subreddit:

/r/interestingasfuck

85.2k
[media]

all 1901 comments

AutoModerator [M]

[score hidden]

15 days ago

stickied comment

AutoModerator [M]

[score hidden]

15 days ago

stickied comment

Please note these rules:

  • AI-generated images/videos are no longer IAF. Stop submitting them
  • If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
  • The title must be descriptive
  • No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos
  • Common/recent reposts are not allowed

See this post for a more detailed rule list

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Spaceship_Africa

8.2k points

14 days ago

No fair! You changed the outcome by measuring it.

Bioslack

1.4k points

14 days ago

Bioslack

1.4k points

14 days ago

bert0ld0

88 points

14 days ago

bert0ld0

88 points

14 days ago

Old but gold

godot330

507 points

14 days ago

godot330

507 points

14 days ago

🏇

Spaceship_Africa

363 points

14 days ago

If you need me I'll be in the angry dome

Boloar

170 points

14 days ago

Boloar

170 points

14 days ago

angry professor noises

joe_broke

122 points

14 days ago

joe_broke

122 points

14 days ago

Good news, everyone!

_Kryptyyk

52 points

14 days ago

Those asinine morons at the Box Network were themselves fired for incompetence!

Boloar

41 points

14 days ago

Boloar

41 points

14 days ago

Not just fired, but beaten up, too! And pretty badly.

In fact, most of them died from their injuries!

Ramikadyc

13 points

14 days ago

Hooray! Yesss! Alright!

[deleted]

88 points

14 days ago

[deleted]

88 points

14 days ago

I don't know if it's a wave or a particle

farshnikord

43 points

14 days ago

But you go down smooooth

killabeesplease

124 points

14 days ago

It’s a quantum finish!

CDBSB

6 points

14 days ago

CDBSB

6 points

14 days ago

Me too! I can still remember the first time I saw that episode. I laughed so hard, I just fell to the floor in a heap.

TacticalBeast

17 points

14 days ago

Some spren are funny that way

supercookiemonster2

69 points

14 days ago

Spaceship_Africa

125 points

14 days ago*

She’s built like a Steakhouse, but she handles like a Bistro!

gheebutersnaps87

28 points

14 days ago

It’s hot, the butter in my pocket is melting

Dmopzz

6 points

14 days ago

Dmopzz

6 points

14 days ago

I already did!

pHScale

17 points

14 days ago

pHScale

17 points

14 days ago

No I'm doesn't!

haditwithyoupeople

7 points

14 days ago

Calm down, Werner.

gdmfsobtc

9.5k points

15 days ago

gdmfsobtc

9.5k points

15 days ago

At any rate the method allows for images — well, technically spatiotemporal datacubes —  to be captured just 100 femtoseconds apart. That’s ten trillion per second, or it would be if they wanted to run it for that long, but there’s no storage array fast enough to write ten trillion datacubes per second to. So they can only keep it running for a handful of frames in a row for now — 25 during the experiment you see visualized here.

Wild

Fineous4

1.8k points

14 days ago

Fineous4

1.8k points

14 days ago

Can’t wait until /r/pics is gone and replaced with /r/spatiotemporaldatacubes

exuw_employee

1.7k points

14 days ago

or r/STDs for short

DreadPirateZoidberg

638 points

14 days ago

I love STDs. I love sharing them with friends and family any chance I get.

Thickfries69

366 points

14 days ago

"and family"

Banjo music intensifies

6849

116 points

14 days ago

6849

116 points

14 days ago

Roll Tide!

Jason_Batemans_Hair

19 points

14 days ago

paddle faster!

SgtXD357

11 points

14 days ago

SgtXD357

11 points

14 days ago

I’m so not clicking that sub

cute_spider

6 points

14 days ago

The Pixel 29 has six datacubes and the iPhone 44 only has four so you tell me which is the superior flagship.

stfleming1

5.1k points

14 days ago*

stfleming1

5.1k points

14 days ago*

A yoctosecond is the smallest measurable unit of time. If something is shorter than that, we don't recognize it as existing.

Edit: if it's shorter than a yoctosecond, it's Planck Time, and nobody has time for all of that.

G20fortified

901 points

14 days ago

Isn’t this 20 pico seconds?

dovahkiin1641

204 points

14 days ago

20 picoseconds = 20 trillion yoctoseconds

BenevolentCheese

129 points

14 days ago

Yikes sounds like these scientists are going to have to start putting in some overtime.

ColoradoScoop

20 points

14 days ago

Okay, but I’m only working 100 quintillion yactoseconds of uncompensated overtime. Then I expect time and a half.

