Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Quantum Physics says Good-bye to "Reality"

page: 4
36
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 3 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   
"We are not a bubble reality We are part of a greater dimensional reality.
the quest for the Higgs Boson is what they hope to find, amoungst other things."

I actually agree we are part of a greater dimensional reality - however I prefer Marvel comics term "Multi-verse" rather than "uni-verse" The "bubble" reality could easily be seen as an extra=dimensional add-on, but within the article I posted it stated that theorectically, the bubble would seperate from our reality - in effect, we could have no interaction with that new universe. I think the understanding of a "greater dimensional" universe loses its meaning if other dimensions are not seen as alternate realities - unless you are referring to Brane theory - and mean the added dimensions literally - as in the 5 th dimension, the 6th dimension etc.? My point was how can you know? If bubble universes are possible, then how do we know it is not an infinite train of bubble universes? Perhaps the fabled Greys are just the creators of our universe,; scientists checking in from time to time on their experiement?

"With that in mind, Id like to ask, do all potentials and realities exist simultaneously? Thats what I got from the slit videos? Or am I wrong?"

- I don't think anyone could say you are wrong at this point. I think that all realities do exist simultaneously, but that does not mean they are all equivalent or exist in the same degree. When a wave function collapses that aspect of the particle concretizes, but what has happened is that you have in effect chosen a new reality (Wheeler stuff) - the superimposition still exists but that small aspect is no longer accessable in its full waveform to you anymore. At least thats my take on it. Some people have referred to this view as the "solid" view of the multi-verse - all possibilities are actualized. ok, now everyone knows how really crazy I really am.




posted on May, 3 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   
I still say my theory answers both dilemmas
I believe that both potentials exist at the same time.
For instance at the macro level the wave funtion has collapsed and remains collapsed.
At the quantum level it remains a wave function until investigated at that level where in it then collapses.
that would solve both dilemmas and we remain collapesed in the macro frame yet wave function till tested at the quantum frame
this will allow manipulation of the universe on the quantum scale while remaining in a full frame wave collapsed universial reality



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 10:00 PM
link   
I've held the thought/belief for a number of years that the world exists only in my mind, and that without my mind there would be no existence.

But does that also mean that I could be the result of some sort of mind that is imagining me into existence?

Help me Obi-Wan-Kenobi, you're my only hope....



posted on May, 3 2007 @ 11:39 PM
link   
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?

if i understand what you guys are saying then i think that 'what the bleep' clip is misleading. they are showing us the wave forms on the wall but how can we know its a wave if by observing it makes it change forms? how do we know its nature before we even have measured it?



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 05:56 AM
link   
I'm not sure if I'd say that Quantum Physics has lost it's grip of "reality" as you have put it. The problem is they need redefine what their idea of reality is.

Quantum Physics is about thinking Really Small!


Tim



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 06:02 AM
link   
exactly, like I said twice...the macro world is collapsed all the time.
The quantum world remains in the wave function until observed...this allows manipulation of the quantum world in a quantum way that we will transcend to the macroworld for our own enterprises.



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 07:10 AM
link   
Hmmm.... So if I understand you correctly, Junglejake, you are saying that through discovery that Reality is mutable and tumultuous at the most basic levels of matter, we will find ways to implement it on the macroscopic universe?

"Ye Shall be as Gods"?



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 07:13 AM
link   
yeah they have had quantum tunnel diodes for years...the ability to make quantum computers is very fesible and forseeable.
I envision quantum craft such as the ET use

it is my contention that they fly in a quantized state.
The Mexican video shows they fly cloaked in the IR
the NASA videos shows they fly cloaked in the UV
I assume since it is invisible in the visible spectrum it is acting in a quantized state.
the signature of intelligent life is not to be found in the Radio band, well it is, but dont look there first and spend most of your time looking there

SETI is a fakeout.
the signature of intelligent life is a ship that is quantized in a higher EM frequency then Radio waves


[edit on 4-5-2007 by junglelord]



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 04:42 PM
link   
The idea of "flying in a quantized state" is really mind boggling (and kinda cool) ; but I dont understand how this relates to your previous statements about the macro world being totally collapsed; if macro level reality is always collapsed then how do you get a totally quantized state on the macro level (unless the ufo is shrunk)? I think there has to be a relation between the micro state and the macro states, we are talking about an interconnected reality here; the micro level is the macro level seen small. This is why Schrodinger s cat was dreamed up, to show a macroscopic consequence of a quantum event. Don t get me wrong, how quantum effects affect our macro (read human) scale is quite fascinating to me - I think this is key in many ways. I believe there are some theories out there relating to anethesthics that view certain structures in neuronal cells as being quantum tunnelling structures - which may underlie consciousness, since it is the the interference with these structures that makes contemporary anesthetics possible.

and hey, Unrealized, yes, there may be an infinite regression of minds imagining you into existence
- but what if it is a circle of minds and not a line? Your dilemna is called the homunculus paradox -
www.consciousentities.com...



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by liquidself
The idea of "flying in a quantized state" is really mind boggling (and kinda cool) ; but I dont understand how this relates to your previous statements about the macro world being totally collapsed; if macro level reality is always collapsed then how do you get a totally quantized state on the macro level (unless the ufo is shrunk)? I think there has to be a relation between the micro state and the macro states, we are talking about an interconnected reality here; the micro level is the macro level seen small. This is why Schrodinger s cat was dreamed up, to show a macroscopic consequence of a quantum event. Don t get me wrong, how quantum effects affect our macro (read human) scale is quite fascinating to me - I think this is key in many ways. I believe there are some theories out there relating to anethesthics that view certain structures in neuronal cells as being quantum tunnelling structures - which may underlie consciousness, since it is the the interference with these structures that makes contemporary anesthetics possible.

and hey, Unrealized, yes, there may be an infinite regression of minds imagining you into existence
- but what if it is a circle of minds and not a line? Your dilemna is called the homunculus paradox -
www.consciousentities.com...

