Short Question, Short Answer

Hey guys,

no Idea if something like this thread is needed for PS2. I simply try to make a start. If is no need for it, it will vanish after view days.

The rules for questions:

• If you have a question about something related to PlanetSide 2 that can be answered by a player, write it down here
• Keep it short
• Try to be precise: (what is the best weapon -> bad question. What TR-LMG is best suited for CqC -> better question)
• Do not troll
• Be a nice being, be polite

The rules for answers:

• Quote the question
• Keep it short
• Thumb up, if an answer was helpfull for you
• If you are not sure, or post personal preference, communicate it
• Do not troll
• Be a nice being, be polite

Here is an example of a thread, that could be handled here in a easier way, without new thread:
Short Question -> Short Answer

How does observing change the outcome of the double-slit experiment?

Nanites

If either slit is observed, a photon will seem to pass through a slit with no observed interference.
If none of the slits are observed, a photon will appear to pass through both slits and then interfere with itself afterwards.

Later experiments with more complex setups have shown that the particle's wave or nature is most likely undefined until a measurement is taken. The less likely option is backwards casaulity which violates the rules of relativity.

This is a nice explanation as to why the outcome changes, but not how. Thats why I phrased it like this
For example, this doesnt explain why taking the measurement changes the outcome even when the outcome should be the same regardless of the measurement being observed or not.

It also doesnt explain how this could apply to large molecules (buckyballs I think they used?), which unlike photons arent a wave to begin with.

I'm not sure if there is an answer - as per the key principle (and paradox) of quantum theory, which IIRC postulates that if you could prove quantum theory then the theory would be wrong (and from this quantum theorists make a living? ).

Nearest I can come to an answer is that:

• the two slit theory demonstrates that subatomic matter can be both particle and wave;
• Schrodinger said that at the subatomic level (and hence at all levels) events are determined by probability - as per his cat story;
• Heisenberg said in his uncertainty principle that observing an event changed it.

TL;DR matter can exist in two states simultaneously and the act of observing it can alter which one you see. So nothing changed, you just saw it differently (or to put it another way - some weird quantum sh*t is going on).
So, I wonder how well this response meets the criteria set out by OP.

Short answer: Time is an illusion produced by consciousness.

Is it bad to no eat or drink in 36h? Migraine...

Glucose good.

What happens to the original magazine/battery after we have reloaded, and where do the bullet casings go after they fly off the right side of our screens?

Yes, it is bad. The migraine is most likely a direct result of dehydration, as headaches are one of the primary symptoms.

While the human body needs both food and water, it is very important to be drinking plenty of fluids throughout the day, while sometimes it can be okay to go without eating for a while.

Avoid drinking caffeinated beverages or alcohols, as these will block water re-absorption in the kidneys and will actually dehydrate you further.

Ideally, the empty mag/battery will be placed back in whichever pouch the others (full ones) are stored.
As for the casings... I don't even see those, must be due to my rock-bottom settings. Maybe they are biodegradable.

The answer to most of these questions are be Nanites.

Are traps gay?

If you know which slit a molecule went trough then how can you expect results consistent with the view that it went trough both?

As for the "how" part, it can be imagined with classical analogies. A recent double slit experiment that did use molecules had molecules "with a mass M = 515 atomic mass" and "mean velocity v = 240 m/s". This corresponds to a mean momentum of p = 240 m/s * 8.55e-25 kg = 2.05e-22 kgm/s per molecule. In comparison, a single photon in the visible light spectrum has a momentum in between 8.84e-28 to 1.74e-27 kgm/s. I guess, if you modified the experiment to measure which slit a molecule passes trough, you'd use a laser pointer and detector at the slits. At least one molecule-photon "collision" would be needed to conduct the measurement, whereas it takes 120.000 - 230.000 visible light photons to match the momentum of the average molecule. Imagining a motorcycle rider colliding with a fly at the cruising speed of a boeing 747 (259 m/s), only a single one can collapse the rider despite it taking millions to equate the momentum.

https://www.livescience.com/19268-quantum-double-slit-experiment-largest-molecules.html

If you know that it had to go through only one slit but you just don't know which one, how can you expect the results to be consistent with that it always goes through both slits at once?

I'm still curious to the experiments they must have done where they did observe which slit it went through, but destroyed the evidence of which one it went through before anyone could take a look at it.

Still doesn't explain how a single entitity, with or without mass, can somehow "know" where the interference pattern would create a peak and hit those spots even though the redirection of it's momentum is impossible meaning it should be creating two bands on the back instead of an interference pattern.

Perhaps if you could answer this question you could explain how: Why would the photon/molecule hit the peaks of a potential interference pattern, rather than the deconstructive interference parts of the two waves?

That depends on a person's caffeine/alcohol tolerance.

There are basically three possibilities according to an "ordinary" cause-effect way of thinking:

1. If the entity goes trough the left slit it hits the left side of the screen. (Classically too)
2. If the entity goes trough the right slit it hits the right side of the screen. (Classically too)
3. If the entity goes trough both slits it hits the screen with an interference pattern. (Only quantum entities)

So if I knew which slit it went trough, I would expect results like in case 1) or 2), since observing an interference pattern would contradict the knowledge I had with respect to the slit. If I knew that it went trough only one slit, but not which one, I'd see that as an "either case 1) or 2)" and would NOT expect the phenomenon in case 3) to occur at all.

There is an extension of the double-slit experiment that is called the quantum eraser. It's photon/light version can be done at home or high-school using a pair of polaroid sun-glasses. One of the interesting conclusions of this experiment is that one does not need to observe which slit an entity passed trough, it is sufficient that it is observable in principle, to destroy the interference pattern. But if you make it unobservable again you still get the interference pattern.

Because at the quantum scale movement is best described as waves instead of classical mechanics, and the double slit causes change to the wave structure, as can be seen if putting one in water and creating artificial waves. So if I take a large football and push it straight forward, it does not go to the left or right because that is not where it moves (describable with Newtonian mechanics), and if I take an atom and push it trough the slit, it does not hit the deconstructive parts for similar reasons (describable with Wave mechanics). Its just how the universe works I suppose, kind of hard to explain other than descriptively. Also check out this animation that is supposed to make it simpler:

True, but not by much.

If thirsty, don't reach for a coffee or liquor.

No particles exist until observed. They are just have a probability of existing at some given location. With more complex objects like a buckyball, the probabilities of the individual atoms are interrelated so they are far more likely to be in a given location (the bell curve becomes thin and tall in the middle). Theoretically you could get an interference pattern with something very large and complex. The instrumentation to pull this off experimentally isn't practical though.