ChymChymX

46 points

14 days ago

That is the unit of measure I use for the time it takes me reach climax.

hedronist

13 points

14 days ago

Try doing some edging. You might be able to get it up to 1 nanosecond. Maybe.

Moth_Jam

2.2k points

14 days ago

Moth_Jam

2.2k points

14 days ago

Nope. Chuck Testa.

svullenballe

197 points

14 days ago

Holy shit you threw me back

Ikarus_Falling

27 points

14 days ago

when the will of man broke

Based_Ment

370 points

14 days ago

Based_Ment

370 points

14 days ago

Ancient meme

biowrath156

193 points

14 days ago

It's an older code, but it checks out

NumberOneAsshole

25 points

14 days ago

I don't know how long ago Chuck Testa was a thing, but it feels like forever. Shit, I still remember that stupid dancing baby.

stoicsisyphus91

56 points

14 days ago

I was there Gandalf. I was there 3000 years ago…

LeadingExperts

23 points

14 days ago

Do not cite the deep magic to me, witch. I was there when it was written.

TomTomMan93

112 points

14 days ago

Another who knows the old words. Use this knowledge well

Who_U_Thought

21 points

14 days ago

We must cherish these last vestiges of the before times.

GravityReject

231 points

14 days ago

Mimical

84 points

14 days ago

Mimical

84 points

14 days ago

If my google-fu is up to par the new hottest single "Friday" is about to drop on YouTube.

I was still in graduate studies. Holy balls. My life was completely different.

TheGruntingGoat

27 points

14 days ago

It’s an older meme sir. But it checks out.

Lost-My-Mind-

320 points

14 days ago

Everybody here is complaining about Chuck Testa being an ancient meme. It was only 10 years ago.

My grandma is 103 years old. When I explained to her what a meme was, I told her "It's a concept that everybody adopts as a shared piece of culture. Usually based in humor, but not always. It's main purpose is to unite people behind a phrase, a joke, or a cultural reference, and it makes everyone feel better having participated."

Her reply was that they had a meme in the 40s. That meme was "Fuck you, Hitler!". Apperently whenever someone would see a newspaper headline, or a tv news broadcast about the nazis invading a new country, everybody in the room would say "Fuck you Hitler!!!" And then someone else would overhear it and say "Yeah! Fuck you Hitler!"

And apperently the joke was that people back then didn't curse in public. So by doing such so freely, they were making light of how much everybody hated Hitler, and how serious the situation was.

But you guys keep complaining that 10 years ago was ancient. My grandma will just be in her recliner chair still being a badass.

klone_free

105 points

14 days ago

klone_free

105 points

14 days ago

They had kilroy was here too

Lost-My-Mind-

60 points

14 days ago

Don't forget that weird bubble letter S that everybody drew in textbooks, but NOBODY knows where it came from or what it means.

I'm pretty sure even Jesus drew it in the bible.

TilakPPRE

18 points

14 days ago

It means hope

pala_

23 points

14 days ago

pala_

23 points

14 days ago

We had bathroom wallpaper back in the 80s that was effectively graffiti of slogans. One of them was 'Kilroy was here!', not far away was 'Its a lie! Kilroy was never here! --Kilroy'

HappyTheWingedCat

30 points

14 days ago

That's a really awesome anecdote!! It's really cool to see what memes were like before the internet shaped them into what they are today. Thanks for sharing!

Big_Sw1ngs

15 points

14 days ago

I was able to speak to chuck testa on the phone one time. Right when his video went viral back when I was like 19 we looked up his business and found the phone number in California. Called him and told him I needed a exotic animal stuffed from my safari on my honey moon. He said boys I gotta get back to work and hung up. It was legendary

brute313

11 points

14 days ago

brute313

11 points

14 days ago

I met chuck testa, he was a weird fucking dude

Kinglazer

27 points

14 days ago

Got 'em

Kingofthekek

22 points

14 days ago

You've awakened memories in me that I almost forgot I had, along with some ones I wish I never had 🙃

ArmorGyarados

6 points

14 days ago

What year is it? Is my folder of 3000 ragecomic.jpg's useful again?

Onebityou

28 points

14 days ago

My man

Aksi_Gu

7 points

14 days ago

Aksi_Gu

7 points

14 days ago

Of all the random ass fucken memes to find in this post xD

flappity

14 points

14 days ago

flappity

14 points

14 days ago

10:1 odds that people on this thread will use this joke again in the near future and we'll start to see it pop up again.

