What is Digg?122 Comments
- harrisbradley, on 11/21/2008, -6/+65Oh 'Cliffs'!!! I thought it said 'Chins', and I was about to tell my wife.
- mut3, on 11/21/2008, -1/+29This is a BASIC example in quantum physics/mechanics textbooks... no new science here. Even Griffiths mentions its in his textbook.
- dafragsta, on 11/21/2008, -1/+23Are your balls small enough to apply the laws of quantum physics?
- nepidae, on 11/21/2008, -0/+19I prefer PASCAL
- BigManOnCampus, on 11/21/2008, -0/+18Quantum mechanics *DOES NOT* predict the opposite of what you might expect, It is simply UNEXPECTED (both in predictions, and it's existence).
- thirdeyeopen, on 11/21/2008, -6/+22T
- Rivetgeek, on 11/21/2008, -0/+15*****, I didnt see a single GOTO
- postitnote, on 11/21/2008, -1/+9You didn't actually say anything meaningful.
- tehzombie, on 11/21/2008, -0/+7I bet the band hates fans like you who drag them into every possible conversation.
"*****, I'd hate to inform you that your mother just passed away."
"Really? Wow, that's kind of like that TOOL song about his mother dying. Even cooler is the fact that it's a two-part epic! Don't TOOL rock?" - harrisbradley, on 11/21/2008, -2/+9An object does not need to be small to be effected by quantum physics. However her chin is quite small, which is why we have the rolling off issue.
serve returned... - mrsaturn42, on 11/21/2008, -2/+8This is pretty stupid.
Sci-am continuously reads way too much into quantum mechanics and all physics(read their ****y article about nature breaking the 2nd law of thermo)
What is happening is an undergraduate evaluation of elementary QM. Also known as a simple solution to the shcrodinger equation.
Basically particles act as particles AND waves. In this case(and the case of tunneling) its like a wave that either reflects off of a something(ie a mirror) or goes through it(ie a piece of glass) or a little of both.
QM is a LOT less interesting than whoever wrote this crappy article made it seem.
There may be some new science in here, but really its just romanticizing old science, and then mentioning that someone might have found a use for it, but not really. - NathanielJ, on 11/21/2008, -0/+6Did you just ask why the word "the" is less offensive than the word "*****"?
- aptanalogy, on 11/21/2008, -0/+5Actually, I've met a lot of people who seemed really enthused about the letter "t", as in lowercase. I've seen it in front of many large building where many seem to be congregating...
- drex8, on 11/21/2008, -1/+5Seriously, who dugg this up? No possible way the commenters. I mean except for a few comments here and there, none of the others make any sense or are relevant.
I bet whoever dugg it up, did just because of the word "Quantum" in the title, because it's such cool scientific word, and not because they understood the article.
(Disclaimer: Atleast I didn't. Digg up the article that is. Because I barely understood what the article was trying to say. But felt compelled to provide my 2 cents of retarded text. And I'm not making any excuses for that or apologize for it.) - KingGorilla, on 11/21/2008, -0/+4T is the superior letter
- Harabeck, on 11/21/2008, -1/+5Stop connecting to this bond movie, a "quantum" just means the most basic unit of something, youre really stretching this to connect it to an article about quantum mechanics.
- heyblue, on 11/21/2008, -1/+5Wow. You've now heard of 3 things related to Quantum Physics. Congratulations.
- JayD16, on 11/21/2008, -0/+4Small potatoes makes the steak look bigger...
- dafragsta, on 11/21/2008, -1/+4A subatomic particle sized chin. That was pretty ***** good. Well played sir! Technically you served. I volleyed, but I'll give you the point.
You could at least tell us if her chin has it's own universe inside it or not. My theory is that everything is infinitely large and small simultaneously. It's probably all still a singularity. - n00854180t, on 11/21/2008, -0/+3Agreed, journalistic science articles like this are less than worthless. Give me a white paper any day (assuming the topic were actually interesting, and not just another random and crappy interpretation of QM).
- zip000, on 11/21/2008, -0/+3Jeez, if this is a basic example then I'm really out of my league. I'm gonna go kick around in the shallow end.
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -0/+3Remember, the higher an object is the greater its potential energy. It appears to "predict" because its wave-like properties are in space as well as time.
