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 ghosts

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 12:13 PM
link   
This newsstory is about the possibility of timetravel, but this bit rang a bell:


Researchers speculate that time travel can occur within a kind of feedback loop where backwards movement is possible, but only in a way that is "complementary" to the present.

In other words, you can pop back in time and have a look around, but you cannot do anything that will alter the present you left behind.

The new model, which uses the laws of quantum mechanics, gets rid of the famous paradox surrounding time travel.
news.bbc.co.uk...

I think this sounds a lot like what seems to happen to ghosts (in movies atleast). In movies u always see ghosts who can walk through walls and when they try to drink a cup of tea, their hand passes through the cup and the ghost-actor is usually shocked that he cant interact with the physical world anymore.

Suppose above quantum mechanical theory does indeed explain why ghosts cant interact with our world...
how do poltergeists manage to do it then?




posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Well, maybe there are no such things as poltergeists, but it is actually psychokinetic activity being created by a person, who does not know they are doing it.



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 07:31 PM
link   
The most popular explaination of poltergiests is that the effects are generated by a young person, typically female, and are not really connected to Ghosts at all. I investigated something of this sort once and this seemed to be the case. Once the young girl had gotten some help with her emotional problems the poltergiest events stopped.

Nice find Plop, good to see a Time Travel idea that I can agree with. Viewing the past I can accept, actually going to the past and interacting in any way I have a real problem with. Most people think about the 'Grandfather Paradox' but I know that even tiny actions can start changes that would completely alter the future.

I have never believed that a Ghost is actually the spirit of someone who has died but rather energy imprinted into the surrounding because of the circumstances of their death. Mix the raw emotional force with some of their mental energy and you get something that can linger and give the appearance of active thought.


A.T
(-)



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 09:20 PM
link   
A good theory, but I think you have slightly misinterpreted the findings of this particular research. This new model holds that, whilst travel into the past is theoretically possible, doing so will render you unable to alter those specific events of which you have certain, definitive knowledge of in the future. It does not mean that you will be intangible, it just means that if you know something to be true in the future, you will be unable to alter that thing in the past.

To illustrate: say you really hated your boss and decided to travel back in time to kill him before he becomes your boss. After you travel back in time to commit the deed, one of two things will be possible, according to this theory:

1) If, when you left the future, you knew for a fact that your boss was alive and well in the year 2005, you would be unable to subsequently kill him in the year 1985 (or whatever year you had travelled back to). However ...

2) If, when you left 2005, you were uncertain as to whether your boss was alive or dead, then you may indeed be able to kill him in the past. Sound crazy? Let me explain, because it is kind of crazy (that's quantum physics, after all).

First of all, this theory rejects the concept of parallel universes splitting off from one another based on the choices individuals make. The theory argues that, since we do not see evidence of time travellers affecting the present (eg. people simply 'popping' out of existence), that the past must be unchangeable to a certain extent. The theory then utilises the uncertainty principle to explain why it is not possible to change certain things in the past.

Basically, this principle states that, before you know something to be true, there exist a number of possibilities regarding its state. However, once you know the truth, those possibilities shrink to one. Therefore, if you are unsure of whether something is true in the year 2005 (for example, you are unsure as to whether your boss is alive or dead), you may be able to affect it in the past, since there are a number of possibilities regarding it. However, if you know it to be true in the year 2005 (for example, you know it to be true that your boss is still alive), then you will be prevented from affecting it in the past. In the article, they use the example of trying to kill your own father and state that:



If we don't know your father is alive right now - if there is only a 90% chance that he is alive right now, then there is a chance that you can go back and kill him.

But if you know he is alive, there is no chance you can kill him.


You are still able to interact physically with the past but, according to the theory, you will be prevented from altering anything you know to be true in the future:



You go back to kill your father, but you'd arrive after he'd left the room, you wouldn't find him, or you'd change your mind," said Professor Greenberger.

You wouldn't be able to kill him because the very fact that he is alive today is going to conspire against you so that you'll never end up taking that path leads you to killing him.


So you see, any 'ghosts' in this scenario would be quite solid, tangible human beings. They would simply be limited in their actions as a result of quirky quantum laws.

I still like the essential core of your theory. I believe that there may be some merit to the concept of ghosts being a visible example of some kind of overlap between different dimensions. How one would go about proving or disproving this, I have no idea.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jeremiah25
So you see, any 'ghosts' in this scenario would be quite solid, tangible human beings. They would simply be limited in their actions as a result of quirky quantum laws.

I still like the essential core of your theory. I believe that there may be some merit to the concept of ghosts being a visible example of some kind of overlap between different dimensions. How one would go about proving or disproving this, I have no idea.


The ghosts not being tangible is an assumption i made since this is how ppl generally view ghosts. So lets assume that the timetravellers(or in this case ghosts from the future) can travel as intangible beings(for instance pure consciousness) to the past. They can then only observe and not change anything. They actually have to be invisible, because if they were observed by the living people, the living peoples behaviour would be altered, which would change the future, which is not allowed according to this theory.

Also, u would never ever be able to kill ur father, even if u didnt know he is alive or not. Why? Because ur father is also an observer and he does know he is alive/dead, as do all the other people who have observed him. The state of possibilities collapses when observed by anyone.

I think the only way a ghost could possibly interact with the past, is if something has been left unobserved by anyone. For instance if someone else put a cup of tea in ur bedroom while u were asleep, then u have not observed this cup of tea. The ghost can then interact with it. Or something.

Also, when u read near-death-experiences, people often tell that there is no time in the afterlife. And some even mention that they can see 1000 years in the future and in the past. So in this case it would mean that ghosts exist in a timeless place, so even if they travelled to the present, they would already have knowledge of what happened 1000 years in the future, so for ghosts this theory would not just apply to the past, but to all of time.

There should be some kind of experiment that can test this.

[edit on 18-9-2005 by plop]



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by plop
Also, when u read near-death-experiences, people often tell that there is no time in the afterlife. And some even mention that they can see 1000 years in the future and in the past. So in this case it would mean that ghosts exist in a timeless place, so even if they travelled to the present, they would already have knowledge of what happened 1000 years in the future, so for ghosts this theory would not just apply to the past, but to all of time.

There should be some kind of experiment that can test this.

Some good ideas here, plop.


I have previously theorised that ghosts, whether they be spirits of the dead or some other phenomena, might exist beyond the constraints of time as we understand it. I mention this concept briefly over in this thread, which also touches on some of the issues you have raised. If we accept that the afterlife, in whatever form its takes, is non-physical in nature, then it is not unreasonable to assume that, if space as such does not exist in this realm, neither does time, given that the two concepts are inherently interlinked.

However, this then raises a counter-argument: why are there no reports of ghosts from the future? If time is a non-issue in the afterlife, and if ghosts are able to appear or interact in the physical world, why is it that the overwhelming majority of ghost sightings are of beings from our own time or from the past? Why do we not see any futuristic ghosts, assuming that afterlife exists outside the constraints of time? I am aware that this concept has been put forward in a slightly altered form in those theories which hold that aliens and UFOs are visitors from our own future. However, I do not accept such theories and so the question remains: where are the future spooks?


I also find your idea that, if ghosts operate according to a non-linear concept of time, that the uncertainty principle may limit their interactions with the physical world, to be an excellent one. This assumes that the 'quantum theory' proposed in the source article is correct, of course, although it may help address issues of why we do not see more evidence of communication between ghosts and the living, which is the main question I ask in the aforementioned thread.

Nice work, plop.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join