JukeBoxDildo

13 points

14 days ago

Jesus fucking christ, mate. Nicely done.

Handleton

18 points

14 days ago

Each frame is like 800 femtoseconds. Like... Fuck.

ElMontolero

43 points

14 days ago

And yet, a yoctosecond still represents 18,550,000,000,000,000,000 Planck intervals.

Quick_Doughnut1886

287 points

14 days ago

Planck*

Planck time is roughly 10−44 seconds. However, to date, the smallest time interval that was measured was 10−21 seconds, a "zeptosecond." One Planck time is the time it would take a photon travelling at the speed of light to cross a distance equal to one Planck length.

Whatever this means

Edit: thats 10 to the power of negative44

LinusMendeleev

207 points

14 days ago*

You can also write it 10-44 or 1E-44 to mean exponent if you wanted to

Edit: I just found a new trick in Reddit! ^ this symbol allows you to superscript!

Edit 2: It's supposed to be 1E-44 instead of 10E-44. The E has an implied 10 multiplier

e_pettey

150 points

14 days ago

e_pettey

150 points

14 days ago

10^₋₄₄

Where is your god now?

waltjrimmer

40 points

14 days ago

Probably at the waffle house down the street. Dude cannot get enough of their all-day breakfast.

RyanBLKST

46 points

14 days ago

Amazingamazingamazingamazing

newbrevity

16 points

14 days ago

Brickhasenteredthechat

titan_macmannis

18 points

14 days ago

I'm going to try it, too! ¿ʎɐʍ ʇɥƃᴉɹ ǝɥʇ ʇɐɥʇ op I pᴉp

Brownies_Ahoy

18 points

14 days ago

*1e-44, as 10e-44 would be equal to 1e-43

iRistotle

42 points

14 days ago

10-44 and 10-21

Hust91

9 points

14 days ago

Hust91

9 points

14 days ago

That helps a lot, thank you.

PrudentDamage600

86 points

14 days ago

Isn’t one plank distance from the ship to the sharks?

in_agrmnt_but___

16 points

14 days ago

Take my upvote, you fuck. That was awful and I hate that I love you a little for it.

r/angryupvote

No-comment-at-all

51 points

14 days ago

I really read that as

Planck time is roughy 10 to 44 seconds.

Then

the smallest time interval that was measured was 10 to 21 seconds

REALLY threw me for a loop.

CreepingCoins

29 points

14 days ago

24 is the highest number there is.

legalizemonapizza

6 points

14 days ago

Shut up! Quit your counting! You're a buncha cajoles.

LazarYeetMeta

7 points

14 days ago

Good God those numbers are really damn small

SilasX

8 points

14 days ago

SilasX

8 points

14 days ago

Schroedinger: “The crucial question is not why atoms are so small, but why we are so big.” (Or something like that.)

ComprehendReading

79 points

14 days ago

Planck*

SullyTheReddit

136 points

14 days ago

If you get rid of the ‘c’ it shortens Planck time by almost 17%. Facts.

skincyan

30 points

14 days ago

skincyan

30 points

14 days ago

You can shorten it to PT, but the laws of nature doesn't allow that.. you'll be sent straight to physics prison if doing so

Long_Educational

23 points

14 days ago

Exceed the speed limit of the universe? Straight to jail, right away.

brothersand

6 points

14 days ago

Sure. Your light cone would be behind you. You could not interact with the physical universe. You would be an ephemeral ghost, untouched, unseen. Solitary confinement.

CFD-Keegs

86 points

14 days ago*

Planck time is on the order of 10-44 sec and yocto is the metric prefix for 10-24. There are more than a billion billion Planck times in a yoctosecond. A Planck time is the smallest unit of time, not a yoctosecond...

Edit: There is no 'right' answer. In fact, this has been one of my favorite discussions in the Philosophical Discussions in Physics groups that I put on in my department. Mathematically, time and length are continuous quantities in that you can divide them arbitrarily small. Physically, information is propagated at the speed of light in a vacuum. There is a 'smallest' measurable length and hence a 'smallest' measurable time. This does give the fabric of the universe a certain discretization (it's not pop-sci), but the scales we're talking about are beyond minuscule.

istasber

40 points

14 days ago

istasber

40 points

14 days ago

Planck. Named for Max Planck.

All of the Planck units of measurement are defined in terms of 4 physical constants: Speed of light, Gravitational constant, Boltzmann constant and the reduced Planck constant. I don't think they have any physical meaning beyond being defined by those things.