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -0/+3or he quoted an internet cartoon
- Dylson, on 11/21/2008, -3/+6Pics or it doesn't exist.
- diggydougie, on 11/21/2008, -0/+3I've seen stuff like this in TV documentaries before. The way I see it there is a huge flaw in the analogy. If it doesn't make sense it is because we don't really understand it. And by "we" I mean the physicist. The fact that the rules break down at the small scale means that we don't have the math right.
- noumuon, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2you sound like you know very little to nothing about quantum mechanics.
- einstevo, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2griffiths is my hero. i didn't appreciate him until i tried reading other quantum books.
- TheMoniker, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2Damn you! Now that theme song is stuck in my head!
- Cerebron, on 11/21/2008, -1/+3Particle may be reacting to gravity/magnetism, or any number of as yet undiscovered forces, so I tend to interpret 'quantum' as 'we don't really know yet'.
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2Care to point out what I said that was incorrect? I am happy to learn from my mistakes ^___^
- latticebug, on 11/21/2008, -4/+6Quantum field theory, to be precise.
- EatChex89, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2I thought it was funny. *shrug*
- Lewie, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2Oh boy....
- noctambulist, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2Oh my oh my. This is a terrible, terrible article. Please don't believe that explanation of quantum mechanics has any value.
Particles behave as waves (until you look at them) and all waves exhibit this phenomenon. Quantum mechanics has been around for 80 years and our understanding of waves goes back centuries. Nothing new or weird to see here. - miggyb, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2It would if it was in a vacuum.
- karmabandit, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2Wow, well said. And here I was getting pissed off at all of the stupid comments-- glad that I could end the page with this one.
- frazw, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2QM doesn't quite work like that.
It is not that it WILL behave unexpectedly but that it CAN behave unexpectedly.
Also if your head exploded how did you ask for a mop? Shenanigans!!!!! - Checkerd, on 11/21/2008, -2/+4These comments suck. Including this one.
- Harabeck, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2This has nothing to do with a spiritual realm. And, its beyond what we can conceive, right now, but that doesnt mean that will last forever. Look at the incredible progress physics has made in its short lifetime... In a few hundred years, who knows what we will understand?
- lostlyrics, on 11/25/2008, -0/+2now schroedinger's cat (unless dead
always falling onto its paws) but a jam
toast (always falling onto jam side) tied
up its back - what happens if ... uh oh -
wahhhHHH *blink blink* HAR HAR HAR ! - GarrettGrimsley, on 11/21/2008, -1/+3Heh, you could apply this to a number of other things as well, does not prove that they are not real though.
- tehknotte, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2you seem to have completely missed the point. by like 10,000 miles.
- NathanielJ, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2@Zeigy - I see what you did there.
You posted the exact same comment twice under the same story. - RutgerB, on 11/21/2008, -0/+2-shirt
- grungegbunny, on 11/21/2008, -1/+3In one parallel universe there is.
- inactive, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Some of the ideas here are actually common sense.
- TheMoniker, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1This article seems a bit too oversimplified. It doesn't really say anything new, so far as I can tell. In third year quantum (actually, in an exercise in Griffith's--the guy quoted in the article--textbook) you calculate the probability that a particle will reflect off of a well. (To be clear: I'm not talking about a particle in a well here, I'm talking about a free particle that comes across a well, instead of a barrier, and instead of getting trapped in the well, it reflects back.) I suspect that there's a lot more to the article and that the interesting parts were swept under the carpet.
- frazw, on 11/21/2008, -1/+2I hate to be a grammar nazi but...
Definitely has an I not an A. Derived from finite. - Rivetgeek, on 11/24/2008, -0/+1Just because YOU cant comprehend it, doesn't mean other people can't. Quantum physics led to particle physics, nuclear physics, and eevntually nanotechnology. Standard Science uses gravity to explain things like orbits, quantum theory describes what really causes things like mass and gravity.
tl;dr: u r dumb. - GothAlice, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Uh… huh. Air /does/ roll off a cliff. Any time you have a pressure differential, the material moves, and if it's moving over the ground, it's said to "roll over the ground". Predominantly it's rolling over itself, but…
-
Show 51 - 100 of 122 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is