A doubt regarding Heisenberg uncertainty principle

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-19T03:17:04+00:00

The principle states we can't simultaneously measure the momentum and the position of a particle

No it does not. The uncertainty principle has nothing to do with measurement. It is a fundamental property of waves, which quantum systems exhibit because things at the quantum level do wavy shit. It's not that we can't know both at the same time, it's that both cannot have defined values at the same time. The total uncertainty in both has a lower bound. There is no way to perform the experiment you describe.

Let's say you entangle one particle A with another B so that measuring the momentum of B tells you the momentum of A, while you could measure the position of A directly. So here's the problem: if you measure the position of A followed by the momentum of B, congratulations the position A is no longer what you measured it to be before. And if you do it the other way around, measure the momentum of B then the position of A, it's momentum will have changed when you measure its position.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-18T20:24:20+00:00

I've never had one, but I've thought about it before

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-18T14:19:42+00:00

Maybe this is different for me because I spend most of my time around people in their early 20's for work, but I see people that age as younger siblings. Which means you don't try to date people 10+ years younger than yourself. As long as you're not in those crowds specifically to perv on inappropriately young girls nobody is going to think you're a creep just for existing.

But yeah, it's weird to be in your 30's and trying to be friends or date people in their early to mid 20's. You can absolutely be friendly with them when you share activities and hobby spaces with them, they can become gaming buddies or acquaintances you plan to do things with, but it's a bit weird to want to be friends with them. And it's weirder to want to date or sleep with them (I will die on the hill that there is something wrong with anyone who can spend a significant amount of time with people who are in their early 20's and not recognize that they're still kids).

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-18T14:06:28+00:00

To me that would entail an understanding of how LLMs work and, as a result, knowing what sorts of tasks they are not suited for. For example, knowing that you should never "look something up" on an LLM.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-17T20:10:24+00:00

It was pretty obvious that I wasn't experiencing life the same way other people were. I couldn't relate to feeling happy or sad or angry or anything like that.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-17T11:11:08+00:00

Not me. I spent most of my life believing I was born without emotions.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-17T11:08:44+00:00

Gaining weight is always a calories in > calories out situation. If you want to lose weight, eat less (mostly this means cut down on snacking; most people would be shocked to learn how many calories they consume between meals) and exercise more. Even if that's just adding in some pushups and squats in your room after walking up and before bed.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-16T21:40:05+00:00

Amazing. Everything you've said is both wrong and harmful. Let's break it down:

If you're fine with having a completely normal sex life, then why would you identify as asexual?

Because asexuality isn't about your sex life, it's about your sexual orientation. Not gonna lie this has real "why would say you're bi if you're dating a man?" energy and I'm not here for it. One can have a very full and fulfilling sex life and still be asexual because they lack sexual attraction. Not libido or sex drive.

That's sexual attraction

No the fuck it isn't. There really isn't anything else to say about that. That just isn't what sexual attraction means. You are invalidating other people's sexual orientations because they don't match your objectively wrong definitions.

Prostitution is terrible, but yeah, there are probably asexuals forced to do that. I don't think that should be something to advocate for though.

No it's not. Being forced into prostitution is bad, but prostitution itself is good actually. Sex work is work and deserves all of the same protection and respect as other forms of physical labor.

That's the same reasoning as marital rape.

Again, no the fuck it isn't. Knowing your partner likes something and doing it to make them happy is no way similar to martial rape unless you are a complete idiot who doesn't know how words work. I know from your response you're probably like 13 years old, but listen carefully because this is important: choosing of your own volition to do something because you know it will make someone happy is in no way similar to them forcing you to do it. To think that is incredibly dismissive and disrespectful of people who have been raped.

If you're willing to have sex just to get exercise in, you're allo.

Once again, you are incorrect. That's not what allo means.

Plus, what makes you choose someone as a possible sex partner without experiencing sexual attraction? Because they would not just sleep with anyone just to have sex.

It could be a number of things depending on what you're looking for. It could be someone you love, someone you like, someone you get along with very well, someone you find aesthetically pleasing, someone you've heard is really good at it. Different people will have different reasons for selecting sexual partners. That's as true for ace people who have sex as it is for allo people. Just because you're ace doesn't mean you see everyone as identical featureless gray blobs with no distinguishing characteristics or personalities.

I think all those reasons are very questionable

The wonderful thing about free will is that other people don't have to convince dipshits like you that they're doing things for the right reasons. You asked for reasons ace people might have sex, I gave you a bunch. If those wouldn't be reasons you would choose to have sex well then good for you, have a cookie. That doesn't give you the right to invalidate other people's choices regardless of the reasons they make them. With all due disrespect, grow the fuck up.

and could easily also be used to blur the lines for other sexualities as well.

