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.

 

Quantum Experiment Confirms Reality Doesn't Exist Until Measured

page: 11
35
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 01:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: elysiumfire




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!


No, ours ears detect air vibrations and our brains translate it into sound. According to the rules of the material world.

There is just no point to render a piece of forest that is not being observed by a user.


then according to you, pluto shouldnt even exist right now. whats the point to rendering a sub-planet? not a single human has been within 100,000 miles of it. not a single human has laid a direct bare eye on it. it doesnt need to be there until our consciousness puts it there. and yet...it is.
edit on 7-6-2015 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm

Can you prove it is there without using human consciousness and or any extention of it?

Judging by the replies I am going completely over some heads here.

Repeating that reality is persistent because it is what your paradigm tells you is not an argument.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: TzarChasm

Can you prove it is there without using human consciousness and or any extention of it?

Judging by the replies I am going completely over some heads here.

Repeating that reality is persistent because it is what your paradigm tells you is not an argument.



please tell me you arent actually implying that pluto ceases to exist when we cease observing it.

because thats what im reading here. and if thats the case, i need no longer bother with you.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm

I'm sorry it took you so long to figure out what I am saying.

What makes you assume that the material world is persistent?



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: TzarChasm

I'm sorry it took you so long to figure out what I am saying.

What makes you assume that the material world is persistent?


no, it took me a little while to make out the trollish figure through that scholarly charade you have going. and now its time to stop feeding you.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm

Yet no answers or even acknowledgement of this experiment and its results, and conclusions. No intelligent perspective on it. Looks like you are the one that came in here to pick a fight.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm




please tell me you arent actually implying that pluto ceases to exist when we cease observing it.


I am implying it ceases to exist in the material form.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 02:48 PM
link   
HotMale:

And yet you are not even able to acknowledge, let alone explain the results of experiments like these.


What is there to acknowledge about these experiments? The experiments are measurements of quantum phenomena and behaviour, having little to no correlation to the macro-world of reality that we inhabit. Unlike a fuzzy point-like particle in the fuzzy quantum world, a macro-world object cannot be in two vector positions or be in two distinct states at the same time.

It seems to me that you are desperately trying to force quantum world effects onto our everyday macro-world. Quantum effects occur at the quantum level only, they cannot bridge the scalar lacuna between the disparate dimensions of reality. I'm sorry, but you are very confused. Consciousness is not prior to stimulation, it is after it. Data stimuli has to be transposed into the electro-chemical language so that it can be processed in the brain (note: not by the brain). There is a latency before the stimulation is experienced as a a conscious experience.

Something else you need to consider, also, is that quantum measurements cannot look for both position and momentum of quanta at the same time. You can only measure one at the exclusion of the other.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: elysiumfire


What is your view on this conclusion by the scientist that conducted the experiment?


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.



Or, "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.





What is there to acknowledge about these experiments? The experiments are measurements of quantum phenomena and behaviour, having little to no correlation to the macro-world of reality that we inhabit.


You don't see the implications of these inescapable conclusions?

And does all matter not consist of atoms?



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Reality is a tautology and cannot be anything other.

If reality exists at all (that is to say, that it is true that; it is not true that only pure nothing exists eternally);

Then reality exists exactly as it exists at all times.

Reality = A

A = A

Reality changes = Reality changes

Reality = Reality.

Reality exists beyond human perception; for example, my great great great great grandfather might have thought reality did not exist beyond his perception. His perception no longer exists, reality still does.

Reality is always true. Only a mind can ever be false.

Now with all that being said; I have not made any claims about the quality of reality, how reality really exists in and of itself, and this has be distinguished by Kant as Noumena (reality as it exists in and of and as itself exactly) and Phenomena (the way in which our minds receive sensations and experience with reality) ...

"By Kant's account, when we employ a concept to describe or categorize noumena (the objects of inquiry, investigation or analysis of the workings of the world), we are in fact employing a way of describing or categorizing phenomena (the observable manifestations of those objects of inquiry, investigation or analysis). Kant posited methods by which human beings make sense out of the interrelationships among phenomena: the concepts of the transcendental aesthetic, as well as that of the transcendental analytic, transcendental logic and transcendental deduction.[5][6][7] Taken together, Kant's "categories of understanding" are descriptions of the sum of human reasoning that can be brought to bear in attempting to understand the world in which we exist (that is, to understand, or attempt to understand, "things in themselves"). In each instance the word "transcendental" refers to the process that the human mind uses increasingly to understand or grasp the form of, and order among, phenomena. Kant asserts that to "transcend" a direct observation or experience is to use reason and classifications to strive to correlate with the phenomena that are observed. By Kant's view, humans can make sense out of phenomena in these various ways, but can never directly know the noumena, the "things-in-themselves", the actual objects and dynamics of the natural world."


The nature of fundamental and theoretical physics, and perhaps all science, is the attempt to starting from ignorance (monkeys...babies), work towards more and more and better and better understanding, comprehension, and 'knowing' of how reality exists in and of itself, perhaps how it exists independent of humans, but because humans are apart of reality and humans via science want to know all of reality, we also are interested in all the truths of human; but fundamental physics, aspects of it, the attempting to know how reality exists in and of itself, is an attempt to know that which is not human, but what is learned about reality in all areas, will help uncover how the human is able to exist, what it is made of, how the mind functions etc.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: ImaFungi




Reality exists beyond human perception; for example, my great great great great grandfather might have thought reality did not exist beyond his perception. His perception no longer exists, reality still does.


