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.

 

Superpositioning: Matter Watches Us Watch It

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
Yeap, I am waiting for this experiment with high anticipation.


From what I can gather, it's coming soon.




posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Actually this is all rather easy to understand. Superposition is quite simple to get your head around...... simply states that any quantum system will occupy all probable states of being until it's observed and then the states will collapse into the state in which it's being observed.

You don't have to add energy to the system in order to change it, just the thought of the change will change the system. But freezing an object to 0K will halt the process, simply because there's no energy (potential, kinetic or otherwise) in the system for thought to work upon. The slightest amount of energy in the system will allow it to undergo change immediately, no matter how cold.

Quite simply, consciousness dictates what the state of the quantum system will be and what behaviours it will exhibit. The implications of this are far more reaching than just meerly a change of state for a subatomic particle.

Think about it.



posted on Sep, 16 2006 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by GhostITM
You don't have to add energy to the system in order to change it, just the thought of the change will change the system. But freezing an object to 0K will halt the process, simply because there's no energy (potential, kinetic or otherwise) in the system for thought to work upon. The slightest amount of energy in the system will allow it to undergo change immediately, no matter how cold.


The "thought" of a change changes a system without adding energy to it? How does that work?



posted on Sep, 16 2006 @ 04:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by NightBlade40


The "thought" of a change changes a system without adding energy to it? How does that work?


It's due to consciousness being the "force" which shapes the reality which it observes. Like saying that consciousness generates its own reality, that without the presence of consciousness, reality is nothing more than an illusion.


You could equate it with the Anthropic Principle....... that the universe is the way it is because we are here to observe it. If we weren't here, the universe would not exist (at least not the way it does, if at all.)



[edit on 16-9-2006 by GhostITM]



posted on Sep, 16 2006 @ 10:09 PM
link   
if consciousness is the "force" that moves or changes these things then does that mean it can be measured eventually?



posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by homeskillet
if consciousness is the "force" that moves or changes these things then does that mean it can be measured eventually?


Possibly, who knows. But that sort of technology is going to be some time off in the future. Quite a long way, most likely.


Remember, though. I put force when describing consciousness in quotes..... like calling time a "dimension", for the sake of argument.



posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by GhostITM
Actually this is all rather easy to understand. Superposition is quite simple to get your head around...... simply states that any quantum system will occupy all probable states of being until it's observed and then the states will collapse into the state in which it's being observed.

You don't have to add energy to the system in order to change it, just the thought of the change will change the system. But freezing an object to 0K will halt the process, simply because there's no energy (potential, kinetic or otherwise) in the system for thought to work upon. The slightest amount of energy in the system will allow it to undergo change immediately, no matter how cold.

Quite simply, consciousness dictates what the state of the quantum system will be and what behaviours it will exhibit. The implications of this are far more reaching than just meerly a change of state for a subatomic particle.

Think about it.


Bingo....



posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth

Originally posted by Yarium

When that photon hits the electron, it gets excited, momentarily changes its direction or speed or whatever, and then releases a photon of its own back towards us.



Well, doesn't the process of that electron getting "excited" suggest that it is,at least on some level, aware that something is going on?


.... are you retarded?

Ok no offence but if you are saying that an electron is sentient you need to really re-evaluate your interest in science.

[edit on 17-9-2006 by Smood]



posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Smood, I don't think that was appropriate.

If anything, blame the teacher, not the teached.

Besides, one could argue that the Uncertainty Principle, and how observation affects quantum interactions, is a representation of the SHADOW of consciousness - not on the part of the electron, but on who's observing it.

But, I don't believe consciousness changed quantum interactions. It's observation that changes it.

The question is, what's observing it? Is it the consciousness? Or is it simply the photon? If it is the consciousness, then how? Is the photon carrying the information? But photons need not reflect off us first to give us information.

Also, if consciousness affected observation, then there would be a TIME-DELAY. Any light that left the particle before we "observed" it would be different from any photons that left the particle whilst we were observing it. In other words, for the consciousness thing to make sense, thoughts would not only have to travel faster than light, but also travel backwards in time. Wild speculation aside, there's nothing that could possibly explain it.

