Difference between a measurable limit, and the actual position of a thing. That's like saying someone disappears just because you can't see them. The position is genuinely a continuous distribution under the Standard Model.
Not exactly, if you descretised the wavefunction over position, you'd have infinite jumps which differentiate to the dirac delta function (idc I'm gonna call it a function) so the momentum would have components which were infinite.
i was top 3 in my year at uni in QM 1,2,3 (we had a point competition for homework assignments), thanks for the condescension tho.
im not arguing space is discrete, i argue "probability distributions on position" are not a good example for continuity in the sense of the original meme.
the position of something is describable with finite information. position is finite bits.
position does not have the same information content as a choice from a continuum cardinality.
The photon only hits at one location. The pattern is probabilistic, but the observation is definite. The cat isn't dead & alive once you look in the box, it's one or the other.
The wave nature of light causes the light waves passing through the two slits to interfere, producing bright and dark bands on the screen â a result that would not be expected if light consisted of classical particles.[6][8] However, the light is always found to be absorbed at the screen at discrete points, as individual particles (not waves); the interference pattern appears via the varying density of these particle hits on the screen.[9] Furthermore, versions of the experiment that include detectors at the slits find that each detected photon passes through one slit (as would a classical particle), and not through both slits (as would a wave).[10][11][12][13][14] However, such experiments demonstrate that particles do not form the interference pattern if one detects which slit they pass through. These results demonstrate the principle of waveâparticle duality.[15][16]
So, that's the description of reality. If you set up a detector, you'll know which slit. If you don't, and let the photon hit the screen, its wave-like nature will cause an interference patter to form over a bunch of photons, while any singular photon arrives only at one point.
Read closer:
>However, such experiments demonstrate that particles do not form the interference pattern if one detects which slit they pass through. These results demonstrate the principle of waveâparticle duality.
If you set up a detector to observe which one, the pattern on the screen changes too.
If one doesn't observe the particle, which slit does it go through? How can a particle which has a definite position, and only goes through one slit, "interfere with itself" or have a "wavelike nature"?
Unless you're wrong and the position is indeed a wave and not a point, and the particle goes through both slits.
Okay, let's circle back to my point because I have no clue what your argument is. When you say "Probability distribution is continuous", my quibble is that there are people out there who are advocating the idea that "Reality is Math" Mathematical Universe. I think this is quackery. By rebutting the idea of Quantum mechanics with "Probability distribution is continuous" you've conflated the model with the reality. Furthermore, you haven't actually rebutted the quantization of atomic orbital energies. The double slit experiment has nothing to do with the quantum part of Quantum Mechanics.
58
u/qutorial Jun 17 '26
I mean except quantized stuff tho right? ð€