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.

 

Why must you insist reality is illusion?

page: 8
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 03:52 AM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 





Ok, so when you are watching a live tv event, you are not actually observing the event that is being filmed.


Analogy doesn't apply in the context to the observer effect. Try Again.



The fact that I think that consciousness changes the pattern, doesn't mean I 've got that mixed up with the observer effect, or that I think it is the same thing.


Yes you do. In order for consciousness to have any role in what is going on, it then needs to become the 'instrument/detector' as is dictated by the observer effect. Consciousness has no effect in and of itself on the DIRECT detection or change in the process. What you see, you only see after the detection has taken place.



Nowhere in that text does it say that particle entanglement is responsible for changing the pattern. They use particle entanglement as a means to erase the info.

The erasing of the info changes the pattern.


I think your failing to understand something here or simply just refusing. Quote from the text where it says this. I mean a direct similar meaning. Not something you interpreted to appear to mean that way. I want something DIRECT.

You know why I want you to post direct quotes? Because everything your saying is NOT directly from the text. YOU keep adding things to it. The statement I just quoted from you does not exist in the text in any form, not even in implied form.



No, actually you are interpreting it wrong.


No, your misusing the term.




posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 05:27 AM
link   
So why do they even erase the info of the detection? Why does the result change after the info has been erased?

I mean from the earlier versions of the DS-experiment you could conclude that light behaves like both waves and particle, but in this experiment the particle turns to a wave if you erase the info of the detection.

How does that happen?

[edit on 17/9/08 by enigmania]



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 





O gawwwd. I can see why some of the other people on the thread have lost patience with you.


People? Oh you mean the guy who's posts keep getting deleted. Funny how that goes.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 05:41 AM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 





I think your failing to understand something here or simply just refusing. Quote from the text where it says this.


You quote where it says that particle entanglement is responsible for changing the pattern.




What you see, you only see after the detection has taken place.


Yes but if the info of the detection is erased, the particle reacts as if there were no detector at all, how do you explain that?

You are right, my claims are not to be found directly in those texts, but neither are yours.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 05:44 AM
link   


Uh.. Our human eyes perceive the world as being solid, except for air ofcourse which we do see as empty. I'm talking at a fundamental level here.


"Our human eyes" are one - and just one - of the senses.
And let's not even go into the relevance of those limited senses as a cognitive instrument...

It's not a fundamental level.
It's a purely semantic - and highly flawed - level.

"My personal eyes happen to see nothing I can identify as something" does NOT equal "emptiness".



EDIT: Tthere was more here, but... Let's save it for some other occasion.





[edit on 17-9-2008 by AdAstra]

[edit on 17-9-2008 by AdAstra]



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 06:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 





First: you seem to think that light switches between being a particle and being a wave - now this, now that. You are incorrect. Light is both a particle - a photon, or quantum of electromagnetic energy - and a wave - a propagating disturbance in an electromagnetic field. What you take it to be - particle or wave - depends on what you use to detect it.


No they shoot a single particle wich will only behave as a particle if the slits are being watched. If they're not watched it turns to a wave.

It doesn't depend on what you use to detect it, it depends on if you detect it.




you cannot control the experiment to produce a specified outcome, nor can you predict what the outcome will be, in advance, simply by willing it


Yes you can, if you watch the slits you get a particle pattern, if you don't watch the slits you get a wave pattern.

If you watch the slits but erase the info you get a wave pattern.




For heaven's sake, you're observing any number of photons swarming out of your computer screen even as you read this.


Yes but those are not single photons, and there is no point where the photon has to make a choice wich path to go.

If nobody's watching, the photon goes through both slits and interferes with itself creating a wave.

If watching, there can only be one option so it remains a particle.

I'm not saying I control the particle, I'm just making it impossible to go through both slits if I'm watching.

This has nothing to do with entanglement cause this happens to the photon that enters the DS setup, the entangled partner never enters and is only manipulated to release the info of the DS-partners detection.

[edit on 17/9/08 by enigmania]

[edit on 17/9/08 by enigmania]



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectroMagnetic Multivers
"Do we hear sounds the same? taste the same tastes? see the same colours? I think not."

Generally yes. These perceptions are standardized through shared DNA. How we react to the perceptions is where the variation and difference is (conciousness).


How could you possibly know that?!? Have you ever percieved the world through anyone but your self? I think we all have a different perception of colours, people who are colour blind, are extremes to this, yet I think we all see things slightly differently, not everyone everywhere, but generally, we percieve colours, smells and sound differently.

Ever ask someone can they smell that smell, and they say, yea..and then say a completely different smell? Who's right? neither of you, IMO.

EMM

[edit on 17-9-2008 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by enigmania
 


Damn your denser than lead boy.

It is not YOU doing the observing, it is the instruments themselves. Your looking at the outcome of the observation as it is done through the instruments, YOU never DIRECTLY OBSERVED nor DIRECTLY CHANGED the physical properties of the electron. The entire time you used INSTRUMENTS.