I think the "observer" is simply anything capable of sending information - so anything that can be changed. A wave of light can have longer or shorter frequencies, and so can carry information to conscious beings, even though the wave of light is not conscious itself.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Yarium
Smood, I don't think that was appropriate.

If anything, blame the teacher, not the teached.

Besides, one could argue that the Uncertainty Principle, and how observation affects quantum interactions, is a representation of the SHADOW of consciousness - not on the part of the electron, but on who's observing it.

But, I don't believe consciousness changed quantum interactions. It's observation that changes it.

The question is, what's observing it? Is it the consciousness? Or is it simply the photon? If it is the consciousness, then how? Is the photon carrying the information? But photons need not reflect off us first to give us information.

Also, if consciousness affected observation, then there would be a TIME-DELAY. Any light that left the particle before we "observed" it would be different from any photons that left the particle whilst we were observing it. In other words, for the consciousness thing to make sense, thoughts would not only have to travel faster than light, but also travel backwards in time. Wild speculation aside, there's nothing that could possibly explain it.

I think the "observer" is simply anything capable of sending information - so anything that can be changed. A wave of light can have longer or shorter frequencies, and so can carry information to conscious beings, even though the wave of light is not conscious itself.


It is the observation of the particle that changed its quantum state. But what is it that ultimately makes the observations. When an electron changes its spin state, it doesn't give off any photons (as in light photons), but it can still be detected using radio waves (radio wave photons). It's who is observing the particle which changes its state. Any interacting with the particle without taking measurements is technically not an observer. So a light beam, or radio wave hitting the particle isn't the observer. The entity watching the proceedings is, and it's only by the observations of that entity of the particle that changes the particle's state. Even after being influenced by the beam or wave, the particle will still behave as though it is in all possible states, just that a few particular states will acquire more energy than the others. Once those states are observed, then the quantum state function will collapse into the most probable state that the particle should hold....... that of being excited by the beam/wave.

Schrodinger's cat is the definitive example of this...... you can't know what the cat's state will be unless you open the box. Therefore nothing from outside the box can influence the state the cat's in. Only by opening the box and observing the cat can you tell what state it's in.

Consciousness, therefore, is the factor which defines the state of the particle's existence, when observed. Also, since consciousness behaves nonlocally, it effects the experiments instantaneously and simultaneously...... no time delay at all. The same as quantum nonlocality. Einstein's "spooky action at a distance", where particles separated by enormous distances can instantly know what happens to the other particle when a change is made to one of them, and change accordingly. This implies that consciousness works at a quantum level or at some level not yet discovered but effects reality at a quantum level and therefore onto a macroscopic level.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 05:49 AM
link   
wow. gives real meaning to "if a tree falls in the woods....."!



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 06:40 AM
link   
But Ghost, if you need to take measurements to be the Observer, is not anything that carries information taking measurements?

A tape-measure can take a measurement of distance, the only thing is that we consciouss beings can UNDERSTAND what those measurements mean - but the measure still would occur even if it was dragged on the ground by a sliding rock.

In this way, a photon could take a measurement because it can carry information. We then work with the photon to process that information.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Yarium
But Ghost, if you need to take measurements to be the Observer, is not anything that carries information taking measurements?

A tape-measure can take a measurement of distance, the only thing is that we consciouss beings can UNDERSTAND what those measurements mean - but the measure still would occur even if it was dragged on the ground by a sliding rock.

In this way, a photon could take a measurement because it can carry information. We then work with the photon to process that information.


No. The thing which is used to measure the occurence or whatever is not the observer. The observer is critical in the outcome of what quantum state function the observed is going to collapse to. There needs to be a an observer who makes the decision as to what is being observed. That's the whole basis of the interactions and the theory behind it. Just because the measuring "device", be it a photon or a tape measure, carries information doesn't mean it's observing what is happening. It's just carrying the information. The system is still in a state of superposition, until the observer reads off what the information is. At that very moment, he/she has made the decision as to what state it will be in, based on the info he/she gets.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 09:31 AM
link   
But then it is not the state of the electron, but the state of the photon, that is being observed! We are then observing the photon's information - not the electron.

