It is incorrect to claim that objects are in two places at once. We only say that an object is in a position if it has been detected there. If a particle is detected at one location QM guarantees that it won't be detected simultaneously in another location. It is far more correct to say that in between detections particles don't have actual positions. The same is true of all physical properties. It's just sloppy terminology, using classical concepts where they are known to fail.
I think that he means to get more attention by misleading the public with incorrect descriptions because they sound more puzzling than a correct description. It's tragic because it discourages accurate descriptions and makes science sound like magic. Magical thinking is decidedly unscientific.
It is not only the "terminology" that is sloppy... the "measurement" as well is pretty sloppy due to our technical limitations... the thinking is lame too (see the limits of understanding, as permitted by our brains..... :-)
Nature gives us diffracting gratings for helium atoms - the surface of crystals. This has been observed since 1930 by Esterman and Stern using LiF crystals. I agree that microfabrication allows for a whole new generation of instruments, but I don't see how anyone in 1990 could be doubting that you could make an double slit interferometer when diffractometers have been in use for decades before that.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
It is incorrect to claim that objects are in two places at once. We only say that an object is in a position if it has been detected there. If a particle is detected at one location QM guarantees that it won't be detected simultaneously in another location. It is far more correct to say that in between detections particles don't have actual positions. The same is true of all physical properties. It's just sloppy terminology, using classical concepts where they are known to fail.
Right, right, but you know what he means, don't you.
I think that he means to get more attention by misleading the public with incorrect descriptions because they sound more puzzling than a correct description. It's tragic because it discourages accurate descriptions and makes science sound like magic. Magical thinking is decidedly unscientific.
The actual conceptual ramifications of quantum mechanics, relativity are more profound and disturbing than "being in two places at once".
It is not only the "terminology" that is sloppy... the "measurement" as well is pretty sloppy due to our technical limitations... the thinking is lame too (see the limits of understanding, as permitted by our brains..... :-)
Nature gives us diffracting gratings for helium atoms - the surface of crystals. This has been observed since 1930 by Esterman and Stern using LiF crystals. I agree that microfabrication allows for a whole new generation of instruments, but I don't see how anyone in 1990 could be doubting that you could make an double slit interferometer when diffractometers have been in use for decades before that.
p.p.s. Good ol' Newton was not talking about apples falling, but his observation related to crow doodoo falling :-)
Space is not expanding, matter is shrinking.
so why aren't you giving a talk there?
Nice one. must watch again > 1
p.s. - ponder what "magic" a technology one billion years older might perform... :-)
quanta scale
signals📡🎶👀