It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
If one chooses to believe that the atom really did take a particular path or paths then one has to accept that a future measurement is affecting the atom's past, said Truscott.
"The atoms did not travel from A to B. It was only when they were measured at the end of the journey that their wave-like or particle-like behaviour was brought into existence," he said.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a question for anyone who actually has an answer: would the gist of this be that reality is noncoherent until observed?
Imagine having a television. When you look at it you see the picture. But when you turn away the picture fades away into static, the various colors in the image smear/blur in a way that is almost like the entire series of frames that make up whats on the TV was being shown in a single image.
non-coherence vs coherence.
Is that the gist here?
It's not off topic. It's precisely on topic and I didn't just post the video, I posted an explanation. The answer is, nobody knows what causes the quantum mechanical observations we make, that is the whole point of the video. But one of the possible solutions is what's already explained in that post by a physicist, better than I can explain it, the Everett interpretation. It says that different realities exist before we observe them. I don't know if it's right or wrong, nobody does, but it's another possibility to the alternatives you mentioned, which can explain observations if correct.
originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: Arbitrageur
If you are not able to recognise the 2 only possible scenarios describing the results in his experiment, could you then, in your own words tell me what the third scenario is, in this experiment, without having to resort to off topic YT vids that don't apply.
In you own words please. What is causing the seemingly barriers of time defying result?
Surprise me, plus that scientist that did the freakin experiment.
It says that different realities exist before we observe them.
I see two things expanding: 1. Space 2. The heads of people who think the universe wouldn't exist without their consciousness.
I didn't provide an explanation of results, I cited a physicist (who wrote a paper on this topic) saying we don't know the underlying reality of quantum mechanics observations.
originally posted by: HotMale
Is what you suggest more level headed? You ridicule one notion and act like your explanation is more sane.
The experiment just confirms our existing models of quantum mechanics as explained in the OP article:
Anyway it is off topic because it just doesn't apply to this specific experiment its parameters and its results.
If it does please show me how it can cause, or even relate to the result of this particular experiment.
If the Everett interpretation is correct, it says that not only does reality exist before the measurement is made, that there's more than one. You just don't know which one you're in until you make the measurement, but they do exist already according to Everett.
"It proves that measurement is everything. At the quantum level, reality does not exist if you are not looking at it," said Associate Professor Andrew Truscott from the ANU Research School of Physics and Engineering.
This is why the Sean Carroll video is on topic, it's talking about how to interpret quantum theory and the OP experiment is just an expected phenomenon resulting from existing quantum theory, so it doesn't change anything discussed in the Sean Carroll video.
The results confirm the validity of quantum theory,
I didn't provide an explanation of results, I cited a physicist (who wrote a paper on this topic) saying we don't know the underlying reality of quantum mechanics observations.
If the Everett interpretation is correct, it says that not only does reality exist before the measurement is made, that there's more than one. You just down't know which one you're in until you make the measurement, but they do exist already according to Everett.
This is why the video is on topic, it's talking about how to interpret quantum theory and the OP experiment is just an expected phenomenon resulting from existing quantum theory,
You seem to think this experiment is ground-breaking or something, but it's not, it just confirms the validity of quantum theory as the article says.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: FormOfTheLord
That could be the point, maybe what we are seeing is a projection of sorts.
That being the case, so what?
Relativity says that everything that is, has, and will happen already did (and is, and will be). So what? What are you going to do about it if you think that's true, or if you think what we are seeing is a projection of sorts? Live your life differently? Einstein says you can't.
Are you referring to the consciousness of Zog?
originally posted by: HotMale
To be clear, I am not saying the universe does not exist without humans. I ma saying that the material world is a construct governed by a program, and this and everything in it, including us humans, is a fabrication of consciousness.
Consciousness is the reality, matter is its dream.
Experiments like these do prove that reality is not there when there is no consciousness to look at a particular part of it.
Utter nonsense!
All macro-world objects that we perceive with our senses are there, and will still be there when our senses are no longer present.
The cliché of the the tree falling in a forest with no one present...does it still make a sound? Of course it does! All the required elements are in play for a sound to be created. It is irrelevant whether a pair of ears are present or not to hear the resulting fall of the tree, because sound isn't created by our ears, it is detected by them!
originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: neoholographic
And a partner of mine and I used to laugh about starting a measuring
company. We'd just go around measuring stuff with our tape measures
and charge people a flat rate. Stupid bit of fun for the young, dumb,
full of beer in So Cal. but, we sure never dreamed of measuring reality.
We could prolly charge twice as much
According to your way of thinking, the sun, the moon, and all other celestial objects beyond our planet don't exist when there is no consciousness, but seeing that conscious life forms did not bloom forth on this planet until billions of years after the planet formed, how do you account for that?
Consciousness does not create the things we perceive!