It's a WAVE!

a reply to: mbkennel

And still you can't win the actual discussion.

a reply to: DutchMasterChief

You are very unpleasant.
Yet you can't say what "which info path collapses" is supposed to mean.
If this were my house and not just a silly internet discussion, I'd ask you to leave...

a reply to: Peeple

You are very unpleasant.

You are a horse.

Yet you can't say what "which info path collapses" is supposed to mean.

Seriously, you want to discuss these quantum experiments with me but you have never heard of wave function collapse and which path info. See this is why I am "unpleasant".

Well let me try to explain it in terms that you obviously still won't understand.

It means that the interference pattern collapses when there is even only the possibility of the which path info getting known.

If this were my house and not just a silly internet discussion, I'd ask you to leave...

Why would I be in your house? Why the long face?

originally posted by: mbkennel
Ah, reruns are on syndication again on the Cartoon Physics Channel.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Ah yes, the moment the universe was created 150,000 years ago. That was a funny story, especially putting the TP roll on backwards, er I mean using the wrong side of the leaves to wipe. Or was it 6000 years ago? I get confused in religious discussions.

Anyway, I think this is an interesting video by a physicist (Dr. Moriarty) talking about those types of claims in relation to quantum mechanics by Robert Lanza and others, where he also touches on the "quantum mechanics does not require consciousness topic". In a nutshell, the Moriarty says that the people like Lanza and others making these types of claims about QM with how little they know about QM would be like his performing surgery with no experience as a surgeon, all you get is a catastrophic mess.

It seems nobody wants to go to a physicist for surgery if the physicist has no training in surgery, so then why do people listen to the likes of Lanza on physics topics when Lanza is not trained in physics?

Quantum Physics Woo - Sixty Symbols

This video features Professor Phil Moriarty, a physicist at the University of Nottingham.

He's talking about this article and says that quantum physics proves no such thing (as far as I know, quantum physics has no opinion on afterlife):

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Quantum physics proves that there IS an afterlife, claims scientist
- Robert Lanza claims the theory of biocentrism says death is an illusion
- He said life creates the universe, and not the other way round...

Moriarty recommends not trying to learn physics from the DailyMail, or from people who don't know physics, like Robert Lanza. Good advice.

www2.ph.ed.ac.uk...

Eichmann et al (Phys.Rev.Lett, 1993) set up a ‘two slit’ experiment using photon with lead atoms as the scatterers. With careful choice of energy, he was able to arrange that the scattering event changed the internal electronic state of the atom: a process which requires negligible momentum transfer but would allow subsequent measurement of the atomic state and determination which way the particle went. As a consequence, the interference fringes vanish.

Here, describing the same expected result, availabilty of which path info destroys interference.

Durr et al (Nature, 1998) used a standing light wave to scatter rubidium atoms. Added to this was a microwave source which changed the hyperfine state of the atoms at one of the “slits”, which could in principle be measured but supplies negligible momentum. The interference pattern disappeared.

The same thing, availability of info destroys the interference pattern.

And the commentary,

Again, quantum mechanics has been shown to give a correct description: non-identical wavefunc- tions do not interfere even if they describe the same particle! It does not matter whether the measurement of the internal states is actually performed: the mere fact that it could be is enough to destroy the interference

Again, the same thing I have been saying, the availability of which path info is what matters.

So to what mechanism does it matter if info is available? Who or what would be using this info but the conscious observer?

a reply to: DutchMasterChief

Did you ever see an electron? 2008 movie electron

These things are not little solid balls, as we picture them, they are more like tiny wave bubbles. It is more likely our ways of measuring are polluting the experiment than that it has anything to do with an observer.
The extra energy going into the experiment, causes the wave to collapse.

a reply to: Peeple

I really don't need you to lecture me on particles.

Not it does not, Quantum Eraser experiments have proven this decades ago.

You don't even read what I post do you. Look what I just qouted in my previous post, for the second time.


So you are back at the "it's the apparatus". Do you think that if it was the apparatus there would still be a mystery. There would be no quantum weirdness.