Quantum Physics says Good-bye to "Reality"

page: 11
36
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 11 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
I've always felt that what we perceive as "reality" is only a lower-dimensional shadow of a "higher reality".


Well, there is the theory of the holographic universe. However, in order for something to be a hologram, there has to be an original object. If this theory is/were true, then where the original object is is the real enigma.


I see a hologram as a construct of light, is that not what we are? condensed, structured light? I think it's more of a hologram than people realize, like windows running without the computer, lol, sort of. For it to exist, it would need a source and a form of structuring/scaffolding, IMO anyway, physical is a refraction of light.

EMM


"So in the computers memory they are real, but only as an algorithm. So there is structure off stage so to speak, but it is a fuzzy structure, not totally defined. Its depends upon your interaction in order to actualize its specifics. "


I liked this, very good, star


Not defined, could be the 'wave' of possibilities that can be seen, yet when we focus on it, it becomes the 'particle' or object we expect it to be, or assume it to be. Just a thought.

[edit on 11-9-2008 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]




posted on Nov, 24 2008 @ 10:04 AM
link   
This thread deserves a bump. Amazing stuff that could explain everything from god to aliens and the meaning of life. EVERYONE should know this and THINK about it.

Here is a link I like to add to a new scientific theory based on quantum physics and Einstein´s theory of relativity: The Dynamic Unity Of Reality



posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Waldy
 


From the same web site:
'The Big Bang Never Happened' by Eric J. Lerner
www.spaceandmotion.com...

Much to do about electricity in space.
Lets see if I can find a good learning suggestion.

Tesla said we should find out what electricity is.
Hey. That might be good for starters.



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by NGC2736
 


You can question the nature of reality. Sure, if everything is like the matrix, it is. But we can also never prove it. Making such a thought a paranoid unprovable existence. We can also choose that it isn't. Or that it is deterministic. Whatever you choose, because it is choice after all, it will be contradicted.

Good luck!



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795

Originally posted by cloakndagger
How can this coke can in front of me be a waveform but yet I can touch it while not observing it such as closing my eyes?


With observing they actually mean: "paying attention to". Even though you're not watching the coke can, you're paying attention to it.


But a bullet that suddenly hits you from behind, for example, was not paid attention to...

And so on.

I am not trying to be funny or simplistic, I do think very seriously about these things, but the explanations of the "observation" part always seem flawed; I mean they leave a whole lot of unanswered questions.



[edit on 17-8-2009 by Ethereal Gargoyle]



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Quantum Physics Says Goodbye To Reality

by Jon Cartwright
20 April 2007
physicsweb.org...




The link doesn't work.
Here it is updated.

Physicsweb








[edit on 17-8-2009 by Ethereal Gargoyle]

[edit on 17-8-2009 by Ethereal Gargoyle]



posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Ethereal Gargoyle
 


There could be different factors caused by that. Perhaps you were in a dangerous zone, and knew that there could be a good chance of being shot. All of that info was in your subconscious, and fueled by emotion, causes stuff to happen.



posted on Aug, 19 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Ethereal Gargoyle
 


Yeah, but the guy on the other end of the gun is very aware of the bullet. Is he not?
I mean, the guy that is shooting the weapon is very aware that there is a bullet. There is the consciousness behind the bullet's existence.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Ethereal Gargoyle
 


I think that the bullet "event" would not dissapear at the macro level even if no one is observing it; things are not "dissapearing"; you simply cannot know both the position and velocity at the same time. At the macro level such things are massively averaged out as I understand it (and I certainly could be wrong) such that it effectively makes no difference. Even at the subatomic level no one is saying that a given particle disapears, just that you cannot know certain data at the same time about it - this does lead to some bizarre experimental results that to common sense imply a disapearence and re-appearance.

Also - at one time it seemed researchers were saying "recorded" rather than "observed"; so that if a bullet impacted the occipetal region of your skull and an emergency medic happed upon the scene afterwards, the event has been recorded within the skull.

I think you are thinking more of a philsophical problem like Bishop Berkley proposed - if a tree falls in the forest did it ever happen if no one was there to see it? which is difficult because if you know something (factual) then chances are you have observed it somehow.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Very nice, but the unspoken question, I think, is: what is its relevancy to US? People seem very excited about such things. Why is that? Because they hope *they* will somehow profit from the unstable nature of "reality".
And so, how can WE as individuals profit from this? How can WE affect the fabric of reality to make it more amenable to our wishes?

Isn't that the real question here?


This is not meant as a criticism of this thread, I hope that's clear.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by homeskillet
could someone explain what our "observing" or measuring means? a few people have mentioned it already but what are they actually doing when we are actually observing the particle?



Observing in this sense means that that information has been passed on. Information is the basic currency of the universe.

For example, if you use a particle A to measure the state of another particle B, information is passed from particle B to particle A. This passing of information is 'observation'.



[edit on 14/9/2009 by LightFantastic]



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by liquidself
 


Yeh, that makes sense. It's something to chew on.
Thanks.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Ethereal Gargoyle
 


The person who shot the bullet is.





new topics
top topics
 
36
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join