It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The verdict is in objective physical reality doesn't exist

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+22 more 
posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 10:45 AM
I think it's time for science to bite the bullet of materialism. The evidence is overwhelming that an objective physical universe doesn't exist as we perceive it to be and consciousness may be more fundamental than what we call matter. I will lay out the evidence below.

1. Quantum Mechanics

Quantum Mechanics clearly tells us an objective physical reality doesn't exist until a measurement occurs. This also depends on the knowledge of the observer. This knowledge can be quantified as an increase in entropy. This is also shown in the Free Will Theorem. QM shows that local realism is dead.

Death by experiment for local realism

A fundamental scientific assumption called local realism conflicts with certain predictions of quantum mechanics. Those predictions have now been verified, with none of the loopholes that have compromised earlier tests.

The Free Will Theorem states:

Given the axioms, if the two experimenters in question are free to make choices about what measurements to take, then the results of the measurements cannot be determined by anything previous to the experiments.

Very simple yet profound. In other words, there can't be a physical hidden variable. This hidden variable would have to determine the choice the Experimenter makes, thereby determining which history the particle can be in prior to measurement. This would have to be some magical physical object that has foreknowledge of the future before a measurement occurs.

It has also been shown over and over again, these properties don't exist until measured.

Reality Doesn’t Exist Until We Measure It, Quantum Experiment Confirms

Australian scientists have recreated a famous experiment and confirmed quantum physics's bizarre predictions about the nature of reality, by proving that reality doesn't actually exist until we measure it - at least, not on the very small scale.

Our general logic would assume that the object is either wave-like or particle-like by its very nature, and our measurements will have nothing to do with the answer. But quantum theory predicts that the result all depends on how the object is measured at the end of its journey. And that's exactly what a team from the Australian National University has now found. "It proves that measurement is everything. At the quantum level, reality does not exist if you are not looking at it," lead researcher and physicist Andrew Truscott said in a press release.


There's Physicist now who say the wave function is real but non physical.

The wave-function is real but nonphysical: A view from counterfactual quantum cryptography

Counterfactual quantum cryptography (CQC) is used here as a tool to assess the status of the quantum state: Is it real/ontic (an objective state of Nature) or epistemic (a state of the observer's knowledge)? In contrast to recent approaches to wave function ontology, that are based on realist models of quantum theory, here we recast the question as a problem of communication between a sender (Bob), who uses interaction-free measurements, and a receiver (Alice), who observes an interference pattern in a Mach-Zehnder set-up. An advantage of our approach is that it allows us to define the concept of "physical", apart from "real". In instances of counterfactual quantum communication, reality is ascribed to the interaction-freely measured wave function (ψ) because Alice deterministically infers Bob's measurement. On the other hand, ψ does not correspond to the physical transmission of a particle because it produced no detection on Bob's apparatus. We therefore conclude that the wave function in this case (and by extension, generally) is real, but not physical. Characteristically for classical phenomena, the reality and physicality of objects are equivalent, whereas for quantum phenomena, the former is strictly weaker. As a concrete application of this idea, the nonphysical reality of the wavefunction is shown to be the basic nonclassical phenomenon that underlies the security of CQC.

This communication scheme has been verified by experiment. Scientist transmitted information from A to B without a physical medium.

Traveling without moving: Quantum communication scheme transfers quantum states without transmitting physical particles

While Einstein considered quantum entanglement as "spooky action at a distance," and those who fully accept entanglement acknowledge it to be counterintuitive, current entanglement-based quantum communication schemes for transferring an unknown quantum state from one place to another require classical transportation of particles between sender and receiver. Now consider this: Recently, scientists in China at Harbin Institute of Technology, Yanbian University and Changchun University demonstrated what is known as a counterfactual approach in which quantum information can be transferred between two distant participants without sending any physical particles between them. The researchers accomplished this by entangling two nonlocal qubits with each other without interaction – meaning that the present scheme can transport an unknown qubit in a nondeterministic manner without prior entanglement sharing or classical communication between the participants. Moreover, the scientists state that their approach provides a new method for creating entanglement that allows two qubits to be entangled without interaction between them.

But wait, there's more! Next up is Evolution.