Gee golly and what do you know, the observer effect talks about just that!

@Robin:

No, your also misusing the observer effect. So, who kept this "Matrix movie" going for 13.8 billion years before man evolved? Or is the universe now so inherently complicated that it was created just this second?

Hell, let's just roll with that one. Our universe was created right now, this very second. Everything popped into existence just as it is, with a predefined past and all. Prove it wrong.
Now you getting it, we don't know, therefore, we can't say it's wrong or right, only possible.

Your still assuming that man is the only conscious thing in this universe. It didn't need us to 'observe' it, as everything is observing each other IMO, Stars, planets, plants, particles, quantum energy. All forms of conscioussness IMO.

EMM

[edit on 17-9-2008 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 09:00 AM
link   
I don't think anyone is saying we consciously manipulate the particle with the power of our mind, I think enigmania is saying, the particle alters its own state, to our expectations, we do not change it, it changes itself when we observe it. Sirnex, you are unbelievably offensive, it doesn't matter if people don't agree with you, at least debate with respect.

EMM



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectroMagnetic Multivers
 


Exactly! Thank you!

Let him be offensive, it only shows his own shortcommings, plus it amuses me.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


I love how your post held absolutely no information at all, did not contribute to the discussion, and served only to bash someone on a subject that you clearly have no idea about. Congratulations, you're not....to bright.

In regards to the OP, this is from a frequent meditators perspective. So, reality can be considered to be an illusion because everything that you experience is subjective. Nothing has any objective qualities because you cannot honestly say that you know what that state of being is. Sure, you can say a rock is hard...but what is hard? What's heavy? Exactly, no one can give an answer that encompasses those questions in their entirety. I realize for a lot of people that this is somewhat difficult to understand and difficult to even entertain as a thought, but its something fun to think about.

Whats consciousness anyway? We don't know. Its something every human has, but we don't know what it is. Its intangible, just like the majority of really important things that would be nice to know about.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 03:41 PM
link   
What a good question. I only scanned all the entries, so if this is a repeat, my apologies.

Two things come to mind:

One, if you are a Christian, who believes in the story of creation, and I am not and believe in evolution, then our 'realities' are quite different.

Second, science has proven that atoms are mostly empty space, so we should be able to see through any 'solid' object. Our brains, however, in order to make sense of the world around us, sees these objects as solid, and we cannot percieve anything beyond them.

Reality is subjective to the observer.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 





How does that happen?



Experimenters do so by manipulating the entangled photon, and they can do so before or after its partner has entered or after it has exited the double-slits and other elements of experimental apparatus between the photon emitter and the detection screen.

...

In doing so, the experimenter restores interference without altering the double-slit part of the experimental apparatus.





You quote where it says that particle entanglement is responsible for changing the pattern.


See above.



Yes but if the info of the detection is erased, the particle reacts as if there were no detector at all, how do you explain that?


See above again.



You are right, my claims are not to be found directly in those texts, but neither are yours.


See above again.



Yes but those are not single photons, and there is no point where the photon has to make a choice wich path to go.


Each photon entering the retina is indeed one photon. The photons don't make a choice, your misunderstanding the terms and experiment and the cognitive level of a photon, but using your analogy/logic, each photon could make a choice as to which rod to strike.



I'm not saying I control the particle, I'm just making it impossible to go through both slits if I'm watching.


Your not watching the particle. You never personally see the particle, so please stop adding yourself into the equation. You are not part of the detection process.



This has nothing to do with entanglement cause this happens to the photon that enters the DS setup, the entangled partner never enters and is only manipulated to release the info of the DS-partners detection.


See above again.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectroMagnetic Multivers
 





Ever ask someone can they smell that smell, and they say, yea..and then say a completely different smell? Who's right? neither of you, IMO.


How the brain interprets signals doesn't make the universe any more or less real or unreal. The universe will still continue to exist and operate as it has done for billions of years with or without an organic electrochemical self-aware brain processing the bits of information it receives through whatever sensor it uses.

Our human brain interprets sugar as being a 'sweet' taste, the so called "sweetness" isn't sweetness in it's own right, it's sweet because we used a developed language to label that sensation/taste as 'sweet'. It has nothing to do with what is real or not.



the particle alters its own state


Wrong.


This is often the result of instruments that, by necessity, alter the state of what they measure in some manner.




Sirnex, you are unbelievably offensive, it doesn't matter if people don't agree with you, at least debate with respect.


Yes, I am offensive, or at least can get very offensive in light of stupidity. I hate stupid people. Trying to stop smoking right now isn't helping matters either, it only compounds to the problem. I've been trying to explain something to this ... guy ... and he refuses to accept the answers that the scientists themselves came up with. It's not my opinions or views personally, it's the opinions and views of the scientists themselves. He wishes to add human consciousness into the equation and make himself part of the detection process despite the small issue that he never directly detects in a manner that alters.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Torsten
 





So, reality can be considered to be an illusion because everything that you experience is subjective.


Wrong.

