You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Ask me anything #003 - The social interaction experiment. 2SBD prize | El experimento de interacción social
Hola @raptordashzero
Pides una pregunta extraña que permita comenzar una interacción. Se me ocurrieron muchas, pero creo que con esta resumo varias inquietudes, siempre que te sientas libre y entiendas la referencia inicial.
You practice your Spanish and I practice my English
You asked for a weird question that allows to start a social interaction. Many came to my mind, but I think this sums several, as long as you let your mind go free a catch the initial reference.
Question
Is 42 still the answer?
I am a fan of the reference, Ill try and keep todays answer short, but please feel free to ask this again in the future and see what answer appears the next time :)
The act of observing something requires the transfer of energy.
In quantum physics, the observer principal suggests that the act of observing an experiment changes the outcome. This has been demonstrated in the 'classic double slit experiment'. No need to go into details but, the basic problem(solution) is physicists spend their time trying to find a way to perform the experiment without affecting the outcome. Instead they need to realize they already have an answer(wait for it), they are looking in the wrong place. The magical little electron a supposed particle, behaves as a wave, it is quite possible the electron is not a particle at all. If it is a wave(neatly folded) then it makes perfect sense that any measurement equipment would absorb some of that waves energy in order for a measurement to be taken. What we really have is an experiment that shows the underlying motion of existence. The solution isn't to devise a better experiment, its to understand the data you already have. As always the universe does exist(it isn't a hologram sorry) The answer to any question about the universe are contained withing it, the question that is being asked is the problem. So as always, 42 is indeed the answer, but what is the question?
Fun fact, I estimate the chances of there being a major scientific breakthrough hidden in a random Steemit post that will never be discovered by mainstream science at around 42% +/-8%
42 sigue siendo la respuesta?
Soy un fan de la referencia. Voy a mantener mi respuesta corta, Por favor, siéntase libre de preguntar nuevamente en el futuro y ver un resultado diferente.
la observación requiere la transferencia de energía.En física cuántica, el principal observador sugiere observar algo cambia el resultado. Esto ha sido probado con el experimento de doble rendija. El problema es que los físicos intentan encontrar una forma diferente de hacer el experimento. Necesitan entender los resultados que tienen, no cambiar el experimento.
Si un electrón es una onda, no una partícula, parte de su energía sería absorbida por cualquier dispositivo de medición. Esta es una pieza fundamental del universo. El universo contiene todas las respuestas, las preguntas son el problema. Entonces, de hecho, 42 es la respuesta, pero como siempre, ¿cuál es la pregunta?
Dato curioso: estimo la posibilidad de perder un avance científico importante en un blog Steemit aleatorio, que nunca se descubrió al 42% +/- 8%
You point something interesting: the scientists bias, they try to put the conclusions ahead of the experiment, a change the experiment to validate belief. I work in social sciences (mostly political and comunication) and you see a lot of it. Politics always tend to blame the reality for not being equal to their point of view. That (I think) is one of humankind greatest fears, discover that we are wrong.
As you stated, the truth is out there, in the universe.
I had to read some quantum physics to reply... that is a nice push to learn something new.