801
Please be patient. (lemmy.world)
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 92 points 6 days ago

When is it my turn with the electron?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 69 points 6 days ago

You can have it as long as you don't observe it.

[-] voldage@lemmy.world 39 points 6 days ago

don't worry guys I'm keeping track of it it's moving very fast but oh fuck sorry guys my bad

[-] tetris11@lemmy.ml 18 points 6 days ago

For fuck sake Pauli, stop trying to smush it in the palm of your hand!

[-] BluesF@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

No Peter, this isn't an electron, this is the power of the sun

[-] Dogs_cant_look_up@lemmy.world 19 points 6 days ago

It already is been again and soon now.

[-] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 74 points 6 days ago

I see, charge is a class method and not an instance method. Well played universe creator.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] callyral@pawb.social 18 points 6 days ago

second, slightly different electron shows up

universe implodes or something

[-] PoopBuffet@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago

Na, we got those too. Muons, tauons and neutrinos. But the universe unfortunately hasn't imploded, meaning I have to go to work and pay taxes and shit.

[-] itslilith 16 points 6 days ago

It is an interesting theory, for sure. Instead of countless 3-dimensional particles, you have a single (or very few) 4-dimensional objects. You can imagine it like a sheet of fabric that is our present, with everything above the sheet being the future, everything below the past. When you want to sew a thread (our electron) through the sheet, you need to pierce the fabric, but to do it again, you first need to piece it the other way, giving you a positron. You can create or destroy arbitrary many of these, but you need create or destroy one of each every time. More interestingly, it is exactly determined which two will annihilate each other, as the allegorical loop of thread gets pulled tighter and tighter until it gets pulled though the sheet. The universe would be deterministic.

I'm sure there's a myriad of contradictions to modern QM and particle physics, but it's fun to think about nonetheless

[-] iii@mander.xyz 23 points 6 days ago

We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively.

[-] Cascio@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago

Life is just a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the weather!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 31 points 6 days ago

So if I can destroy 1 electron I destroy every electron?

[-] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 19 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

You would need a positron to do that and all you might have done is reflect it backwards in time.

If you could "remove" it by placing it into another dimension, it might disprove the theory, but the causal domain might be larger then previous assumed.

This is one of those Math Theories that isn't technically a Science Theory. We can make a mathematical model, but it's untestable.

[-] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 14 points 6 days ago

Only in its future. Probably you’d have to find the electron precisely at the end of its timeline.

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 6 points 6 days ago

So I have to destroy 2 electrons to fuck over causality.

[-] iii@mander.xyz 2 points 6 days ago

How could you destroy 2, if there's only one?

[-] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

That's why it would fuck over causality. If I destroyed 1 that could be the natural end of the electrons "life" of bouncing back and forth through time. I would need to destroy a 2nd which would then have to be the same electron from earlier in it's timeline.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] pyre@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

If you destroy it, that will be the end of its timeline

[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

To destroy every other quantum state of the single electron, wouldn't you need to destroy it at its beginning state? The end state would be at/just after the heat death of the universe, so it wouldn't really make any difference then.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

Let's try it and find out!

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ikidd@lemmy.world 27 points 6 days ago
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 20 points 6 days ago

To his credit, Wheeler did try to make a quantum leap. It just wasn't coherent. If he had kept at it, I'm sure he would have had momentum.

[-] tdawg@lemmy.world 18 points 6 days ago
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago

I'm glad you realized the gravity of the situation.

[-] ikidd@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

This thread indicates you might have a bit of a strange quark.

[-] Klear@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

Still very charming, though.

[-] angrystego@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

All ups, no downs.

[-] Jarix@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

I'm out in left field trying to figure out what's happening?

[-] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 19 points 6 days ago

Shouldn't be just electrons though - don't all instances of any given type of subatomic particle have the same mass and charge?

[-] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

The higher dimensional abstractum of the electron emanates through the multiverse. Electron is.

[-] Technotica@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago

One reason why that is probably not true is because there are less positrons but if it were true they should number the same as electrons, right?

But if electrons are moving along the same "time direction" as we are and positrons are moving in the opposite "direction" then wouldn't we expect there to be less protons? As we can't measure the protons that already "passed" us? And we would measure more electrons as a some/many/all of the existing electrons are traveling alongside us?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 15 points 6 days ago

I think you may have put more thought into this than Feynman. But then he probably had someone waiting for him in bed...

[-] Technotica@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago

I know! Horrible isn't it? I just can't help it, thinking about stuff is actually fun for me... so embarrassing!

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

It was more a joke about how Feynman had two great loves: physics and fucking. And probably fucking more than physics.

[-] Technotica@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

Ah I see ;) I also have two loves, but my gaming pc is too heavy to drag to bed...

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Cataphract@lemmy.ml 11 points 6 days ago
[-] RIPandTERROR@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 days ago

🏳️‍⚧️

[-] i_love_FFT@lemmy.ml 10 points 6 days ago

Currently reading Hyperion... Got it, the electron is the Shrike!

[-] truxnell@infosec.pub 4 points 6 days ago

Enjoy, it, Hyperion Cantos is far and away my all time favourite read (so far...)

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
801 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

10853 readers
2522 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS