Does the Quantum Eraser Experiment show that consciousness creates reality?

page: 1
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 17 2014 @ 08:18 PM
link   
I say yes and this is why you have so many interpretations of what's called the measurement problem. People will say consciousness has nothing to do with quantum mechanics when they don't even know what consciousness is. There's no evidence that consciousness emerges from the material brain. That's strictly conjecture. At this point, the best explanations for consciousness are found in theories like the quantum mind or biocentrism.

Let's look at the quantum eraser experiment. Basically, you have an entangled photon pair going in different directions. One pair goes to detector D0 and is the signal photon, while it's entangled pair can go to detectors D1, D2, D3 or D4. If the idler photon is detected at D3 or D4 then which path information is known and you know if the particle went through slit A or slit B. If the photon is detected at D1 or D2 then which path information can't be known and you get an interference pattern.

This all depends on what the experimenter knows. If quantum mechanics has nothing to do with a conscious observer then why does a particle behave based on what an experimenter knows or doesn't know? If materialist are correct, then a particle should behave as a wave or a particle independent of observation but that's not the case. More from Wiki:


In D0, the sum of all the correlated counts will not show interference. If all the photons that arrive at D0 were to be plotted on one graph, one would see only a bright central band.

The total pattern of signal photons at the primary detector never shows interference (see Fig. 5), so it is not possible to deduce what will happen to the idler photons by observing the signal photons alone. The delayed choice quantum eraser does not communicate information in a retro-causal manner because it takes another signal, one which must arrive via a process that can go no faster than the speed of light, to sort the superimposed data in the signal photons into four streams that reflect the states of the idler photons at their four distinct detection screens.


So the state of the quantum system depends on the observers knowledge. It's like the past doesn't exist until we become conscious of it. So there has to be another theory yet discovered or consciousness is fundamental to the reality we experience.

Here's a video that talks about this more:





posted on May, 17 2014 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Yeah, folks are getting close to the data that yogi's and swami's and good teachers everywhere have been saying for millennia. We are creating scientists testing the reality that the observer that they created creates.



posted on May, 17 2014 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic


There's no evidence that consciousness emerges from the material brain. That's strictly conjecture.

Was that a conscious thought process that led you to that conclusion?



posted on May, 17 2014 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Ok... when I learned of the double slit experiment, it confirmed some of my beliefs but I was actually with a lot of skeptics in the sense that it could have been manipulated by the equipment itself therefore being impossible to truly prove.

However, this experiment is actually creeping me out. The way the arranged it is genius. There seems to be no way around acknowledging the resulting implications.

1 - Observation leading to knowledge decides the reality.
2 - That same knowledge can retroactively change the result!

That's INSANE. When people question my methods and explanation of my craft works, the meditations of various people, or even the prayers of the religious, I now have something to point to that says, without a doubt, that there is proof our consciousness affects reality. Extrapolate that fact and the possible meanings are myriad.

I always wondered if quantum physicists would be the first ones to get James Randi's money. Unless this experiment is irreconcilably discredited, this is one giant leap towards the apex of science and spirituality (or physics and metaphysics).

I know many here hate having quantum physics used to try to explain "magic" or "spirituality" but... c'mon, even those people have to admit there may be something to this.



posted on May, 17 2014 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Cuervo

A fully trained yogi/swami/door-to-door salesman does not think, because if they have a thought it usually will manifest in their lives somewhere sometime, and usually pretty quickly. It's how healers operate, if some people say you are healed then you are healed because the real healers control their own universe.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 12:25 AM
link   
I think the crop circles are trying to convey a similar message....



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 12:28 AM
link   
So can we essentially alter human history just by thinking about a past event?



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 12:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: BattleStarGal
So can we essentially alter human history just by thinking about a past event?


Just a click on the mouse.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 04:40 AM
link   
Maybe that is the thing about what is called we see by faith . Or out of sight out of mind . a reply to: Cuervo



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 06:12 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

At last somebody whom is looking at the potential for the mind to alter it's percieved reality and on a potentially physical level, there are other ramifications as well and I personally think the consciousness act's like a band pass reality filter and discriminates against reality's outside of it's own specific pathway. By that I mean that take for eg,
Parallel reality's, now they are side by side but not really seperate and exist in the same fundemental continuum but are phased somehow, now the mind may very well also be side by side with itself but some physical or universal law means that due to our limited bandwidth of consciousness it is segmented and seperated into parallel states that are then almost independant of one another, this may be manifest as our seeming ability to alter the quantum state of matter by observation but in reality is merely that we in one given bandwidth or reality was only able to percieve on state and thus we steer through the multiplicity of outcome's or are steered through that multiplicity.
Imagine the power a wider bandwidth of consciousness would express in it's broader reality awareness and it's potential to influence if indeed it is consciousness influening and not being influenced the nature of a given reality stream (parallel feedback), as you know consciousness is not the same thing as mind which most whom read this will confuse it with but the state of awareness.
I also think that this line of reasoning also hilights the possibility of consciousness (not necessarily mind) migration or continuation after physical death as in one reality death may effect a being but in it's parallel reality's/state's it has not died and there may also be some feedback between these parellel selve's as this would acount for precognition and many psychic phenoma as well as ghost's.
Oddly is it not strange how the medium's of the 1800's talked about other world's and vibrational frequency's of the soul and now quantum physics is doing much the same thing, perhap's in the future there will be a convergance of superstition and science as they reach a reality of awareness that is shared.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Isn't this exactly want Kant was talking about 300 years ago when he said we constitute our own reality.

