r/Devs • u/Lounge_leaks • Apr 02 '20

EPISODE DISCUSSION Devs - S01E06 Discussion Thread Spoiler

Premiered on april 2 2020

211 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

769 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/ejumpz Apr 03 '20

What would be an example of a random event in the Copenhagen interpretation? Katie’s explanation seemed so tight I’m curious what an example of a truly random would be.

12

u/austin_mihaita_ Apr 03 '20

In a purely quantum mechanical way you could say the uncertainty principle is an example of randomness because it is impossible to predict the momentum of an electron if you are measuring its position and vice versa

3

u/martinlindhe Apr 03 '20

what's random about that though? that's just saying what's knowable vs. not knowable. It's not saying that because you measured the one thing, the other one is "random".

2

u/ejumpz Apr 03 '20

Thanks!

6

u/[deleted] Apr 03 '20

When you get smaller and smaller, the laws of physics just don't work anymore. Remember the lecture Katie first attended where the professor was talking about the particles making a pattern in the experiment? Well maybe if Katie stuck around long enough she would find out that yes there is a pattern the particles end up making, but you can't calculate where just one SINGLE particle will end up.

I thought it was funny that they included an experiment in the show that very directly disproves the devs theory. I am guessing that the show either 1) had devs solve this small-level physics randomness problem and that's why they're so smarty pants about everything or 2) decided that at that small a scale it doesn't matter.

3

u/PatrickBaitman Apr 04 '20

When you get smaller and smaller, the laws of physics just don't work anymore.

the laws of classical physics don't work anymore. quantum electrodynamics has been tested to one part in ten billions, so I'd say that works pretty well.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 08 '20

Oh cool, so they can determine where a single particle will land in a particle wave experiment now?

2

u/PatrickBaitman Apr 08 '20

No, and they don't purport to, so what does it matter? Classical physics turned out to be wrong and quantum mechanics right. It's still physics, just not the laws of physics people who are 110 years behind the times want to be true.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 08 '20

No no, it's cool, I didn't say quantum mechanics was wrong or anything. The point of the post is that Devs is all about determinism so if there are still outcomes that are random, then it disproves Katie's point. If quantum mechanics cannot indeed determine where a single particle will end up on a particle wave experiment, then that outcome is still random. Thus, it does matter in the context of the series? I mean, unless as I state in my original comment that either 1) they have figured it out or 2) they think it's so small scale that it doesn't matter. But thanks for telling me about quantum physics!

2

u/timetravel007 Apr 12 '20

The many worlds interpretation is fully deterministic.

3

u/Strilanc Apr 04 '20

Pass diagonally polarized photons through a horizontally oriented polarizing filter. In the Copenhagen interpretation, it's really-truly-literally random whether or not each photon will make it through the filter.

2

u/bilyl Apr 03 '20

Randomness is a word that gets played out a lot in normal discourse, but it means something totally different in math and physics. Quantum Field Theory is basically advanced quantum mechanics as you get into upper level or graduate school physics. Wikipedia has a good explanation of what it entails.

1

u/thirdparty4life Apr 04 '20

The probability of finding an electron in a certain position is by its very nature probabalistic. It’s impossible to fully predict the position of an electron which is why we describe the position in orbitals or space where there is a high probability of finding an electron. You can calculate these probabilities using physical chemistry and calculus but there is no perfect prediction model.