A bose einstein condensate is a single quantum entity of cold gas that acts as one huge atom...so its not inconcevible


there is enough of a diamagnetic field within us to walk on water...Yeshua did, I assume his electrons took the diamagnetic state for that to happen
just my idea.


diamagnetic effects on a frog.
A live frog levitates inside a 32 mm diameter vertical bore of a Bitter solenoid in a magnetic field of about 16 teslas at the Nijmegen High Field Magnet Laboratory.

youtube.com...


[edit on 4-5-2007 by junglelord]



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 06:06 PM
link   
For example photon to pass information - does not even have to to be observed. No need for measurement or observer to observe - wave function collapsed an particle is realized. End of story.

No need for mystical agenda.



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 06:17 PM
link   
looked up the Bose consensate on Wikipedia - heard about it years ago but forgot the specifics , very remarkable properties in this "superfluid"-

"Without friction, the fluid will easily overcome gravity because of adhesion between the fluid and the container wall, and it will take up the most favorable position, all around the container." - what the heck? Taken in the context of ufos quite interesting.

The diamagnetic theory is interesting - but would it not require a huge amount of magnetic energy for it to occur internally (would this not be a huge demand on an organic structure?)

The interface between macro/micro levels is still problematic for me though. When we survey our surroundings, do we not in effect take a mass observation (measurement) of literally billions of quanta at once?



posted on May, 4 2007 @ 06:20 PM
link   
What mystical agenda? This passing of information did not occur unless you observed it and can provide the proof. It is not mystical to assert that the double slit experiments alter their results based upon whether they have been observed before or after hitting the "wall".



posted on May, 5 2007 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by blue bird
No need for mystical agenda.


Sounds like you're the one with the agenda. The majority of us are just looking at the conclusions those Austrian scientists have made based on scientific evidence they have from their experiments. Till know you only have an assumption, or a belief.



posted on May, 5 2007 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795

Originally posted by blue bird
No need for mystical agenda.


Sounds like you're the one with the agenda. The majority of us are just looking at the conclusions those Austrian scientists have made based on scientific evidence they have from their experiments. Till know you only have an assumption, or a belief.


Than try some physics forum on the subject


*more or less comments are like:


There's a whole passel of improperly informed people yakking on about consciousness and its relation to reality and other ridiculous notions, specifically because people insist on confusing the necessary MEASUREMENT with the irrelevant OBSERVATION. Collapse of quantum wave functions requries interaction with another non-entangled wave function such as a measuring device. All of the results which support the inequalities tested and referenced here were produced using equipment which measured the phenomena and gave results well before any observation occurred. The parent, and the blurb in Nature both imply the mistaken idea by using terms that refer to a observer. Nature should know better. Everybody else that's really interested in understanding it should learn better. It makes the science much more interesting. But then it weeds out the semi-informed speculativists and the newage (rhymes with sewage) pseudoscientific-spiritual theorists. Being the vast majority, they obviously tend to revolt at the insistence on being correct.





[edit on 5-5-2007 by blue bird]



posted on May, 5 2007 @ 09:39 AM
link   
Surely light is waves made from particles. Different Tests would find both.

What do i now?

Nowt.



posted on May, 5 2007 @ 09:49 AM
link   
And personally I am troubled - coz I couldn't read the whole article...not subscribed on Nature ( for last 2 years). Does anyone have the complete article?



posted on May, 5 2007 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by albie
Surely light is waves made from particles. Different Tests would find both.

What do i now?

Nowt.


I think that a paradox comes into effect here. You know the double slit experiment? Anybody can do it...

en.wikipedia.org...

The reason for the fringed appearance of the light that comes through the slits is that light is behaving as a particle AND a wave. The fringes are the interference pattern of the waves as they come through both slits.

How does one photon in such a wave know what the rest are doing?

We can detect individual photons (any photovoltaic surface for the screen beyond the slits will do this) but if light were JUST a steady stream of photons you would get two fuzzy slits on the screen, not the wave interference pattern that actually results.



posted on May, 5 2007 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by etshrtslr
Great find SOT




Now physicists from Austria claim to have performed an experiment that rules out a broad class of hidden-variables theories that focus on realism -- giving the uneasy consequence that reality does not exist when we are not observing it (Nature 446 871).


I thought this is what the double slit experiment proved long ago.

Everything is a wave of possibility until its observed and collapses the wave function.


Although the video is a cartoon it gets the point across.


I think you are wrong. The tests that prove light is a wave and a particle don't prove that reality isn't there if you are not looking at it. What it proves is that different tests get different results.

You can't turn a particle into a wave by closing your eyes;something else I've heard someone say.

Chortle.

That might have been me, actually.

Is it possible that in any light beam there are several waves varying in vibrational speed that would always cause interference?

Dunno.



posted on May, 5 2007 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Karilla

Originally posted by albie
Surely light is waves made from particles. Different Tests would find both.

What do i now?

Nowt.


I think that a paradox comes into effect here. You know the double slit experiment? Anybody can do it...

en.wikipedia.org...

The reason for the fringed appearance of the light that comes through the slits is that light is behaving as a particle AND a wave. The fringes are the interference pattern of the waves as they come through both slits.

How does one photon in such a wave know what the rest are doing?

We can detect individual photons (any photovoltaic surface for the screen beyond the slits will do this) but if light were JUST a steady stream of photons you would get two fuzzy slits on the screen, not the wave interference pattern that actually results.



I thought it was the opposite, that one photon being produced at a time would STILL show signs of interference? That's surely the problem? No interference would be what you'd expect from particles.





new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join