• DarthFreyr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    6 days ago

    Not a true expert, but I think it comes down to “observing” a particle/phenomenon like this inherently comes down to some sort of interaction, and it can’t just be neglected like you could on a macro scale. Even for something like holding a ruler up to an object and seeing what mark lines up, you’re relying on a bunch of light bouncing off the object (and the ruler) to be able to judge that. If the thing you’re trying to measure is on the order of one particle of light, blasting it with a bunch of anything is gonna affect it pretty severely, and who knows what a “ruler” would even mean in that analogy. So it’s less like some idea of sapient knowledge, and more like when you struggle to measure something like a tiny feather or single bead of Styrofoam, like you can’t even get near the thing without the wind from moving or some random static or something else moving the thing around uncontrollably, except many orders of magnitude more sensitive.

    • daannii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      The ruler metric itself is also a factor. And the human looking at it.

      If you were using cm , thats going to give you a different number than if you were using mm. Or nm.

      Humans can’t perceive nm by eye. And most can’t distinguish more than 1/3 or 1/4 of a mm. At best.

      So the tool and the human also limits accuracy. Meaning the tool has influenced the result. And The human has limited the measurement too.