2. Evolution

This part will really be amazing. This is because Evolution has become a sacrament in the religion of Materialism. It's amazing that Evolution shows that physical reality doesn't exist. The work of Donald Hoffman, a Professor of Cognitive Sciences in this area is simply mind blowing. First, I will post his Ted Talk, which is amazing. It's called Do we see reality as it is?

Hoffman shows that with evolution an organism tuned to fitness will win out over an organism tuned to truth. Truth doesn't matter just fitness and physical reality doesn't exist. He says what we call physical reality is an interface of icons that we use and the fundamental reality is conscious agents. He put this into mathematical formalism that makes predictions. Here's a paper called Objects of consciousness


posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 10:46 AM
a reply to: neoholographic

Current models of visual perception typically assume that human vision estimates true properties of physical objects, properties that exist even if unperceived. However, recent studies of perceptual evolution, using evolutionary games and genetic algorithms, reveal that natural selection often drives true perceptions to extinction when they compete with perceptions tuned to fitness rather than truth: Perception guides adaptive behavior; it does not estimate a preexisting physical truth. Moreover, shifting from evolutionary biology to quantum physics, there is reason to disbelieve in preexisting physical truths: Certain interpretations of quantum theory deny that dynamical properties of physical objects have definite values when unobserved. In some of these interpretations the observer is fundamental, and wave functions are compendia of subjective probabilities, not preexisting elements of physical reality. These two considerations, from evolutionary biology and quantum physics, suggest that current models of object perception require fundamental reformulation. Here we begin such a reformulation, starting with a formal model of consciousness that we call a “conscious agent.” We develop the dynamics of interacting conscious agents, and study how the perception of objects and space-time can emerge from such dynamics. We show that one particular object, the quantum free particle, has a wave function that is identical in form to the harmonic functions that characterize the asymptotic dynamics of conscious agents; particles are vibrations not of strings but of interacting conscious agents. This allows us to reinterpret physical properties such as position, momentum, and energy as properties of interacting conscious agents, rather than as preexisting physical truths. We sketch how this approach might extend to the perception of relativistic quantum objects, and to classical objects of macroscopic scale.

Here's an interview he gave:

The Evolutionary Argument Against Reality

DONALD HOFFMAN: Right. The classic argument is that those of our ancestors who saw more accurately had a competitive advantage over those who saw less accurately and thus were more likely to pass on their genes that coded for those more accurate perceptions, so after thousands of generations we can be quite confident that we’re the offspring of those who saw accurately, and so we see accurately. That sounds very plausible. But I think it is utterly false. It misunderstands the fundamental fact about evolution, which is that it’s about fitness functions — mathematical functions that describe how well a given strategy achieves the goals of survival and reproduction. The mathematical physicist Chetan Prakash proved a theorem that I devised that says: According to evolution by natural selection, an organism that sees reality as it is will never be more fit than an organism of equal complexity that sees none of reality but is just tuned to fitness. Never.

Just ASTOUNDING! Here's more:

I think that’s absolutely true. The neuroscientists are saying, “We don’t need to invoke those kind of quantum processes, we don’t need quantum wave functions collapsing inside neurons, we can just use classical physics to describe processes in the brain.” I’m emphasizing the larger lesson of quantum mechanics: Neurons, brains, space … these are just symbols we use, they’re not real. It’s not that there’s a classical brain that does some quantum magic. It’s that there’s no brain! Quantum mechanics says that classical objects — including brains — don’t exist. So this is a far more radical claim about the nature of reality and does not involve the brain pulling off some tricky quantum computation. So even Penrose hasn’t taken it far enough. But most of us, you know, we’re born realists. We’re born physicalists. This is a really, really hard one to let go of.

Again, he's using evolution to show that physical reality doesn't exist. He doesn't just say this, he rigorously shows this in paper after paper. He also ties this to space-time being a quantum error correcting code. John Preskill and others say this:

Is Spacetime a Quantum Error-Correcting Code? | John Preskill

Next up:

3. Holographic Principle

Most Physicists are beginning to accept some form of the Holographic Universe. This has serious implications when it comes to the nature of reality. A holographic universe would show that 3D volume doesn't exist. Whar we call volume is a projection of information on a 2D surface area. Here's a video with Susskind and others.

