It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
An analysis has been performed of the theories and postulates advanced by von Neumann, London and Bauer, and Wigner, concerning the role that consciousness might play in the collapse of the wave function, which has become known as the measurement problem. This reveals that an error may have been made by them in the area of biology and its interface with quantum mechanics when they called for the reduction of any superposition states in the brain through the mind or consciousness. Many years later Wigner changed his mind to reflect a simpler and more realistic objective position which appears to offer a way to resolve this issue.
Because it asserts that a wave function becomes 'real' only when the system is observed, the term "subjective" is sometimes proposed for the Copenhagen interpretation. This term is rejected by many Copenhagenists because the process of observation is mechanical and does not depend on the individuality of the observer
originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: TzarChasm
Not that I disagree with it, but what's the source for that quote?
I searched for it and never found a good source, just other people saying they found it and they didn't post a source either.
It's certainly true, use a movie camera to record an observation.
When the movie of the observation is played, every conscious observer is watching the same movie. The observation was already made by the camera, before anybody even started watching the movie.
"The jury is not in, so we just don't know," physicist Kip Thorne, one of the world's leading authorities on relativity, black holes and wormholes, told Space.com. "But there are very strong indications that wormholes that a human could travel through are forbidden by the laws of physics. That's sad, that's unfortunate, but that's the direction in which things are pointing."
I'm in the same camp as NASA's Eric Christian and Stephen Hawking in thinking that even if you could make a traversable wormhole, it wouldn't allow such time travel as Eric Davis speculates (that drawing of the wormhole to the Jurassic appeared in his wormhole paper).
"You can go into the future or into the past using traversable wormholes," astrophysicist Eric Davis told LiveScience. But it won't be easy: "It would take a Herculean effort to turn a wormhole into a time machine. It's going to be tough enough to pull off a wormhole."
However, British cosmologist Stephen Hawking has argued that such use is not possible...
"A wormhole is not really a means of going back in time, it's a short cut, so that something that was far away is much closer," NASA's Eric Christian wrote.