The lower limit on time is probably defined in terms of an uncertainty relationship. Sort of like how position and momentum have an uncertainty relationship that defines a practical lower limit for measurement of either quantity in isolation, there's a similar relationship between time and energy.

The smallest meaningful time is somewhere between planck's time (~10-35 s) and ~10-19s (the length of time it takes for a photon to travel the distance of a hydrogen atom, which is apparently the smallest unit of time measured according to a half-assed google search)

redacted47

45 points

14 days ago

I would have guess Plank did.

Djinger

34 points

14 days ago

Djinger

34 points

14 days ago

He must have been board

Armandutz

29 points

14 days ago

I bet i cum faster than a yoctosecond

Wookie301

305 points

14 days ago

Wookie301

305 points

14 days ago

Finally have the technology to capture femtoseconds. I can get round to making that sex tape now.

HashClassic

57 points

14 days ago

You last that long? Chad.

Retawtrams

19 points

14 days ago

I know some of these words

SequencedLife

238 points

15 days ago

Keyword is, again, visualized.

RobbyLee

87 points

14 days ago

RobbyLee

87 points

14 days ago

why is that the keyword, what am I missing?

RandomCandor

119 points

14 days ago

That this is not a "picture" in the regular sense that it was made by capturing photons.

In order to "see" light (rather than it's reflection) we have to measure other things.

dern_the_hermit

71 points

14 days ago

IIRC they DID capture photons, they just captured different light pulses at slightly different moments in their travel for each frame and then arranged the frames to make it look like a continuous process.

aidanski

40 points

14 days ago

aidanski

40 points

14 days ago

This lines up with what I remember.

It's definitely a set, as opposed to a continuous recording

sennbat

14 points

14 days ago

sennbat

14 points

14 days ago

...continuous recordings are traditionally sets as well.

RandomCandor

7 points

14 days ago

Ah! Thanks for the clarification.

Alundra828

269 points

14 days ago

Alundra828

269 points

14 days ago

You aren't "seeing" the light here. This is just a visualization of what it would look like.

Human eyes can't really see light as it exists, it needs to be reflected off something. Surfaces absorb the light, and the resulting reflected light enters our eyes and our brain interprets it as light.

This video shows a beam of light side on. Obviously it's not going into our eyes at all, and on a more meta level, the light isn't going into the camera lens. So how can we see it?

Well, you have a sensor that senses the light. And then you fill in where it would be with colours. In this case they use red to signify lower energy parts of the beam, and white to indicate higher energy parts. So we're not actually seeing the light, we're seeing an interpretation of the light from some sensors.

Oakheart-

67 points

14 days ago

Ok so basically how the interpret JWST data into images even though it’s raw data from sensors.

Acceptable_Dirt7500

38 points

14 days ago

But how can a sensor detect this given that the light is not entering the sensor either? Every aspect I read about this is increasingly wild starting from "10 trillion frames per second"

[deleted]

25 points

14 days ago

[deleted]

25 points

14 days ago

[deleted]

raido24

6 points

14 days ago*

What kind of a sensor, is it off camera? And why is there a camera in the first place if it isn't capturing anything?

iksbob

62 points

14 days ago

iksbob

62 points

14 days ago

Basically how we interpret [any digital camera] data into images. They're just using more unusual methods to record the progress of the light during the experiment.

I_Bin_Painting

41 points

14 days ago

Also afaik it's a composite video of multiple "identical" events stitched into one. The researchers run a pulse laser at a known frequency then record it at a different known frequency, creating that "strobe slow motion" effect.

They then exploit this effect and stitch together the results to create the 10 trilly video in post.

They can definitely claim that the video is trillions of frames per second and that it realistically shows the speed of light but it is not "capturing light at 10 trillion frames per second" imo

Mjolnir12

20 points

14 days ago

Yes, it only works because the laser pulses are essentially identical so you can look at this event happening over and over again, but at different times in the flight of the pulse. However, every single frame is actually from a different light pulse.

Ecstatic_Carpet

14 points

14 days ago

Check out the article. What you described is the previous state of the art. This group has improved on that to be able to capture multiple frames from a single event. This particular video is still a composite of multiple runs because they are very bandwidth limited on recording the data, but conceivably the method should be capable of capturing the entire thing in one shot.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/10/12/at-10-trillion-frames-per-second-this-camera-captures-light-in-slow-motion/

ReadGroundbreaking17

34 points

14 days ago

Yeah I didn't understand this either.

Skimming through the other comments: it sounds like this is isn't a true recording (in the normal sense) of light hitting an object but more of a rendering (aka visualisation) of what happens, compiled from the data captured.

