Quantum mechanics needs no consciousness (and the other way around)

a reply to: Elysiumfire

Other variable to take note of - which affect knowing which path is taken - is the state of M1, 'on' or 'off'. Always bear in mind, that you can either measure at the slit, or you can measure at M2, you can't measure both at the same time. Do pay attention in science.

Again the erasure part is ignored......

The double-slit quantum eraser experiment described in this article has three stages:[1] First, the experimenter reproduces the interference pattern of Young's double-slit experiment by shining photons at the double-slit interferometer and checking for an interference pattern at the detection screen. Next, the experimenter marks through which slit each photon went, without disturbing its wavefunction, and demonstrates that thereafter the interference pattern is destroyed. This stage indicates that it is the existence of the "which-path" information that causes the destruction of the interference pattern. Third, the "which-path" information is "erased," whereupon the interference pattern is recovered. (Rather than removing or reversing any changes introduced into the photon or its path, these experiments typically produce another change that obscures the markings earlier produced.)

en.wikipedia.org...

This is qoute refered to in the paper from the OP.

Conscious access to the information about the outcome of a measurement of a quantum state is not necessary for the collapse of wave function

Why are they making the distinction between ACCES and CONSCIOUS acces. Apparently even they are saying that ACCES, AVAILABILTY matters.

a reply to: ImaFungi

You dont get this entire situation.

Says the guy that made another long winded post refuting something I didn't say or even suggest. I wasn't talking about you. I was saying that there would be nothing to explain if you could ascribe all weird quantum results to the apparatus.

Like with the experiment from another thread were you ascribed the weirdness to the particle interacting with the pathway which happened to be a laser beam.

You really think these scientists haven't thought of that. You really think these setups and their parts aren't tested to rule out these things.You really think they would pass their peer reviews? There would not be a consensus that continuous inherent flaws in the experimental setups are the cause for all Quantum mystery on which no consensus can seem to be reached?

Cause that is what you are saying.

originally posted by: HotMale

Says the guy that made another long winded post refuting something I didn't say or even suggest. I wasn't talking about you. I was saying that there would be nothing to explain if you could ascribe all weird quantum results to the apparatus.

Like with the experiment from another thread were you ascribed the weirdness to the particle interacting with the pathway which happened to be a laser beam.

You really think these scientists haven't thought of that. You really think these setups and their parts aren't tested to rule out these things.You really think they would pass their peer reviews? There would not be a consensus that continuous inherent flaws in the experimental setups are the cause for all Quantum mystery on which no consensus can seem to be reached?

Cause that is what you are saying.

Be honest with me here.

Either the universe is real or it is an illusion.

Have you concluded that it is an illusion?

If it is real, there must be physical reasons as to how everything that occurs occurs.

If it is illusion, there still must be physical reasons as to how everything that occurs occurs, but they would be non local.

I do not think that all thought has taken place which can comprehend the potentials of the universe being real.

What I mean by that is; I do not think all the possible reasons for the results have been exhausted.

I do not think it has been proven that there cannot exist real reasons as to how what occurs occurs.

HotMale:

Why are they making the distinction between ACCESS and CONSCIOUS access.

The distinction is between the arbiters doing the actual measurement...machine or human.

a reply to: Elysiumfire

A machine is doing the actual measurement in both cases.....

Again, the only variable is AVAILABILITY of or ACCES to the information.

a reply to: ImaFungi

Again you reply with a post that has nothing to do with was said in the post it was directed at.

HotMale:

A machine is doing the actual measurement in both cases...

No, there is no machine making a measurement. Machines are being used to manipulate the photons, measurement is being made by human. However, you asked for a distinction.

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: ImaFungi

Again you reply with a post that has nothing to do with was said in the post it was directed at.

(first of all it is access*)

Second of all do you know what logic is? Do you know that a person can understand conclusions from premises?

My post contains conclusions, that accurately are represented as the logical conclusions of your premises.

With that being said;

Has it been proven that there cannot exist local reasons as to how what occurs occurs?

Either the universe is real or not.

If things happen in the universe with no physical reasons, then the universe is fake.

What is your theorized physical reason as to how what happens happens?

a reply to: elysiumfire

No, there is no machine making a measurement. Machines are being used to manipulate the photons, measurement is being made by human.