That's another assumption. Just because some things are discovered later doesn't mean they were there before in the material form.

Anyway this is another bogus argument because you determine that reality still exists beyond human perception by using your own conciousness.........


The rest of your post has nothing to do with the experiment this thread is about.

The only reason why people keep coming up with these hilariously skewed arguments is because they just can't compute.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 05:32 PM
link   
HotMale:

What is your view on this conclusion by the scientist that conducted the experiment? You don't see the implications of these inescapable conclusions? And does all matter not consist of atoms?


Currently, they are interpretations of difficult data. How do they know that they are not reading measurements of other atoms? Was the whole experiment isolated from potential interference? Too many questions have to be satisfied and the experiment made repeatable to enable the same conclusions to be drawn.

Nevertheless, the article quotes a statement agreeing with what I am saying...

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.


I have underlined the most salient point...which agrees that quantum effects occur only at quantum level. Why is it so hard for you to accept this?



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: elysiumfire




Currently, they are interpretations of difficult data. How do they know that they are not reading measurements of other atoms? Was the whole experiment isolated from potential interference? Too many questions have to be satisfied and the experiment made repeatable to enable the same conclusions to be drawn.


They used a single atom.

This type of experiment has been done before with the same results. You are just ignorant.




I have underlined the most salient point...which agrees that quantum effects occur only at quantum level. Why is it so hard for you to accept this?


Because he is looking at the quantum level.

He doesn't say that it does NOT apply to macroscopic reality. He is probably not willing to make such a bold statement. He is thinking it though, I bet.(that it applies to macroscopic reality)

This whole attitude of "it is happening at the quantum level so it doesn't affect us" is just more head in sand behavior. Intellectually dishonest even.

In order to look at the inner workings of reality you have to look at the building blocks of matter, and this is only possible at a quantum level.

It is then that we see how reality really works. This notion that it doesn't apply to macroscopic reality is ridiculous.

Is matter not made up out of atomic and subatomic particles?




quantum effects occur only at quantum level. Why is it so hard for you to accept this?


How can you say that when it is impossible to determine if you are looking at the macroscopic level.
edit on 7-6-2015 by HotMale because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: HotMale
He doesn't say that it does NOT apply to macroscopic reality. He is probably not willing to make such a bold statement. He is thinking it though, I bet.(that it applies to macroscopic reality)
Read and learn:

abyss.uoregon.edu...

Decoherence explains why we do not routinely see quantum superpositions in the world around us. It is not because quantum mechanics intrinsically stops working for objects larger than some magic size. Instead, macroscopic objects such as cats and cards are almost impossible to keep isolated to the extent needed to prevent decoherence. Microscopic objects, in contrast, are more easily isolated from their surroundings so that they retain their quantum secrets and quantum behavior.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 06:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: mbkennel
"The answer is, THE MOON WOULD NEVER EXIST IF CONSCIOUS OBSERVERS WEREN'T HERE TO LOOK AT IT.

At the fundamental level of reality, a universe can't be measured just like a web page can't be seen unless a CONSCIOUS
OBSERVER will experience it."

TIme: 150,000 B.C.
OK so the universe is 150,000 years old because that's the first time it was observed.


that's a joke son



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: ChaoticOrder




The article says nothing about the measurement needing to be performed by a human observer. In fact the delayed choice quantum eraser also proves that non-conscious machines can perform measurements.


What? Non-conscious machines CAN perform measurements? We RELY on them to make measurements in these experiments since we can't see atomic and subatomic particles with the naked eye.

These devices become an extention of consciousness as soon as the rendered results are read by the experimenter


Yeah, when does that happen? What happens when two people look at the dial at the same time? What happens if I take a picture but encrypt the result and don't decode it until later?

Does it count if it's a monkey? Orangutan? A dolphin? A cat?



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 06:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur


Decoherence explains why we do not routinely see quantum superpositions in the world around us. It is not because quantum mechanics intrinsically stops working for objects larger than some magic size.


I rest my case.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 06:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: elysiumfire


What is your view on this conclusion by the scientist that conducted the experiment?


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.



Or, "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.





What is there to acknowledge about these experiments? The experiments are measurements of quantum phenomena and behaviour, having little to no correlation to the macro-world of reality that we inhabit.


You don't see the implications of these inescapable conclusions?


Yes: the wavefunction of quantum mechanics is the thing to look at, and the appearance of 'where' the atom 'was' at a certain time is a sometime or not potential manifestation of the wavefunction.

And since macroreality doesn't seem to work this way, there must be some mechanisms and considerations (which we know know quite a bit about) describing the transition.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Does atoms or matter count as observing each other?.



posted on Jun, 7 2015 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

You obviously are not arguing from standpoint that indicates knowledge of these experiments. Otherwise you wouldn't be asking these questions.



new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join