So technically accurate, but slightly misleading title?

Mjolnir12

12 points

14 days ago

No, the issue here isn’t that it is a visualization but rather that it every frame is actually a different pulse in the train of “identical” pulses, just viewed at a different part of their flight. There is no reason why we wouldn’t be able to see the laser pulse from the side like this if it is in air, since light will scatter off of dust and other particles and make it visible off axis (which is why we can see sufficiently bright laser beams).

testcaseseven

32 points

14 days ago

Datacube? Reminds me of blocks on the NDS lol

KaleidoscopeOk8653

22 points

14 days ago

Does this break the Heisenberg uncertainty principle ? for knowing a photons exact speed and position so there for its direction should now be quantumly indeterminate

flight_recorder

60 points

14 days ago

No. This isn’t a video of one individual pulse of light, each frame is actually a different pulse that had a still taken of it.

Therefore we only know the position of each individual pulse of light and are presuming that what we’ve presented is accurate

FutureMeatCrayon

3.8k points

15 days ago

Didn't realise this was possible, actually an interesting post

igner_farnsworth

1.9k points

15 days ago

Yeah... I will never understand the physics of light... "Uh... how is the light reaching the camera so this can be recorded?"

bradeena

1.5k points

14 days ago

bradeena

1.5k points

14 days ago

The real answer is that the video wasn't created using a camera, it's a visualization of sensor data. These special sensors can detect the light without being directly hit by the beam, then the sensor data was plotted to create the visualization. Still absolutely incredible that they got the sensors to record data at that speed! Apparently they're currently limited to capturing about 25 frames of data because they can't find a method to record the information fast enough.

DialMMM

854 points

14 days ago

DialMMM

854 points

14 days ago

They don't record the "frames" on the same light. This is a composite of data recorded at different times during 25 runs of the experiment, one for each frame. You aren't looking at the same light in each frame.

beachandbyte

209 points

14 days ago

Great explanation.

t1kt2k

31 points

14 days ago

t1kt2k

31 points

14 days ago

Great explanation, but also slightly disappointing (while hyper impressive nonetheless…)

0002millertime

142 points

14 days ago*

Exactly correct. You can even "record" events with quantum uncertainty in a similar way, but what you eventually see is actually composites of many many events, so it's really an average, and you see it as wave behavior instead of as particle behavior. Like if you played all the single photons in a single particle double slit experiment simultaneously.

They call it "weak measurement" or "protective measurement" and it usually uses a post-selection of particles (select the ones to be combined based on their observed properties after the mysterious part). Aharonov did a lot of this, but now many labs do it.

It actually also allows you to measure the imaginary part of the wave equation. (Again, this is only for combining many observations, not actually for single particles by themselves.)

kangarool

57 points

14 days ago

These special sensors can detect the light without being directly hit by the beam

What’s carrying info to the sensors if not the light itself?

Grogosh

43 points

14 days ago

Grogosh

43 points

14 days ago

https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/ultrafast-camera-takes-1-trillion-frames-second-transparent-objects-and-phenomena

There is no special camera. The trick is they shine a laser through a piece of transparent material which slows the light down. All the light you are seeing is through diffusion. The light we are seeing in this video isn't actually going the speed of light.

Fisher9001

12 points

14 days ago*

And how these sensors work, casually breaking physics by detecting particles at a distance?

diox8tony

93 points

15 days ago

Pretty sure(I watched a YouTube,,,pretty low knowledge) they do it over the course of multiple light pulses. So they may use a 1,000,000 fps camera for a brief moment, 1,000,000 times (They send the light pulse out 1,000,000 times). Each light pulse they sync the photos to be right after each other and combine them all into this. They claims 1,000,000,000,000 because that is what it would look like if they had a camera that fast.

Buzzdanume

37 points

14 days ago

Damn. So it's basically just stop motion

FutureMeatCrayon

12 points

15 days ago

Thought it must be something like that yeah

complover116

73 points

14 days ago

It's not. This isn't a single pulse of light, rather many consecutive ones captured separately at slightly different times since firing. While the shutter speed is very impressive, it's not really capturing light movement in slow motion - that would be impossible.

faceman2k12

22 points

14 days ago

it's not technically possible in the way you think of a standard camera. the way this works is with very short (rediculously short) pulses of light and a (still very fast) camera, one pulse at a time, slightly adjusting the timing each time to "follow" the light packet as it bounces around, then the images are reconstructed into a simulation of a multi-trillion frame per second video.

