Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

B A little QM humor

  1. Dec 14, 2016 #1

    collinsmark

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    I was going to post this in the general discussion sub-forum (like the science jokes thread), but I think it's actually technical enough to be more appropriate here.

    Today's SMBC (source: http://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-talk-4):

    http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/1481723478-20161214%20(1)%20(1).png
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 14, 2016 #2

    Drakkith

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I feel like my understanding of quantum theory just increased by a few hundred percent.
     
  4. Dec 14, 2016 #3

    DrChinese

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I wish my mom had the "talk" with me at that age...
     
  5. Dec 14, 2016 #4
    It's so embarrassing when your parents catch you with your qubits hanging out.
     
  6. Dec 15, 2016 #5

    dlgoff

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Me too. I got really excited by it. :blushing:
     
  7. Dec 16, 2016 #6

    Demystifier

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I would be more happy if a certain girl from neighborhood wanted to have such a talk with me. But no, she didn't want to indulge into serious stuff too early.
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2016
  8. Dec 16, 2016 #7

    Boing3000

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Looking at that comic kind of interfere with my ignorance. But the odd that it was in a destructive way, had a really low amplitude ... in this multiverse anyway :cry:

    Great stuff, thanks for posting !:biggrin:
     
  9. Dec 16, 2016 #8

    DrClaude

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I really like their take on why quantum computing is efficient. Never liked the "QC proves MWI" argument.
     
  10. Dec 17, 2016 #9
    If the comedic vehicle in the skit is sexuality is "that talk" I don't want to think about an entangled state.
     
  11. Dec 23, 2016 #10

    Zafa Pi

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I certainly don't find humor and QM incompatible, but quantum flapdoodle is another matter. How many times have I heard that QM shows that probability theory is inadequate. Probability in QM is regular old probability, just like real numbers in QM are regular old real numbers. Probability amplitudes are not probabilities and imaginary numbers are not imaginary.
    When mom said, "Yes! QM is just a certain generalization of probability." then the Children's Services Division should have been called for child abuse.
     
  12. Dec 23, 2016 #11

    Boing3000

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    They are certainly no more imaginary than "real" number ... except for the "naming" part. "Dark" matter isn't dark either btw.

    I think my sense of humor have failed me on this one.
     
  13. Dec 23, 2016 #12

    OCR

    User Avatar

    Well, do it!... drag out the ol' quikfone and call 'em up...[COLOR=#black].[/COLOR] :ok:
    By all probabilities... the Children's Services Division should arrive just when she says...
    Catch her right in the act...[COLOR=#black].[/COLOR] lmao.gif
     
  14. Dec 23, 2016 #13

    Zafa Pi

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    How true. And how imaginary are the reals? Add the perfectly reasonable axiom of choice and along comes Tarski-Banach.
     
  15. Dec 23, 2016 #14

    Zafa Pi

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    EPR-Telecom confiscated my quikfone for late charges I accumulated before I bought it.
     
  16. Dec 23, 2016 #15

    OCR

    User Avatar

    Well, I knew you were going to violate something, but I figured, although incorrectly, that in all probability... it must in some way, be connected to Bell...
     
  17. Dec 23, 2016 #16

    collinsmark

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    I see what you did there. :woot::wink:

    A bit of double entendre between Alexander Graham Bell and John Stewart Bell.
     
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2016
  18. Dec 23, 2016 #17

    OCR

    User Avatar

    I see that too... :oldwink:

    And, also, I think Mr.Pi was let off the hooke rather gently... being EPR-Telecom, in all probability, is not local...?

    It could have been much worse, such... the observable on this operator seems to imply... ?
     
    Last edited: Dec 23, 2016
  19. Dec 23, 2016 #18
    That was actually fairly enlightening. They should write a whole textbook!
     
  20. Dec 23, 2016 #19

    Strilanc

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

  21. Dec 23, 2016 #20
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: A little QM humor
  1. QM and relativity (Replies: 5)

  2. Subspaces in QM (Replies: 1)

  3. Understanding QM (Replies: 1)

  4. Entanglement in QM (Replies: 38)

  5. Force in QM (Replies: 3)

Loading...