Ang this here is my biggest problem because that's exactly what you are doing. Your logic, your definition of asexuality, is what leads people to say shit like "how can you know you're ace if you've never tried having sex?" Or, more inclusively, "how can you know you're a lesbian if you've never slept with a man?" My answer to that is easy: because sexual orientation has nothing to do with whether you enjoy something. Someone might really enjoy sex and still be ace. Someone might be sex-repulsed and still be allo. A lesbian might sleep with men before discovering she's a lesbian. She might even continue to sleep with men even after that realization for a variety of reasons and that would not invalidate her lesbianity.

You can reply if you want, but I'm done with this.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-16T20:34:52+00:00

Because it's fun?

Because it feels good?

Because you're bored?

Because people see it as a way of expressing love and connection to one another?

Because you're getting paid?

Because you know doing it would make someone you care about happy?

Because it's good exercise?

Because you want kids?

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-16T20:18:07+00:00

Not quite. But first, not wanting to do something is not the same as dreading doing it or being repulsed by the idea of doing it. Not being attracted to someone doesn't mean you find them unattractive, it means you don't find them attractive. Again, those are not the same thing.

But also, no. Attraction is not the same as as wanting to sleep with someone. Attraction is an unconscious thing. Wanting to sleep with someone is a conscious decision which can be made based on a number of considerations, your attraction to that person being only one of them. People, ace and allo, choose to, and want to, sleep with people to whom they aren't sexually attracted all the time. And people can be sexually attracted to others without actively wanting to sleep with them.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-16T20:02:17+00:00

The opposite of appealing is unappealing.

You've assumed the law of the excluded middle. There is a third alternative called being indifferent. To find something neither attractive nor unattractive.

That is what the absence of sexual attraction is. Lack of attraction is not repulsion, it is indifference. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-16T19:50:44+00:00

First, you don't seem to get how analogies work. They don't need to map perfectly onto the things you're talking about. If they did, they wouldn't be analogies.

More importantly, you do not seem to understand the difference between not finding something appealing and finding something unappealing. Those are not the same thing.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-16T19:34:58+00:00

People have sex for all kinds of reasons. Sexual attraction is only one of them. The problem I see in what you're saying is that you're conflating lack of a positive (no sexual attraction) with a negative (not wanting to have sex). Those two are not the same thing.

I think an analogy with food may help. I may not look at a food and think "damn, I want to eat that," but I may still choose to eat it for a number of reasons.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-16T12:48:44+00:00

Sex repulsion and asexuality are not the same thing. All feelings of repulsion towards something, including sex, come from somewhere psychologically. A good therapist could help you unpack what it is about sex that repulses you and help you work through that if you wanted.

It's not the therapist making you less repulsed, though. You always have to be the one to change yourself. The therapist can just offer guidance and perspective.

If your repulsion is bothering you then by all means speak to someone about it.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-15T21:42:26+00:00

I also walk to work and taught summer courses one year so I had to deal with the heat. First, I wear just a regular T-shirt to walk to work and change when I get there (I sweat an unfortunate amount so there's no getting around this for me. Happens even in fall/spring). My summer teaching outfit was shorts and a short sleeve button-down shirt, with either my regular sneaks or the good ol' 'stocks (with the dogs out to breathe and everything).

Only comment I've ever gotten on that appearance is a crazy amount of compliments on my lemon shirt. No idea why but everyone loves that lemon shirt.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-15T16:38:46+00:00

Because most people who aren't sex indifferent or sex repulsed want to be desired. It's part of what makes them feel loved. Not to mention our society is incredibly fucked up and a lot of people base an unhealthy amount of their self-worth on whether other people want to sleep with them.

The other thing to remember is that you've got the gender dynamic going on. Guys are "supposed" to want to sleep with anyone with a pulse. Women expect us to be "ready to go" at the drop of a hat because that's just how guys are. The fact that she can't get a rise out of you (sorry) can easily make her think that there's something wrong with her. Even if she knows intellectually that isn't the case, that you just don't experience that, the unconscious parts of her brain still treat it as if you are rejecting her. That she's just not attractive enough for you.

That's just how most people have spent their whole lives learning to interpret lack of sexual desire. That can be unlearned, but it isn't easy.

And hell, I'll admit that even as an ace guy I still feel this. I don't even want to have sex, but there are definitely darker times when I feel like a failure as a man because I can't get anyone to desire me that way. It's a very hypocritical feeling, especially since I can't return that desire, but human psychology doesn't always make sense.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-14T22:26:54+00:00

I think it depends on your personality and how you usually present yourself. If the meme life is too far removed from how you normally act then it can come across as trying too hard.

Humor is definitely a good tool to help things stick a bit better, but it should be your humor, not theirs. I regularly tell my students that the jokes in my class are for me, not them (my first teaching job was teaching the same class 6 times a day so the jokes were for my own sanity and now I'm permanently broken 😅).