Here's an article:

Study reveals substantial evidence of holographic universe

Professor Kostas Skenderis of Mathematical Sciences at the University of Southampton explains: "Imagine that everything you see, feel and hear in three dimensions (and your perception of time) in fact emanates from a flat two-dimensional field. The idea is similar to that of ordinary holograms where a three-dimensional image is encoded in a two-dimensional surface, such as in the hologram on a credit card. However, this time, the entire universe is encoded." Although not an example with holographic properties, it could be thought of as rather like watching a 3-D film in a cinema. We see the pictures as having height, width and crucially, depth—when in fact it all originates from a flat 2-D screen. The difference, in our 3-D universe, is that we can touch objects and the 'projection' is 'real' from our perspective.

Hawkings last paper reduced eternal inflation to a timeless state.

4. Time

Einstein said the distinctions between past, present and future is just a persistent illusion. Think about that, everything we do is built around the distinctions between past, present and future being real. When we wake up, go to sleep, Birthday's, Holiday's and more.

Here's more:

Time is NOT real: Physicists show EVERYTHING happens at the same time

This is just the tip of the iceberg and more will be added throughout the thread.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 10:51 AM
Then how can they "objectively" make that claim......................

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 11:08 AM
This stuff always makes me think of Einstein's statement that "Reality may be an illusion, but it's a persistent illusion."

Time is NOT real: Physicists show EVERYTHING happens at the same time

That's just too heavy to wrap one's mind around.
edit on 11-2-2019 by ColeYounger because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 11:24 AM
This reality we perceive is far from the real reality. We are led to believe by our senses that only what we can sense is real, science can help us to understand the whole picture if they actually try to find the whole picture. What we perceive as normal and relevant is usually not real or true. But that is the consensus of time we live in, maybe someday science will let us in on the real truth and people will be able to comprehend it. Not in my lifetime though, not in the lifetime of my kids either.

I am constantly blowing away my beliefs, researching things to OCD status because I am a skeptic and when I read something I constantly have to verify if it is valid. It is hard to believe how much untruth is intigrated into our societies, at least when you talk to a squirrel, it is not spewing misconception. Consensus of the time is somewhat better on some things now than a hundred years ago but in other things it is much worse. Some of the smartest scientists out there are researching things that are not good for society, neutral like this article is fine, but much of the research being done is to somehow profit groups or organizations or business interests, Often reality is far from what we are led to believe.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 11:27 AM
a reply to: neoholographic

Ummm...I’ve often pondered that perception...both individually...and species a control program that locks the perceived illusion of reality within the consciousness of the individual and primarily in the species as a whole...

To further...if programming presents perceptual versioning...then what of those that have alternate perceptual experience...

Have the insane or delusional...merely unlocked themselves from the program...?
Do differing aspects of perceptual awareness denote altered in...political ideology...religious differences...etc...?

If consciousness creates...or orders...perceptual reality...then what or who...causes separate consciousnesses to perceive sensually the same version...

I’ve often thought that collectively we un...or subconsciously create our reality...and that if we collectively chose to believe an alternate version...then we could mold perceptual reality to whatever version we chose...

There must be a reason...or powerful consciousnesses that direct this version...while the majority just follow along and unconsciously reinforce such directive versioning...

Thank you for bringing this to the’s refreshing to see such thoughts addressed...


posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 11:28 AM
a reply to: neoholographic

Ummm...twice as nice...

edit on 11-2-2019 by YouSir because: of two...two...two posts in one...

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 11:35 AM

originally posted by: neoholographic
I think it's time for science to bite the bullet of materialism. The evidence is overwhelming that an objective physical universe doesn't exist as we perceive it to be and consciousness may be more fundamental than what we call matter.
It matters if you're talking about a subatomic particle or something much larger, let's say a cat. I don't think you understand Schrodinger's cat paradox. It's not saying the cat is really in a superposition of states "dead" and "alive" until it's measured, on the contrary it's saying that people who take observations of individual subatomic particles and try to say the same thing happens to complex systems are getting it wrong.