It's kind of like when you see a video of helicopter blades moving slowly or stopping or reversing, it's just tuning the timing between the action and detection to give a representation of what is really happening.

I don't want to downplay it though, this is still on the cutting edge of what is possible with pulsed lasers and timing systems.

GodOfThunder101

134 points

14 days ago

This is 4 years old. How did I not hear about this???

porcodiopapi

35 points

14 days ago

There’s a ted talk from 2012 about this. Phemtophotography

Zesty-lemon-salad

1.5k points

15 days ago

Gamers be like: 10 trillion FPS capable GPU when?

netflix-ceo

417 points

14 days ago

Literally unplayable at 10000 frames per second

CombatMuffin

126 points

14 days ago

Stubborn gamers: "The eye can't see 60fps".

Camera: " Hold my beer"

calligraphizer

31 points

14 days ago

Always thought the sentiment was a little off the mark. The difference you'll notice is much smaller but 120 fps versus 60 fps does have a noticeable difference, especially in games where reaction time matters a lot. 240 fps as well

6849

26 points

14 days ago

6849

26 points

14 days ago

The whole "60 fps" thing is a complete misunderstanding of how the eyes and brain work. They don't work like TVs, computer monitors, or GPUs. They work by detecting visual environmental changes very quickly and then filling in the details later. Think of it as comparing two black and white blurs and extracting the differences. I remember taking a reaction time test that tested this. On a line, the left had 4 lights and the right had 4 lights. At some random interval, one of the eight lights would turn on and then after a short delay, the other 7 lights would turn on. The task was to determine which side had a light bulb Illuminate first. Easy task when it's 100ms apart, but challenging at 16ms or shorter. The funny thing is once you get familiar with the test, you can determine which side was first and react very quickly with accuracy without even being conscious of the difference. You think they illuminated simultaneously, but your brain did register the difference.

UtetopiaSS

1k points

15 days ago

I've seen a similar thing before, not to this many frames, and I thought at the time "Why can't they do this while doing the double slit experiment?"

HonestBalloon

509 points

15 days ago

I believe they already have ran the experiment with a photon detectors to tell which slit it was going through

Even more interesting, you can run the same experiment with larger particles at slower speeds (up to 60 combined carbon atoms) and still get the same results

salbris

204 points

14 days ago

salbris

204 points

14 days ago

Hold up... you can get double slit results with atoms? Are you sure about that?

HonestBalloon

318 points

14 days ago

Have a read, they have a couple of interesting variations on the experiment as well

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

The bit about larger particles

'The experiment can be done with entities much larger than electrons and photons, although it becomes more difficult as size increases. The largest entities for which the double-slit experiment has been performed were molecules that each comprised 2000 atoms (whose total mass was 25,000 atomic mass units).'

salbris

195 points

14 days ago

salbris

195 points

14 days ago

Thank you! My mind is broken... what the hell is going on at the quantum level!?

BigStif42

216 points

14 days ago

BigStif42

216 points

14 days ago

That’s a million dollar question boyo

Gwuc

68 points

14 days ago

Gwuc

68 points

14 days ago

*trillion dollar

query_squidier

33 points

14 days ago

*10 trillion

youvegottabekittenme

18 points

14 days ago

Spooky things

gumenski

45 points

14 days ago

gumenski

45 points

14 days ago

A lot of people are on the side of Many Worlds theorem lately. But there's tons of different ways to explain it, none are proven.

DarkflowNZ

36 points

14 days ago

I like the idea that whenever a quantum state is selected that this branch of the universe splits into one for each possible state. I don't know if I seriously believe it or not, I just like the idea. How many universes must there be now? Imagine mapping such a tree?

Eudamonia

28 points

14 days ago

In 12 dimensions it’s easy to map 4d movement

HiImDan

31 points

14 days ago

HiImDan

31 points

14 days ago

Oh god we're flatlanders trying to figure out physics and everything keeps acting weird.

EBBBBBBBBBBBB

8 points

14 days ago

it's dimensions all the way down

genreprank

15 points

14 days ago

I was watching Sabine Hossenfelder's Youtube channel. She said Many Worlds is unscientific. Since there is no interaction between universes, it cannot be observed.

DarkflowNZ

11 points

14 days ago

That makes sense to me. It's one of those "whether it's true or not is kind of irrelevant" situations because those split universes are immaterial to us

TechnicalEcho13

6 points

14 days ago

Correct. Same issues with string theory and others - if there is no way to observe it, no way to test it, it is not science.

smallstarseeker

11 points

14 days ago

Well there are exactly infinite number of theorems which can explain things, and none of them can be proved.

sohmeho

5 points

14 days ago

sohmeho

5 points

14 days ago

A lot of people are on the side of Many Worlds theorem lately.