There was a period in empirical philosophy when the exteme skeptic Hume said there was no way to prove reality exists at all. There is no way to know if we are just dreaming or in a coma, and there is no way to predict results because they haven't happened yet.

Kant came along and said reality is constituted by the observer. He also came up with the categorical imperative where when one acts it should be in accordance to universal law.

I am sure monks and ascetics also new this but Kant wrote it down clearly through using reason alone. It as the only logical choice left after Hume destroyed empirical philosophy. Kant was a very smart man if you haven't read his work it's worth a read.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 12:09 PM
link   
I think we create our own reality through thoughts (therefore it must be true lol), but sometimes I wonder if we do this as a collective?

Like the strongest most powerful thoughts/emotion/focus are what shape the current reality we all experience.

Rather than individual realities.

The collective positivity vs the collective negativity.

edit on 18-5-2014 by GoShredAK because: Oops



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 12:13 PM
link   
The observer has no magical power on the universe its the act of the observation that causes the effect. Doesnt even require the observation to be sentient could be a computer taking readings or a light flashing. Its the fact when you measure the particles your changing the experiment itself. The particles arent changing magically because of the observation.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Not saying this is true but what if science really doesn't understand and has too narrow a view of possibility...




posted on May, 18 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr
The observer has no magical power on the universe its the act of the observation that causes the effect. Doesnt even require the observation to be sentient could be a computer taking readings or a light flashing. Its the fact when you measure the particles your changing the experiment itself. The particles arent changing magically because of the observation.


Then how do you explain the experiment noted at the end of the video?

Here's a link to the actual documentation - here

The recorded information wasn't truly "recorded" until it was known.



posted on May, 18 2014 @ 11:06 PM
link   
The big bang happened and there was this giant ball of pure energy. Nobody really knows how or why it happened but I think we can agree that since we're here it happened. The act of observation(by us, our ancestors, dinosaurs, etc.) collapsed the waveforms of that energy and created what we can see around us in space. It makes sense if you think about this: Scientists agree the universe is roughly 13 billion years old. We can see 13 billion light years in a 360 degree bubble. Which means the observable universe is roughly 26 billion ly in diameter. I'm of the belief that any other intelligent creatures out there would have their own slightly skewed 26 billion ly bubble in their observable universe. Think of how the Audi or Olympic logo is linked circles and make them spheres.

Back to the topic, the double slit experiment is one of those things that just makes you go hmm. The first time I heard about it I was amazed. Now with the more complex experiments like the one in the video it just gets crazier. One of these days somebody smart is going to crack this thing we call reality. It just remains to be seen what will happen after that. Will reality itself collapse? Or will we finally get teleports and replicators and all that cool stuff?



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 12:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Cuervo

originally posted by: dragonridr
The observer has no magical power on the universe its the act of the observation that causes the effect. Doesnt even require the observation to be sentient could be a computer taking readings or a light flashing. Its the fact when you measure the particles your changing the experiment itself. The particles arent changing magically because of the observation.


Then how do you explain the experiment noted at the end of the video?

Here's a link to the actual documentation - here

The recorded information wasn't truly "recorded" until it was known.


This has nothing to do with an observer causing anything. What this is trying to show is that entangled particles can be effected in the past. So this is trying to show that time is irrelevant to entangled particles.Though theres alot of debate on what this experiment actually showed us. As far as the video this guy is clueless hes discussing the quantum eraser experiment but than keeps saying hes talking about delayed choice quantum eraser. But the diagrams hes using has nothing to do with it. The experiment of Kim et al. is all about stochastic probabilities .

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 01:32 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

Sad but typical.

Why can't a skeptic come into a thread and debate the issue instead of trying to use words that nobody talked about? Nobody said anything about "magical powers" or particles "changing magically." This just shows that you can't debate the issue so you have to try and debate against "magical power" instead of just debating quantum mechanics.

Even if you try to measure which slit, you can't if there's no possibility of conscious observer knowing which path information.