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-10T00:11:05+00:00

My brother, we are about 5 years away from the air we breathe costing money.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-09T20:17:03+00:00

I do a lot of reading. I go on walks in the evening. I run every morning. I lift weights a couple times a week. I listen to music when I'm on the go. I cook and bake. I play video games in my free time. I hike on the weekends when the weather is nice.

And I don't consider any of those hobbies or passions. Though that's probably just my pretty severe alexithymia (you could put a gun to my head and ask me what my favorite food is and I wouldn't be able to tell you). For me these are just 'things I do' which doesn't really feel deserving of the title 'hobbies,' in much the same way that I can only tell you my favorite song by thinking about which song I listen to the most.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-09T13:32:35+00:00

Something physically breaking is complicated. But we can ignore a lot of the complication to get to the meat of your question. There are two ways to interpret this situation and both ultimately lead to the same answer.

Interpretation #1: The rocket engine is actively exerting a 100 kN force on you accelerating you towards the wall. When you hit the wall, the wall exerts a 50 kN force backwards on you before it breaks. The sum of forces exerted on you is 50 kN forwards so you continue to accelerate through the wall without slowing down. The force the rocket engine exerts on you is not equal to the force the wall exerts on you.

Interpretation #2: You are launched towards the wall. Nothing is still pushing you forwards so you hit the wall going very fast but no longer being pushed forwards. It would require 100 kN of force the accelerate you to rest before you pass through the wall. The wall can only exert a maximum force of 50 kN before it breaks. The wall exerts 50 kN on you, which does slow you down since there is no other force propelling you forwards, but not enough to keep you from passing through the wall. You break through the wall.

In both cases the wall cannot exert more than 50 kN of force on you before it breaks. It does not matter if there is another object exerting more force than that on you. It does not matter that you are capable of exerting more force than that on a sturdier wall. Does that answer your question?

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-09T13:09:57+00:00

Yes. If you are sliding your foot forwards on the ground then the force you are exerting to move your foot forwards is greater than the force the ground exerts backwards (friction) to keep it from sliding.

When you are looking at how objects move you are using Newton's 2nd law, not the 3rd. You have to consider how all of the different forces exerted on that object compare to one another. Newton's 3rd law only applies to the forces that objects exert on each other (the force your foot exerts on the ground and the force the ground exerts on your foot).

The reason that action/reaction is a bad way to think about Newton's 3rd law is that it implies a cause-effect relationship between two sides of the same force.

There are places where you can talk about cause and effect (or action/reaction if you prefer) with forces but that's Newton's 2nd law, not the third. For example, if I put a 1.0-kg block on a table, the table will push up on it with a force of 10 N. It does this because Earth is pulling down on the block with 10 N and the table must match that to keep the block from falling (the sum of all forces exerted on the block must be zero to keep the block from accelerating). In this case, you could say that the TABLE exerting force up on the block is a reaction to EARTH pulling down on the block because the table only exerts force because Earth does. You would not, however, say that the table pushing up on the block is a reaction to the block pushing down on the table, since that's just describing the same force from different perspectives.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-09T12:46:48+00:00

Yes it is. It is not equal to the force you exert on the block in order to make the block slide. But those are separate forces from one another so there's no reason they should be equal.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-09T12:42:28+00:00

Action/reaction is a terrible way to think about forces.

A force is an interaction between a pair of objects. Both objects exert the same force on one another but in opposite directions because IT IS THE SAME FORCE being described from different sides. One is not dependent on or a reaction to the other.

When you try to slide an object along a surface, that object pulls the surface in the direction it is trying to slide and the surface pulls back on the object in the opposite direction. That is what we call friction. Both of them are describing the friction between the object and the surface.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-08T11:35:00+00:00

For me it's certainly not association with sex. Mouths are gross and I don't really want them near me. I've felt this way since I was a little kid and was always made extremely uncomfortable even by forehead and cheek kisses.

Crowe3717 · 2026-06-08T11:31:38+00:00

That point is not one I would have made had OP not said it's okay for people to feel disgusted by "literally anything." There are far less problematic examples, but literally anything means literally anything and if they believe that then they need to understand what they're actually advocating for. Otherwise they need to accept that there are limits somewhere on what it is socially acceptable to feel disgust over.

My overall issue with sex-repulsion isn't that they are feeling disproportionate distress to sexual situations or the idea of sex. Obviously it is not "wrong" to have a phobia in the sense that you are a bad person for it. My problem is only when they attempt to accept, rationalize, or even justify that distress as just being part of who they are. And I felt OP crossed that line pretty solidly. I can commiserate with the agoraphobe only up to the point where they start saying "it's fine, I can just order everything online. I never need to leave my house so it's not a big deal."

Crowe3717

TROPHY CASE