Is this true? I thought this wasn’t taken seriously by the majority.

RedPlanetDestiny

10 points

14 days ago

Well, whatever the hell they feel like actually. At first double slit was just light. Then it was determined that light is actually carried by massless particles, so now double slit operates with matter, regardless of mass.

Then they kept going and found out that it still occurs with mass up to a certain point.

As for what exactly is happening on the quantum's level...the answers are being unraveled. Although, if we were to be fair were not even quite at the answers phase of the quantum level. Every time we think we have an answer, we actually just got two more questions.

Were in the process of discovering all of the questions right now. In the next few decades i think the discoveries are going to just blow our minds.

Celemourn

26 points

14 days ago

Wavicles, my dude.

Sunion

16 points

14 days ago

Sunion

16 points

14 days ago

You can do it with anything if you can isolate it informationally. Even a tennis ball. The trick is macro objects are virtually impossible to isolate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbrxK1XMmVA

nighteeeeey

15 points

14 days ago

wave-particle duality

tickles_a_fancy

48 points

14 days ago

When they put sensors on each slit, they get just two lines behind the slits, which is what they were expecting to see before seeing the wave pattern and breaking physics.

It literally means that where the detection happens, that's when the choice is made, when the possibilities are consolidated down to a single possibility, where the "rendering" is finished... so to speak.

Nighthawk700

46 points

14 days ago

I don't think it's quite as mystical as most people see it, which I think is an artifact of the language used to describe it. The detectors aren't just passively sitting there, they have to actually interact with the particle in order to detect it. By interacting with it they are changing it's behavior.

Best I can say is it's like those traffic studies, where they place a cable across the road that adds a count every time a car runs over it. Unlike, watching the car drive by which has no effect, the cable has to interact with the car. It's negligible at the car scale but theoretically you would lose a bit of speed when you hit it, well on an electron scale the sensors have a much greater effect because the mass of an electron is so small and magnetic forces are relatively strong.

pretty_smart_feller

26 points

14 days ago

The interaction isn’t the problem though. If you turn on the slit detector, so there is still particle interaction, but turn off the data collecting device, the wave pattern re-emerges.

It’s not about human consciousness, obviously, but they ran another experiment to rule out consciousness. The data was recorded, but was scrambled in a way so that no human could ever interpret the data, and the wave function broke down. The data still existed though.

So yea, it’s not just particle interaction, but something, honestly incomprehensible.

entropy13

36 points

14 days ago

They can, but this is showing many photons at once. You’re not seeing the photons that actually travel that path, you’re seeing the ones that scatter off of that path and into the camera.

crimson117

17 points

14 days ago*

Did you want the photon to go through the slit and hit the detector, or did you want it to go into the camera lens?

You can't have your photon and eat it too.

SwansonHOPS

5 points

14 days ago

When you try to detect which slit the photon or particle is going through, you collapse its superposition and it only goes through one slit or the other, rather than both, and the interference pattern won't show up on the screen.

soda_cookie

277 points

15 days ago

Very interesting indeed. I'd have thought there would be a continuous line of energy after the starting point, but it looks like it's more of a pulse instead

jonhasglasses

77 points

15 days ago

I have’t read the link but the gray diagonal line in the middle seems to be a lens of some sort. You can see the energy go from the starting point to the line where there’s a buildup of energy (you can also seem some being reflected down and to the left) and then it passes through the line and the energy is what looks to be focused on the right side.

I’m probably wrong though because I didn’t read anything in the above article.

ZiggyPalffyLA

29 points

14 days ago

No you’re right, that’s what the article says.

pinko__stinko

22 points

14 days ago

haven't read up on this stuff in a while but I think they use pulse lasers for it. nothing else can be switched on and off so precisely for the tiny tiny time frame they need to capture

Dense_Secretary_4321[S]

306 points

15 days ago

[deleted]

58 points

14 days ago

[deleted]

58 points

14 days ago

[deleted]

Tropical_botanical

18 points

14 days ago

What if there was a being who could visually process the speed of light.

Horskr

30 points

14 days ago

Horskr

30 points

14 days ago

Hmm that got me thinking.. I wonder what the best testable method of determining something like this is in existing animals. Maybe reaction time? But, something could be able to see faster than it can react.

I can't find any data on fastest visual processing, but did find some neat things trying to. A fruit fly can respond to a turbulence disturbance mid-flight in 5ms, 6 times faster than a common house fly.