Like I said, people want to claim that consciousness has nothing to do with quantum mechanics when they don't even know what consciousness is.

How can you even say that the particle even has a history without a conscious observer knowing which path information?

John Wheeler, who came up with the thought experiment about the delayed choice experiment said this:


In the real world of quantum physics, no elementary phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is a recorded phenomenon.


He talked about a photon being emitted a billion miles away from earth. This photon comes across a dense galaxy or black hole, then it has to go around the left side or the right side of the galaxy. When the photon gets to earth, the history of that photon only comes into existence when a conscious observer registers which path information.

Wheeler said the past has no existence or meaning unless it exists as a record in the present. He also said this:


The universe does not exist 'out there,' independent of us. We are inescapably involved in bringing about that which appears to be happening. We are not only observers. We are participators. In some strange sense, this is a participatory universe. Physics is no longer satisfied with insights only into particles, fields of force, into geometry, or even into time and space. Today we demand of physics some understanding of existence itself.


Here's a little more about Wheeler before the pseudoskeptics try to label him some type of nutjob.


John Archibald Wheeler (July 9, 1911 – April 13, 2008) was an American theoretical physicist who was largely responsible for reviving interest in general relativity in the United States after World War II. Wheeler also worked with Niels Bohr in explaining the basic principles behind nuclear fission. One of the later collaborators of Albert Einstein, he tried to achieve Einstein's vision of a unified field theory. He is also known for popularizing the term black hole, and for coining the terms quantum foam, and wormhole, and the phrase "it from bit." For most of his career, Wheeler was a professor at Princeton University, and was influential in mentoring a generation of physicists who made notable contributions to quantum mechanics and gravitation.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 02:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: dragonridr

Sad but typical.

Why can't a skeptic come into a thread and debate the issue instead of trying to use words that nobody talked about? Nobody said anything about "magical powers" or particles "changing magically." This just shows that you can't debate the issue so you have to try and debate against "magical power" instead of just debating quantum mechanics.

Even if you try to measure which slit, you can't if there's no possibility of conscious observer knowing which path information.

Like I said, people want to claim that consciousness has nothing to do with quantum mechanics when they don't even know what consciousness is.

How can you even say that the particle even has a history without a conscious observer knowing which path information?

John Wheeler, who came up with the thought experiment about the delayed choice experiment said this:


In the real world of quantum physics, no elementary phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is a recorded phenomenon.


He talked about a photon being emitted a billion miles away from earth. This photon comes across a dense galaxy or black hole, then it has to go around the left side or the right side of the galaxy. When the photon gets to earth, the history of that photon only comes into existence when a conscious observer registers which path information.

Wheeler said the past has no existence or meaning unless it exists as a record in the present. He also said this:


The universe does not exist 'out there,' independent of us. We are inescapably involved in bringing about that which appears to be happening. We are not only observers. We are participators. In some strange sense, this is a participatory universe. Physics is no longer satisfied with insights only into particles, fields of force, into geometry, or even into time and space. Today we demand of physics some understanding of existence itself.


Here's a little more about Wheeler before the pseudoskeptics try to label him some type of nutjob.


John Archibald Wheeler (July 9, 1911 – April 13, 2008) was an American theoretical physicist who was largely responsible for reviving interest in general relativity in the United States after World War II. Wheeler also worked with Niels Bohr in explaining the basic principles behind nuclear fission. One of the later collaborators of Albert Einstein, he tried to achieve Einstein's vision of a unified field theory. He is also known for popularizing the term black hole, and for coining the terms quantum foam, and wormhole, and the phrase "it from bit." For most of his career, Wheeler was a professor at Princeton University, and was influential in mentoring a generation of physicists who made notable contributions to quantum mechanics and gravitation.


You misunderstood everything he was trying to teach. You might want to watch his lectures to understand what he was wrestling with. His goal was to understand time. As far as disproving anything he said dont need to even your quotes are right its your interpretation thats wrong. Ive often times used his quotes in my classes to get physics students to think. But the problem is you dont understand the physics involved especially towards the end of his lif he was trying to understand probabilities. Realize this is the basis of QM but again even in this post you want to make it like somehow conscience changes the rules of physics through some unknown force. Your not describing science science your describing ESP or some form of magic. Heres a lecture you might want to watch it discusses probabilities and wrestles with an internal observer in a quantum system.



edit on 5/19/14 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: dragonridr
Like I said, people want to claim that consciousness has nothing to do with quantum mechanics when they don't even know what consciousness is.


It's more often the other way around. People tend to claim that consciousness is somehow intrinsically linked to quantum mechanics when they themselves don't know what consciousness is, and additionally don't know much about quantum mechanics either.

In the early Universe, before the evolution of stars and planets, did quantum mechanics not work right until Somebody Popped The First Wavefunction?
edit on 19-5-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join