible? Hardly. I am not an idiot. ;-)
    1
  27. @ I don't need my Mom. I can tease the hell out of you myself. ;-)
    1
  28. @ If I can see farther, then it's because I am standing on the shoulders of giants. ;-)
    1
  29. @ You said a lot of nonsense so far. What you haven't proven in that you can say something intelligent. ;-)
    1
  30. It doesn't interact like a particle. There are no particles. There are only quanta of energy.
    1
  31. @ Nobody of importance ever said that energy is quantized. Angular momentum and charges are. Energy and momentum are still subject to perfectly classical transformation laws that are a direct consequence of the Poincare group. Angular momentum is quantized because rotations are periodic. There is no such periodicity for translation symmetry and space-time is not even translation symmetric to begin with, so strictly speaking globally energy-momentum is not even conserved. Locally there is a near translation symmetry and energy-momentum is a useful locally conserved quantity.
    1
  32. Yes and none of that makes any difference. You simply don't understand physics. ;-)
    1