You are here: Home > Message Board > General Talk > Does an object exist if no one observes it?
November 23 2024 9.15am

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Does an object exist if no one observes it?

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 > Last >>

  

Stirlingsays Flag 03 Jan 18 11.39am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

There are many implications suggested by the double slit experiment that allow us to wonder as to the nature of reality.

The later refined experiments called 'delayed choice quantum eraser'....where the detectors were placed on the other side provided more information and some profound suggestions.

If you have some time here are some videos:

[Link]
[Link]

My personal conclusion to the results from the quantum eraser....entirely as a layman of course... is that the universe is deterministic and that it contains many more dimensions than we can directly interact with. We have no way of knowing those dimensions but these experiments suggest they could exist.

Once we or something interacts with a wave/particle (that in my current view exists in multiple dimensions) then its definite position is determined in this particular dimension and we see what is observed.

So I guess I'm currently favouring the 'more worlds' or multiverse outlook.....I prefer to think of 'more' rather than 'many' but who knows.

Anyone else know a bit about this and have a view.


Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2018 12.52pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Sheks Crows Eye Flag Virginia 03 Jan 18 11.55am Send a Private Message to Sheks Crows Eye Add Sheks Crows Eye as a friend

I've always believed that we lived in a deterministic universe, as far as other dimensions, i'm sure there are many things in the universe that our brains cannot comprehend, a bit like sitting a dog at a computer and asking it to pull up google chrome.

It makes me think of the Netflix show Stranger Things and the "upside down" portion that universe.

Perhaps thats where we go when we pass away, maybe thats where Bigfoot has been all along.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
matthau Flag South Croydon 03 Jan 18 12.21pm Send a Private Message to matthau Add matthau as a friend

We are all being watched to be able to exist

[Link]

Anyway I assure you now, smoke dmt or drink ayahuasca and you’ll question everything you thought you knew as fact

I was your typical modern day british atheist up until five years back then I watched dmt the spirit molecule (YouTube or Netflix) then woke up

Edited by matthau (03 Jan 2018 12.23pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Stirlingsays Flag 03 Jan 18 12.44pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Cool.....but I don't think the Schrödinger's Cat concept works.....the cave paintings of ancient man existed on those walls long before we looked at them because we have techniques to date them......So I'm personally of the view that the moon is actually there whether you look at it or not....it's just there in multiple dimensions as well that we can't directly interact with....well in my view.

I don't think there are any questions here that go against atheism either.....but I'm happy to discuss it.

I think it's better to be cautious and of course there are other ways of determining what these experiments suggest....We can only hope that the amazing minds we have out there can further think up more experiments that can provide us with more knowledge.

At the moment, as is suggested we are a blind man feeling objects and imagining what they look like.

Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2018 1.12pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 03 Jan 18 12.52pm

Branes innit.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 03 Jan 18 1.25pm

It depends on what you mean by exists. There is a difference between how things exist on a sub-atomic / quantum scale and how they exist on a relative scale, in terms of physics.

On the quantum scale, concepts such as space and time seem to be more fluid, than on a relative scale - but we know that both scales co-exist - It seems that the 'rules' for particles and the 'rules' for molecules are different, and that how these rules interact creates what we call reality (barring a grand unified theory).

Its important to remember that the paradims of physics don't include concepts such as human artifacts etc. Its entirely about how physical properties of reality operate.

As such, physics can calculate a deterministic universe, in which free will can operate (because the actions of humans isn't within the paradim of physics).

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 03 Jan 18 1.27pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

At the moment, as is suggested we are a blind man feeling objects and imagining what they look like.

Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2018 1.12pm)

This is a good analogy for the basis on which science is built. We feel an object, imagine what it looks like, and then try to determine objective evidence that supports that idea of the object.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 03 Jan 18 1.29pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

There are many implications suggested by the double slit experiment that allow us to wonder as to the nature of reality.

The later refined experiments called 'delayed choice quantum eraser'....where the detectors were placed on the other side provided more information and some profound suggestions.

If you have some time here are some videos:

[Link]
[Link]

My personal conclusion to the results from the quantum eraser....entirely as a layman of course... is that the universe is deterministic and that it contains many more dimensions than we can directly interact with. We have no way of knowing those dimensions but these experiments suggest they could exist.

Once we or something interacts with a wave/particle (that in my current view exists in multiple dimensions) then its definite position is determined in this particular dimension and we see what is observed.

So I guess I'm currently favouring the 'more worlds' or multiverse outlook.....I prefer to think of 'more' rather than 'many' but who knows.

Anyone else know a bit about this and have a view.


Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2018 12.52pm)

Quantum scale particles are not bound by space and time in how they act.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
Stirlingsays Flag 03 Jan 18 1.33pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Quantum scale particles are not bound by space and time in how they act.

Once they are observed they are.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Stirlingsays Flag 03 Jan 18 1.44pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

It depends on what you mean by exists. There is a difference between how things exist on a sub-atomic / quantum scale and how they exist on a relative scale, in terms of physics.

On the quantum scale, concepts such as space and time seem to be more fluid, than on a relative scale - but we know that both scales co-exist - It seems that the 'rules' for particles and the 'rules' for molecules are different, and that how these rules interact creates what we call reality (barring a grand unified theory).

Its important to remember that the paradims of physics don't include concepts such as human artifacts etc. Its entirely about how physical properties of reality operate.

As such, physics can calculate a deterministic universe, in which free will can operate (because the actions of humans isn't within the paradim of physics).

I would argue that there must be a unified theory or these elements couldn't be connected and they obviously are.....you are composed of atoms...what are themselves composed of sub particles.....what lies underneath is outsize of our view due to the immense 'scale' of the Planck length.

So while we can't make sense of how objects in the quantum world operate as opposed to the macro world....they are obviously related...as they are different layers or manifestations of the same objects....Personally I feel that the quantum world operates on multiple dimensions that we cannot interact whereas the macro world is what we see and interact with...hence we cannot seriously expect to connect the dots with the quantum world when we cannot directly interact with the dimensions that these particles also exist in.

Well...for what's it is worth...that's what I've taken from the delayed choice quantum eraser.

Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2018 1.49pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
mr. apollo Flag Somewhere in Switzerland 03 Jan 18 2.08pm Send a Private Message to mr. apollo Add mr. apollo as a friend

To paraphrase..


The Final Proof of the non-Existence of God was proved by a Babel Fish.

Now, it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some have chosen to see it as the final proof of the NON-existence of God. The argument goes something like this:

"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

"But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that You exist, and so therefore, by Your own arguments, You don't. QED"

"Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

"Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

Edited by mr. apollo (03 Jan 2018 2.09pm)

 



Glad

All

Over

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards Hrolf The Ganger Flag 03 Jan 18 3.19pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

All I can add to this discussion is that I believe that scientists have no idea about wider reality. They have a tiny glimpse of it and then make a lot of what are essentially guesses about what it is all about.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

  

Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 > Last >>

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > General Talk > Does an object exist if no one observes it?