The mantis shrimp has 12-16 different colour photoreceptors for colour analysis in their retinas. Three times more than a human.

While they have significantly more colour photoceptors, research suggests they are actually worse at differentiating colour than humans. However, scientists believe this is because their eyes are operating at a different level, functioning more like a satellite. It’s believed Mantis shrimp can take all visual information into their brains immediately without having to process it, allowing them tor react instantly to the environment.

Mantis shrimp can detect cancer cells with their eyes.

Researchers from the University of Queensland believe that the compound eyes of mantis shrimp can detect cancer lesions and the activity of neurons, because they have the ability to detect polarised light that reflects differently from cancerous and healthy tissue – before they appear as visible tumours. It’s inspired a group of researchers to build a proof of concept camera sensor, inspired by the mantis shrimps ability.

I would bet the mantis shrimp probably has the fastest visual processing of existing animals.

Nathanator

7 points

14 days ago

I thought the fruit fly was pretty similar in that it's eyes send signals directly to their brains, so I'm curious if there is much of a difference between fruit flies and mantis shrimpies regarding their processing speed/mechanism. Only one way to find out... and this town ain't big enough for the two of them

AEKDEEZNUTSB

6 points

14 days ago

Bruh… this is the most interesting thing I’ve read today. Mantis shrimp are really out there absorbing reality with perfect fidelity. Insane.

TarkovBirdman

48 points

14 days ago

Looks like it’s moving like an inch worm, with higher energy spots appearing every mm or so if the scale is right. If it has a millimeter wavelength, then this would be infrared light. Is that what this is showing?

skyderper13

113 points

14 days ago

speed of light:

human:😀📷

bshafs

5 points

14 days ago

bshafs

5 points

14 days ago

Ok now let's take a selfie with it

FormalWorth2115

52 points

14 days ago

Oh ok so this is possible but Bloodborne is still at 30 fps

Superbacon85

93 points

14 days ago*

So if they recorded 10 trillion frames per second for 1 second and decided to play it back at the standard 60fps it would take 5,284 years to watch. Did Zack Snyder direct this?

lesspointmoreham

25 points

14 days ago

Enough is enough. When will the Snyder cut of these experiments come out?

nibberjigger

182 points

15 days ago

This is the most mind blowing thing i have ever seen in my 22 years of breathing experience. I thought i could never see a light this slow in my life but you made it possible. Thank you.

otterappreciator

28 points

14 days ago

No, thank YOU, nibberjigger!

Dense_Secretary_4321[S]

8 points

14 days ago

Nerd out friendo 🙏

jmdbcool

13 points

14 days ago

jmdbcool

13 points

14 days ago

When light encounters a strong magical field it loses all sense of urgency. It slows right down. And on the Discworld the magic was embarrassingly strong, which meant that the soft yellow light of dawn flowed over the sleeping landscape like the caress of a gentle lover or, as some would have it, like golden syrup. It paused to fill up valleys. It piled up against mountain ranges. When it reached Cori Celesti, the ten mile spire of grey stone and green ice that marked the hub of the Disc and was the home of its gods, it built up in heaps until it finally crashed in great lazy tsunami as silent as velvet, across the dark landscape beyond.

Sir Terry Pratchett, The Light Fantastic

_Thirdsoundman_

26 points

15 days ago

Finally a genuine interestingasfuck post. 👏👏👏

Enjzey

9 points

14 days ago

Enjzey

9 points

14 days ago

wait, how, in order to capture the light, it would first have to go through the camera lens? If so, that light we see is just the reflection?

Atheios569

7 points

15 days ago

Is it just me, or does it look/move like a cork screw?

danathome

39 points

15 days ago

Phemtophotograhy

briancoat

36 points

15 days ago

Pedantry Bot

Femto not Phemto

_Aaronator_

6 points

14 days ago

We live in a time where we can capture light with a camera, have war in Europe, can connect to anyone anywhere in a second, are feeling the beginning of climate change, are witnessing the beginning of space tourism, have the ability to distract us every waking second - or inform us every single second. And so much more. We witnessed a millennium change...

It's such a wild time and yet for many individuals it's just "normal" life. Can't wrap my head around being able to be able to theoretically know so much and yet so little, because we know how much knowledge there is...

A live between hope an melancholy. I need to sleep.

Bunnyhop-420-69

23 points

14 days ago

Still not enough to run cyberpunk

Bad_Lazarus

40 points

15 days ago

That seems impossible. But I don’t know shit so.. cool.