explain to me whether or not the coppenhagen interpretation is valid or not. do atomic nuclei rotate or experience harmonic oscillations? or is it always a probability density until we measure things? what is this wave excitation bundle doing in real space?

>>16715842 (OP)
The "Copenhagen interpretation" doesn't exist and there's no consensus on it, it's a construct made by other people. Bohr and Heisenberg, the two most commonly associated with it, fundamentally disagreed on many levels.
Ultimately the closest thing to a "Copenhagen interpretation" is the notion that a quantum system has no definitive properties prior to an interaction that allows for its effects to be measured.

>>16715842 (OP)
the best way to learn about it is to read about schrodinger thoughts about it, he literally seethed at the thought about things being random
>If all this damned quantum jumping were really here to stay, I should be sorry, I should be sorry I ever got involved with quantum theory.
>— Erwin Schrödinger

>>16715878
based schrodinpedo

>>16715842 (OP)
copenhagen "interpretation" is not even an interpretation. it's a very vague set of fuzzy rules.

>>16715842 (OP)
>probability
WRONG

Lets unfuck what we are doing when we are "measuring".

We are completing a circuit, and closing a loop.
Which means we are entering energy into what (the system that) we are measuring, and then hoping to compare the ratio of the measurement of the energy that we put in, to the ratio of the total energy we are measuring, using the added energy, to extract the difference and get the original.
Every time.
All measurements that we take and have ever taken, are direct proportional ratios of the base foundational bottom Planck scale length ratio building block.

When we say "Measure" and "Things" I believe that at the Plank level, we are talking about the exact same thing.
Simply the movement of a base foundational Planck length building block into, out of, or staying in a location and the quantity of those blocks and the arrangement of the magnetic fields. Also, they might be painted. Yeah. I know how it sounds.
But the comparisons of one block to every other block, and then every block to every other block increase in quantity rapidly.

You are using a quantity of foundational Planck level building block ratios to compare to one another to build the definition of the word "measurement".
So the reason a measurement would change when "Observed" is because observation is a measurement, in the sense it is a physical quantity of Planck length building blocks, each individually possessing their own magnetic field, coming into contact with one another, changing the quantity of building blocks of each, as well as the shape and structure, which changes all of the magnetic fields, and also the way they interact with higher tier/sized magnetic field quasi particle emergence's.

The larger the difference in ratio between what we are measuring, and what we are putting in to use as a ratio of measurement, I believe the less this effect is noticed, meaning the less blocks we attach to an object, the less we alter it's block quantity and the shape/magnetic fields/colors.

>>16715976
but can't you keep the system isolated while measuring? why does a measurement need to make contact? can't we just remove its influence from the system? like a decoupling of some kind.

>>16715842 (OP)
I know it's hard, but literally just let go of the notion that stuff "really exists", either before or after an "observation" (which is not any kind of special event either, it's just a perfectly ordinary interaction between wavefunctions).
What we think we "observe" is just an illusion. if it appears to be inconsistent, we're mistaken.

>>16715979
bro you're responding to random AI-generated schizo gibberish

>>16715979

We would have to go above, outside or below the forward/back, left/right, up/down movement of our 4 dimensions and figure out what the base building blocks are made from.
Entire lesser dimensional smaller universes for each block?
Is it 1/2 dimension + 1/2 dimension or whatever to make our dimension?
Is it dark matter/energy dimension, or some mirror?
Multiverse?
Disconnected multiverses that do not influence one another?
Or the opposite? They are all connected like a super machine? Interlinked...interlinked....cells....cells...
We just have to knock out more data about our universes environment first. I think they did an experiment to prove "handedness" of the universe just months ago. That is, does the universe have a left/right, and I believe that they proved it.
Ideally stepping outside of the machine instead of being inside of it would offer a much much cleaner idea to see all of the measurements, angles, ratios and comparisons all at the same time instead of trying to measure one thing at a time and then compare each new measurements to every old one, but then we would be removing parts, since we are actually parts inside of the machine, and removing parts would then change the machine......maybe we could swap our parts out?
If we could have 100 eyes on our head watching every episode of a television show all at the same time, it would be like stepping outside of the machine.

I predict that Pi is a finite number, and it is the total quantity of Planck length base level magnetized and colored cube building blocks that exist in our universe. So we can start to build a map with that and a build a better quantum....calculator.....
All work, heat, energy, time, singularities, electricity, all explained by blocks, magnetism, and the movement and arrangement of such. Larger and larger magnetic fields interlinking with one another. Larger and larger quasi particle emergence's. Time is built one block at a time. So it size, the Planck ladder.

>>16715983
wait why is someone spamming /sci/ with ai generated bs? to what end? this is so gay.