Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:15 am +0000
Sat Dec 17, 2016 6:18 am +0000
In quantum mechanics, there is a common misconception (which has acquired a life of its own, giving rise to endless speculations) that it is the mind of a conscious observer that causes the observer effect in quantum processes. It is rooted in a basic misunderstanding of the meaning of the quantum wave function ψ and the quantum measurement process.
According to standard quantum mechanics, however, it is a matter of complete indifference whether the experimenters stay around to watch their experiment, or leave the room and delegate observing to an inanimate apparatus, instead, which amplifies the microscopic events to macroscopic measurements and records them by a time-irreversible process. The measured state is not interfering with the states excluded by the measurement. As Richard Feynman put it: "Nature does not know what you are looking at, and she behaves the way she is going to behave whether you bother to take down the data or not."
Historically, the observer effect has also been confused with the uncertainty principle.
Sat Dec 17, 2016 8:14 am +0000
fanofVan wrote:I know I've pointed this out to you before but the Papers say that Paradise IS INDEED a "point" of actual location which can be located FROM any other point of location by proper coordinates and movement across space and that all other points of time and space are measured relative to this place outside of or encompassing time and space...as we understand it
fanofVan wrote:I think it is an error to project the physics of either reality upon the other and hope to understand or explain anything at all.
fanofVan wrote:As to "godless" science...that's a rather harsh and inaccurate accusation against Newton.
fanofVan wrote:"Although the laws of motion and universal gravitation became Newton's best-known discoveries, he warned against using them to view the Universe as a mere machine, as if akin to a great clock. He said, "Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done."
Makalu wrote:it doesn't matter if mass doesn't have a point and space moves and time is circular...you can still do valid, useful math, and its not nonsense at all. physicists already know that they are setting an artificial frame of reference in order to do the math. they already know they are straightening spacetime, stopping motion and generalizing position. if it was nonsense we wouldnt be able to land on mars
Makalu wrote:i doubt that the uncertainty principle has had much effect on materialistic philosophy or led any scientist toward faith in god...it can easily be seen as purely mechanical. and the UB says the wave/particle problem doesnt exist, there are only particles and wavelike manifestations. but notice all of the useful science we do with that manifestation that some would call nonsense!
toto wrote:42:4.14 The quantity of energy taken in or given out when electronic or other positions are shifted is always a “quantum” or some multiple thereof, but the vibratory or wavelike behavior of such units of energy is wholly determined by the dimensions of the material structures concerned. Such wavelike energy ripples are 860 times the diameters of the ultimatons, electrons, atoms, or other units thus performing. The never-ending confusion attending the observation of the wave mechanics of quantum behavior is due to the superimposition of energy waves: Two crests can combine to make a double-height crest, while a crest and a trough may combine, thus producing mutual cancellation.
Makalu wrote:your ideas about the role of mind in the observer effect are just a common misconception among metaphysicians...its an effect of mechanical instruments
Makalu wrote:Historically, the observer effect has also been confused with the uncertainty principle.
Makalu wrote:As Richard Feynman put it: "Nature does not know what you are looking at, and she behaves the way she is going to behave whether you bother to take down the data or not."
Sat Dec 17, 2016 9:29 am +0000
Sat Dec 17, 2016 9:49 am +0000
Makalu wrote:i bet you have some killer fruitcake recipes
Sat Dec 17, 2016 10:27 am +0000
Makalu wrote:you can find a number of different reference frames and manifolds in use
Makalu wrote:the math is valid enough (something you cant get through your head)...and far more valid than anything you've come up with to "replace" it
Makalu wrote:the uncertainty principle is valid in many areas, and mechanical in the one you've questioned but not valid concerning wave/particle uncertainty...particles dont become waves as a result of measurement and vice/versa...its just a particle or its manifestations (if you don't think the UB says this it's not my problem). you've quoted issues with wave interactions which is nothing to do with the slit experiment and wave/particle uncertainty. and science was no stranger to uncertainty in general and measurement in particular before the uncertainty principal either which throws more doubt on your attempts to make it a seminal moment in human philosophy..from which you now divert.
Makalu wrote:you said " This meant that a real person with a real mind could influence matter. Mind over matter was born! " but it's not the creative mind that directly influences matter, it's just the mechanical instrument doing it and only occurs in time with the operation of the instrument not with any operation of a mind. Minds have understood that they can direct energy and control matter since they started banging rocks together. Minds also have no problem measuring velocity and position simultaneously as can be seen in the math they created.
Makalu wrote:Minds also have no problem measuring velocity and position simultaneously as can be seen in the math they created.
toto wrote:65:6.1 It is impossible accurately to determine, simultaneously, the exact location and the velocity of a moving object; any attempt at measurement of either inevitably involves change in the other. The same sort of a paradox confronts mortal man when he undertakes the chemical analysis of protoplasm.
Sat Dec 17, 2016 10:56 am +0000
Sat Dec 17, 2016 11:25 am +0000
There is but one reference frame for motion, motionless Paradise. Are you advocating for multiple universes?
Sat Dec 17, 2016 12:01 pm +0000
Makalu wrote:you asked me what frame of reference physicists use...i'm not even bothering to read the rest of your post. you just want to argue any little thing that pops into your head for the sake of being argumentative
Sat Dec 17, 2016 12:33 pm +0000
Sun Dec 18, 2016 12:05 pm +0000