The electron then remains hidden unless we count the photon as the observer.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 07:45 PM
link   
No......actually the photon, in this case, only carries the information on the state of the electron, it cannot have the state of the electron because it's not an electron. Anyway, you don't measure electrons using photons. You measure the actual electron!!!!.

You still have to observe it in order to see it the way it is.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by GhostITM
No......actually the photon, in this case, only carries the information on the state of the electron, it cannot have the state of the electron because it's not an electron. Anyway, you don't measure electrons using photons. You measure the actual electron!!!!.

You still have to observe it in order to see it the way it is.


How would you "observe" and measure something like an electron with anything other than photons?



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Does anyone else feel a little nervous about this French-Swiss monster experiment? They don't know what to expect from this thing - what are the possible outcomes of this kind of experiment? If these dimensions are tightly wrapped up in our dimension, what could happen once we rip one open?



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightBlade40

Originally posted by GhostITM
No......actually the photon, in this case, only carries the information on the state of the electron, it cannot have the state of the electron because it's not an electron. Anyway, you don't measure electrons using photons. You measure the actual electron!!!!.

You still have to observe it in order to see it the way it is.


How would you "observe" and measure something like an electron with anything other than photons?


Unless you want to visually observe the electron, or look at it's characteristic that need photons (x-ray or gamma ray photons for example when imaging), you can use other types of detection devices to look at an electron. You can detect their EMF just by using a simple compass, when they flow through a wire as electrcity.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 10:22 PM
link   
But once again, you're reading an instrument, a carrier of information, and never directly observe the particle itself.

What I'm saying is that direct observation by entities such as ourselves is impossible - we always do it through some OTHER medium. THAT medium is the observer - it's the ONLY thing that DIRECTLY interacts with the particle in question. We interact with the medium to pull out the information it holds.

Since we're interacting with the MEDIUM and not with the particled directly, any information we recieved is biased by the Medium we recieve it through.

You talk about Shroedinger's Cat - we can't tell that the cat's in the box until we open it. Until then, anything could be in there. However, we're not the ones determining what's in the box - we're not the ones observing what's in the box. We have to wait for photons that enter the (now openned) box to return to us.

If you say that only we are the observer, that only consciousness is the observer, then we are left with paradoxes everywhere!

For instance, someone standing closer to the box will see what it is before we do. Does that predetermine then what we will see? If so, the information of what the first observer sees would have to travel back to the unknown object in the box, and then back to us. This actually means that for a moment, we would see something else - since we still have the first photons interacting with us that were undisturbed by the first observer's observation. At which point, how can that thing change now that we've observered it? PARADOX.

Second, even simpler - if we open the box, and the information travels via the photons, it takes time for it to just reach us by ourselves. Is the object within formless until we process that information? If consciousness is required, then perhaps it takes our own photons travelling from us to first carry that information - or at least the information travels at the speed of light. If it does so, there's still some untainted photons that reach us first. Once again, we would see what the photons showed us, not what we want it to be first. In order for consciousness to affect it, our ideas of what it is would have to reach it at not only FASTER than the speed of light, but in fact travel BACK THROUGH TIME to change it before any photons hit it. But this is impossible, since the box has not yet been lifted. PARADOX.

Before you simply claim that it's consciousness again, and that it doesn't matter that the photons are carrying information, that we're still observing the electron, I need you to SOLVE these Paradoxes first.

The solution, as best as I can find, is that we are not the Observer. The Observer is the Medium through which information is transfered from point A to point B. This creates a single Observer - the Laws of Physics - which interacts with things in a precise and predictable form. It ensures the consistency of observations necessary to avoid Paradoxes.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 10:27 PM
link   
I think I missed something you said earlier about Consciousness being "nonlocal". What do you mean by this? If it's non-local, as in it's the same everywhere, then why not just say we're not the observer - that this non-local phenomena is. And why not just move further still and say that the non-local phenomena is the Medium that performs the measurement, that it's the laws of physics that are the non-local consciousness? After all, the laws of physics apply "non-locally" everywhere, the same.




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join