Double slit and the eyes.

[Carl-Richard]

28 minutes ago, Hojo said:

@Natasha Tori Maru I have 0 understanding about anything. My brain works in images flashing in my mind and I try to decipher them. When I read something I don't even know what I just read as my mind does not compartmentalize things. I'll read and stare and a picture will come into my imagination and then words come.

In my original post I was asking a question about whether this is true or not cause I don't know and science never explains it in normal videos. And if you cant explain like im 5 then I won't understand cause I have never read a book in my life. I failed high-school.

But I am hyper logical. I don't want so many words and theories dancing around in my logic. If I look and or read something and no reaction happens in my imagination then I discard it.

If you explained the double slit as there is a man standing looking through a hole and there was light shining through that one hole. And then he turned his head and then the light went through all the holes then I would understand.

But there are 15 million words I don't understand in books thats why I don't read them I don't need these made up words in my head. Scientist have to pretend to be smart so they make up a bunch of stupid words to sound like they are better.

Its easier to understand pictures for me.

If you can explain it to a 5 year old that means you understand. If you cant then you are hiding behind words.

Ok. Your topic makes sense if you treat everything you're saying as a metaphor. In a sense, focusing on an object is kinda like looking at a photon; it's concrete, discrete, obvious, while the background that is out of focus is kinda like a wave; amorphous, opaque, indistinct. But if you ask a physicist if focusing on an object can be explained by the double-slit experiment, he would disagree.

Edited June 20 by Carl-Richard

[Hojo]

@Carl-Richard That cause the physicist is counting on there being outside of what he is seeing right? The physicist can't say thats happening because it breaks his theories.

In a sense he's looking at the double slit experiment objectively and saying no. Thats madness.

The physicist sees his math breaking in his direct experience via his eyes and is denying it. Cause he made up that object permanence was real.

Edited June 20 by Hojo

[Carl-Richard]

4 minutes ago, Hojo said:

@Carl-Richard That cause the physicist is counting on there being outside of what he is seeing right? The physicist can't say thats happening because it breaks his theories.

In a sense he's looking at the double slit experiment objectively and saying no. Thats madness.

I don't think that's the reason. Photons travelling through a slit just has little to do with eyes focusing on an object.

[Hojo]

@Carl-RichardWhat is the observer? And what does the observer do explained to a 5 year old. Do they not focus the object via light?  Like they focus all the light waves into one slit.

Edited June 20 by Hojo