But you said this,

The distinction is between the arbiters doing the actual measurement...machine or human.

You clearly imply that both make a measurement. But whatever.

Can you explain the actual point you were making?

a reply to: HotMale

machines and organic observers both take measurements. but not both are conscious. ergo, if the particle anomaly responds to both mechanical and organic observation, then consciousness has nothing to do with it. correlation not causation.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: HotMale

machines and organic observers both take measurements. but not both are conscious. ergo, if the particle anomaly responds to both mechanical and organic observation, then consciousness has nothing to do with it. correlation not causation.

a reply to: ImaFungi

(first of all it is access*)

Yeah I know actually, thanks. I knew something was looking off.

If things happen in the universe with no physical reasons, then the universe is fake. What is your theorized physical reason as to how what happens happens?

Can you rephrase and be more specific? I don't understand what you want from me exactly.

HotMale:

Can you explain the actual point you were making?

You'll notice that others easily grasped the point I made, why not you? However, the final arbiter of any experiment is human reasoning expressed through consciousness. Machines are said to measure when they present a result of interaction.

a reply to: ImaFungi

Also I should clarify, the possibility that the universe would not be fake if such events were considered, would be contained in the possibility that the results would only mean that there exists physical mechanisms which are coupled to quanta which operate faster than light.

Which would still not mean anything spooky, just that physicists shot them self in the foot or put their foot in their mouth or something when they so assuredly declared that light is the physical mechanism which moves the fastest possible out of any theoretical physical mechanism that may exist.

Or it just has to do with the nature and speed of light compared to our clunky classical selves with our clunky classical material devices and the potential imperfection of the detectors claims of purely detecting just a single quanta and not its own thermodynamical reverberations in reference to that particle...or anything.

a reply to: TzarChasm

No it doesn't respond to the mechanical observation, because if you erase the info of said observation, there still is an interference pattern, even though the mechanical observation took place.

This proves it is not the physical detection itself but the availability of the path info.

Why does every single one of you keep ignoring these experimental results even though you must have seen me pointing it out at least a dozen times?

And again, the whole argument that wave collapse is due to the apparatus is idiotic, because there would be no mystery. You would in one blow solve Quantum weirdness and there would be consensus that all these experiments are inherently flawed.

a reply to: elysiumfire

You'll notice that others easily grasped the point I made, why not you?

Yes hihi. Because it ignores the important point, just like you all keep ignoring it. That's why I don't understand what your point is exactly, and your buddies agree with you.

originally posted by: HotMale


Can you rephrase and be more specific? I don't understand what you want from me exactly.

If the universe is real, then there can only be real physical, logical, reasonable, reasons as to what exists reacts as it does.

So there is no quantum oddness, the concept of oddness is meaningless and arbitrary, no more than a baby claiming "everything is odd or weird".

If the universe is real, there can be no controversy. Because there can be no contradiction.

There is physical reason why everything that occurs occurs.

So in this argument and discussion; why is there any controversy? What are the physical reasons as to what occurs, that there is disagreement about?

If consciousness effects results, or if 'the future effects the past', there would be explict and undeniable physical reasons as to how these things occur, and there would be no contradictions.

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: elysiumfire

You'll notice that others easily grasped the point I made, why not you?

Yes hihi. Because it ignores the important point, just like you all keep ignoring it. That's why I don't understand what your point is exactly, and your buddies agree with you.

May I ask you a question?

Are you religious?

I'm just trying to understand why you are so resistant to the information being presented to you here.

a reply to: korg trinity

Why all these evasive questions. As long as results keep getting ignored I have no desire for off topic rambling.

I'm just trying to understand why you are so resistant to the information being presented to you here.

Because it hasn't even touched the point I am making.

But ok....

I would say that my beliefs have some similarities with religious concepts. I believe in a creator. I believe in the soul. I believe true reality is a state of consciousness(however that works I can't know) and everything else is a manifestation of it, and souls are a compartmentalised part of it.

a reply to: ImaFungi

If consciousness effects results, or if 'the future effects the past', there would be explict and undeniable physical reasons as to how these things occur, and there would be no contradictions.

It's Affect by the way.

Wth are you talking about. There obviously are contradictions and consciousness would explain why this is happening. It doesn't explain how exactly. Your desire for undeniable physical reasons for a non physical nature is not realistic.