Schrödinger’s Cat: Explained

until the system collapsed into one configuration, the cat would exist in some superposition zombie state of being both alive and dead.

Of course, Schrödinger claimed, that was ridiculous. Quantum superposition could not work with large objects such as cats, because it is impossible for an organism to be simultaneously alive and dead. Thus, he reasoned that the Copenhagen Interpretation must be inherently flawed. While many people incorrectly assume Schrödinger supported the premise behind the thought experiment, he really didn’t. His entire point was that it was impossible.
Now do you get his point?

The electron's position may not have an objective reality until it's measured, but whether the cat is dead or alive does have an objective reality, before you open the box to measure the cat's state. Maybe you're one of those people who incorrectly assume Schrödinger supported the premise behind the thought experiment, but he really didn’t, as the link says.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 11:46 AM
Time is not a “line” from an immutable “past” to an unknowable “future”, but a ball, a “glob” of all possible pasts, presents, and futures, simultaneously.

Our experience of time can be likened to a trace about the surface of time’s “sphere”.

Our experience is real to us, but it neither reflects, nor affects the true nature of Time itself.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 11:51 AM
a reply to: neoholographic

Thanks for posting this. I will have to take some time to go through it all and watch the videos!

The wave-function is real but nonphysical: A view from counterfactual quantum cryptography

Mind blown right here! I am convinced that extra sensory perceptions of all kinds can be explained through this science.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 12:03 PM
We are in a simulation of sorts and angels and demons are the programs keeping us in line.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 12:11 PM
a reply to: neoholographic

What we call volume is a projection of information on a 2D surface area.

Great thread neo , haven't explored it fully yet as I just got in from work but the above pretty much sums up the belief I'm coming too.
Reality isn't what it seems.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 12:17 PM
I have heard this basic theme for fifty years now. "Reality is all in your head." "Time doesn't exist." And people go around talking as if they understand what those things mean. "There is no time." Really? "Science has shown mathematically that everything happens at the same time." Is that right? OK, then. How does this help me? What can I do to manipulate this information to my advantage?

The idea that "you create your own reality" is not new. There are hundreds of books and movies out there that give this message, from "The Nature of Personal Reality" by Jane Roberts to movies like "The Secret." They all claim that you need only envision something to make it happen. But I have never managed to implement their suggestions.

So, the thing is, I still have to pay the rent.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 12:43 PM
a reply to: ColeYounger

Its the concept of simultaneity.

Enstein explained it using two observers, two bolts of lightning, with one observer on a train moving at light speed and the other observer stationary on a platform.

To the observer on the station platform the lightning bolts appear to happen at the same time, and they do. To the observer on the train the lighting bolt that struck closest to the train as it approaches the station at the speed of light happens first, THEN the second bolt will hit.

It really does depend on the observer whether simultaneous events are observed as simultaneous or separate events.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 12:49 PM
now I know what I'll be reading tonight.

Thanks for taking the time to write this. It's the kind of post that reminds me of the ATS I remember from 2002.

star and a flag!

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 01:07 PM
All this shows is that people say things that don't make a whole lot of sense in the science field same as everywhere else.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 01:18 PM
a reply to: neoholographic

The only thing you have proven is that you have no idea what scientists are trying to say is going on. You have made countless threads showing your inability to understand the things you’re talking about.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 01:21 PM
a reply to: toms54

Perhaps not.

A UK, Canadian and Italian study has provided what researchers believe is the first observational evidence that our universe could be a vast and complex hologram.

Theoretical physicists and astrophysicists, investigating irregularities in the cosmic microwave background (the 'afterglow' of the Big Bang), have found there is substantial evidence supporting a holographic explanation of the universe—in fact, as much as there is for the traditional explanation of these irregularities using the theory of cosmic inflation.

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 01:43 PM
Absurdity. Having one's skull crushed into a pancake will kill a person 100 percent of the time. Physical reality exists. The only question is how. No amount of philosophy will make a bullet magically not wound you.
edit on 2/11/2019 by Puppylove because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 11 2019 @ 01:46 PM
a reply to: gortex

I'm not trying to tell you what to believe. If you want to believe that, doesn't mean I have to.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in