Belief of Magic, Magik, Majic, Majik?

Post Reply New Topic

The evidence, in this case, is intangible. You can't quantify a spiritual awakening. Fnord, you're plenty smart enough to know that. All proof is not phsyical; all evidence is not concrete.

scientific method and its exploration of the supernatural.

one thing can't be in two places at the same time? sounds supernatural, right? well the scientific method has observed it.

The Theory: The Copenhagen Interpretation

The Crazy Part: The part where the furniture in your house behaves differently when you’re not around.

What It Says: Besides sounding like the subtitle of The Da Vinci Code II, The Copenhagen Interpretation is probably the most widely accepted explanation for the observations made through quantum mechanics. It came about in part to explain the infamous “Double Slit Experiment,” which is the one your physics professor probably made you do. The Double Slit Experiment shows that an electron, fired at a wall with two slits in it, will sometimes go through sometimes go through one, sometimes through the other, and sometimes it will go through both slits simultaneously (meaning, a single thing will be in two places at once). In short, it goes batshit f*****g insane. The twist is, if you try and observe the electron at the moment it passes through the slits—you know, to figure out what the hell is wrong with it—the electron goes back to behaving like a normal electron, and innocently shoots through one of the slits while giving you, and reality, the finger.

So What Does This Do For Me? The Copenhagen Interpretation is the result of a lot of smart people trying to figure out what the f**k was going on with these damn electrons. What they came up with is that all particles exist as waves of probability. From the observer’s perspective, there’s only a certain chance that a given electron will go through the left slit or right slit. When you don’t watch, it remains a cloud of probability and sort of does a little of everything. When you watch, the act of observing it somehow causes the cloud to pick a side. So the next time you observe a particle, be warned: they know you’re watching, and as soon as you stop, they’re going to start a party.

Wait, It Gets Worse: If you apply the Copenhagen Interpretation to bigger objects, it gets even weirder. The infamous Schrodinger’s Cat thought experiment, the one your physics professor probably got fired for doing, said that if you put a cat in a box and press a button that has a fifty percent chance of filling the box with poison gas, then until you go and look in the box, the cat exists as a cat-cloud which is simultaneously both alive and dead. And there’s more: if everything exists as a probability wave, then that means that technically, anything possible could happen at any time. There’s nothing stopping a big floppy dick from sprouting out of your forehead right now; it’s just highly unlikely. You feel lucky, punk?
----------------------------------

ripped from an old cracked top 5 article but the ideas and the facts remain: there's plenty of "supernatural" things being tested and observed and eventually figured out and explained.

The wave nature of quantum particles is heavily dependent upon probability, thus the apparent simultaneity of location. What applies at the quantum level does not apply at the ordinary level (except in lasers and other photoelectric effects).

What the Heisenburg Uncertainty principle supposes is that a quantum particle will inhabit all possible states of its existance until it is observed, and the act of observation is what determines which state of existance the particle will take.

The Schrodinger's Cat Thought Experiment was developed to illustrate this point, not to kill cats.

What we have here is the wilful conflation of the magnitudes of scale. To say that the properties of a single electron could be applied to a human, is to imply that the properties of a single human could be applied to the observable universe. The scale of an electron to a human is about the same as a single human to the volume of the observable universe.

Sorta like saying that there must be a bigger, more complex being than humans (e.g, "God") because humans are so much bigger and more complex than a single-celled aomeba. It just does not follow.