How the brain interprets signals doesn't make the universe any more or less real or unreal. The universe will still continue to exist and operate as it has done for billions of years with or without an organic electrochemical self-aware brain processing the bits of information it receives through whatever sensor it uses.

Our human brain interprets sugar as being a 'sweet' taste, the so called "sweetness" isn't sweetness in it's own right, it's sweet because we used a developed language to label that sensation/taste as 'sweet'. It has nothing to do with what is real or not.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 





Reality is subjective to the observer.


Reality is the same for everyone, how the brain processes information is subjective according to how each individual brain operates given a variety of variables, disorders, malfunctions etc. The universe doesn't "care" about the inhabitants and what organs they use to perceive or what they perceive.

For example, sugar doesn't "taste sweet" inherently by itself within its own right. Our brains interpret the various signals and processes that particular molecular structure as "sweet", but the label "sweet" is something we used our developed language to label it as "sweet". It's really just common sense, nothing mystical or amazing about it. Honestly, the brain could have processed it to "taste sour" or "bitter" and we would have labeled that "taste" accordingly to how our brain interpreted it.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


I will agree that we all agree on the reality of most things, but our individual realities differ from person to person. Colors are an example of this. Red looks different with my left eye as compared to my right eye, which is different than the perception of both eyes combined. Color-blind people see it completely differently. And the blind... You get the point. Then there's intelectual reality. An astrophysicist sees the universe much differently than a tribal pygmy does. So my reality and your reality are not the same, and our perception of reality can change with our life experiences. Actual reality is something different altogether.

[edit on 17-9-2008 by JaxonRoberts]



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 



The quantum eraser experiment is a double-slit experiment in which particle entanglement and selective polarization is used to determine which slit a particle goes through by measuring the particle's entangled partner.


They use particle entanglement to determine wich slit a particle goes through.

When they know wich slit the paqrticle goes through, the wave/interference pattern turns into a particle pattern.


The advantage of manipulating the entangled partners of the photons in the double-slit part of the experimental apparatus is that experimenters can destroy or restore the interference pattern in the latter without changing anything in that part of the apparatus. Experimenters do so by manipulating the entangled photon, and they can do so before or after its partner has entered or after it has exited the double-slits and other elements of experimental apparatus between the photon emitter and the detection screen.


They manipulate the entangled partner in order to know wich slit the partner in the DS-setup went through, and when they do so, then the wave function/pattern collapses.

Particle entanglement is just the tool, not the cause.

But it is still the result of knowing what slit the particle went through that collapses the wave.

That's what it says and means, but Wik puts it in a way so that it doesn't seem remarkable to people like you.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 



can destroy or restore the interference pattern

...

by manipulating the entangled photon




They manipulate the entangled partner in order to know wich slit the partner in the DS-setup went through, and when they do so, then the wave function/pattern collapses.


When two particles are entangled they act as if they are the same particle. What happens to one also happens to the other. They determine which slit the particle enters by observing (with instruments mind you) the partner that does not enter the slit. They can destroy or restore the interference pattern by manipulating this particular particle.



but Wik puts it in a way so that it doesn't seem remarkable to people like you


No, it says what it means but you want it to mean something else so you add in your own thought in some attempt to redefine the results according to your own misunderstanding of the process and your own beliefs of what you thing should be happening.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 04:52 PM
link   
What is Reality? It’s the 3D World we live in. That what we can see, hear, feel/touch, smell, and taste. It’s what we can experience (perceive) with our 5 senses. That what science can explain. It’s a limited view of the Whole. There is more then only our 5 senses.


What is Illusion? It’s a distortion or shortcoming of the senses. Sight: optical illusion Hearing: optical illusion Touch (skin/body): f.e. rabbit illusion and phantom limb. There also can be illusion of smell or taste.

Some call the Illusion also Dreamstate. I think why many New Age theories use the term “ Awaken’” (Precognition comes 60 to 70 percent in dreams)


More Reality?

Humans perceive differently from each other cos we perceive with our emotions and sometimes even on different levels (Dimensions?)

F. e: There is extrasensory perception ESP (like precognition) It is sensory information that an individual receives which comes beyond the ordinary five senses. Source: www.themystica.com...

There are also states of trance, channeling, mediumship, and divination.

There is premonition, it generally involves knowledge of a future event. Premonition is sometimes referred to as a "gut-level" feeling. The sensation tends to occur prior to disasters, accidents, deaths and other traumatic and emotionally charged events.

There is also prophecy, it’s precognition, but not all precognition is prophecy. It includes visions, dreams and occurrences of different kind.

Lots of ppl have this first-sight or second sight (foresight) but only few are able to integrate it in their lives (3D Reality).

We notice only part of our TOTAL REALITY, that’s why the 3D Reality is called Illusion. It’s like we can see the shadow but not the one / the object who / that makes it.

Is our mind and the way our brain works real or do our brains merely project via our f.e our eyes what we see?

Good thread!


[edit on 9/17/2008 by Melyanna Tengwesta]




top topics



 
11
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join