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.
Originally posted by nunya13
We have no proof that anything unconscious affects the way matter acts because it takes a conscious being to determine the affect.
Wouldn't it be an amazing feat for a force/field to be able to make something that is 99.9% space "feel" solid?
Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by Psychonaughty
Where dissimilar materials have reportedly fused together, at the atomic level in the presence of high frequency radio waves and other EM fields. Wood with metal, fused atomically where they intersected for example.
Originally posted by Indigo_Child
reply to post by constantwonder
No he didn't. This sounds like some wishful thinking of materialist fundamentalists. Schrodinger was through and through idealist. Read his autobiography. Get over it.
A careful analysis of the process of observation in atomic physics has shown that the subatomic particles have no meaning as isolated entities, but can only be understood as interconnections between the preparation of an experiment and the subsequent measurement
I don't like it, and I'm sorry I ever had anything to do with it.
The paradox that Schrödinger’s hypothetical cat presented was that the cat was simultaneously dead and alive. Schrödinger asked Einstein to imagine that a cat was inside a box and that we could not see or hear or otherwise sense what was happening inside the box. The cats fate is linked to some random event inside the box. Applying the rules of quantum physics the cat is both dead and alive until we can open the box and and directly determine its state. Common sense would suggest that surely the cat is either dead or alive inside the box, whether we know it or not, but applying the rules of quantum physics, the actual state does not come into being until the moment that we measure it. Of course, Schrödinger didn’t actually believe that; he thought the idea made no sense. His real goal was to point out that if this was dumb idea when applied to cats, it might be just as dumb an idea to apply to subatomic particles.
It was originally meant to show how ridiculous quantum mechanics can be, by someone who didn't believe in it in the first place. cats don't behave quantum mechanically. forget about the cat. trying to learn qm using cats will only hurt your understanding
In the 1920s, with the inception of early quantum theory, some of its founders, including Erwin Schrödinger,[11] Werner Heisenberg,[12] Wolfgang Pauli,[13] Niels Bohr,[14] and Eugene Wigner, took an active interest in the philosophical implications of their emerging quantum theory. Given that the theory changed the fundamental understanding of physics, the question of how it could be used to explain all observable reality became central to the debate. The question opened gaps in the empirical and scientific explanations of actual reality and human perceived reality.
The material world has only been constructed at the price of taking the self, that is, mind, out of it, removing it; mind is not part of it...
Originally posted by constantwonder
Originally posted by Indigo_Child
reply to post by constantwonder
Lets see what he said about his own work. . .
A careful analysis of the process of observation in atomic physics has shown that the subatomic particles have no meaning as isolated entities, but can only be understood as interconnections between the preparation of an experiment and the subsequent measurement
Can only be understood when measured, he did not say concsiousness was requirted. . .
[edit on 24-12-2009 by constantwonder]
So if it can only be understood when measured, how does the measurement come to fruition?
In 1925 Schrõdinger resolved that paradox the way the Vedantists did: he asserted that all consciousness is one. As he wrote:
"But it is quite easy to express the solution in words, thus: the plurality [of viewpoints] that we perceive is only "an appearance; it is not real. Vedantic philosophy, in which this is a fundamental dogma, has sought to clarify it by a number of analogies, one of the most attractive being the many-faceted crystal which, while showing hundreds of little pictures of what is in reality a single existent object, does not really multiply the object."
Here is another fragment of that essay:
"... you may suddenly come to see, in a flash, the profound rightness of the basic conviction of Vedanta: ... knowledge, feeling and choice are essentially eternal and unchangeable and numerically one in all men, nay in all sensitive beings."
Finally, Schrödinger himself makes an interesting analogy between Vedantic philosophy and modern physics:
"If finally we look back at that idea of Mach [that `the universe is not twice given'], we shall realize that it comes as near to the orthodox dogma of the Upanishads as it could possibly do without stating it expressis verbis. The external world and consciousness are one and the same thing."
Schrodinger wrote in his book Meine Weltansicht
“This life of yours which you are living is not merely apiece of this entire existence, but in a certain sense the whole; only this whole is not so constituted that it can be surveyed in one single glance. This, as we know, is what the Brahmins express in that sacred, mystic formula which is yet really so simple and so clear; tat tvam asi, this is you. Or, again, in such words as “I am in the east and the west, I am above and below, I am this entire world.”
According to his biographer Walter Moore, there is a clear continuity between Schrodinger’s understanding of Vedanta and his research:
“The unity and continuity of Vedanta are reflected in the unity and continuity of wave mechanics. In 1925, the world view of physics was a model of a great machine composed of separable interacting material particles. During the next few years, Schrodinger and Heisenberg and their followers created a universe based on super imposed inseparable waves of probability amplitudes. This new view would be entirely consistent with the Vedantic concept of All in One."
He became a Vedantist, a Hindu, as a result of his studies in search for truth. Schrodinger kept a copy of the Hindu scriptures at his bedside. He read books on Vedas, yoga and Sankhya philosophy and he reworked them into his own words, and ultimately came to believe them. The Upanishads and the Bhagavad gita, were his favorite scriptures.
Originally posted by Indigo_Child
reply to post by constantwonder
Sorry, but the sources you quoted sound like materialist fundamentalists trying to put words into Schrodinger's mouth.
I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is deficient. It gives a lot of factual information, puts all our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously.
We do not belong to this material world that science constructs for us. We are not in it; we are outside. We are only spectators.
Multiplicity is only apparent, in truth, there is only one mind...
Knowledge, feeling, and choice are essentially eternal and unchangeable and numerically one in all men, nay in all sensitive beings. But not in this sense — that you are a part, a piece, of an eternal, infinite being, an aspect or modification of it... For we should then have the same baffling question: which part, which aspect are you? what, objectively, differentiates it from the others? No, but, inconceiveable as it seems to ordinary reason, you — and all other conscious beings as such — are all in all. Hence, this life of yours... is, in a certain sense, the whole... This, as we know, is what the Brahmins express in that sacred, mystic formula... 'Tat tvam asi' — this is you. Or, again, in such words as 'I am in the east and in the west, I am below and above, I am this whole world.'
Originally posted by nunya13
reply to post by constantwonder
We do not belong to this material world that science constructs for us. We are not in it; we are outside. We are only spectators.
Originally posted by nunya13
reply to post by constantwonder
But aren't the mathematics products of us observing? Or do I have it backwards?
Well, for one thing, it redefines what matter is. If it isn't solid, tangible objects and its solidity is only an appearance, then it makes you question what matter really is and whether it actually exists at all.
Quantum Mechanics, in my opinion is the first real challenge at the assumption of a real world and it has redefined what matter is. I do not claim that it has proven that matter does not exist, but it has certainly redefined what this matter is.
source
Quantum mechanics (QM) is a set of principles describing the physical reality at the atomic level of matter (molecules and atoms) and the subatomic (electrons, protons, and even smaller particles).
If you take the standard model of the atom virtually the entireity of it is made up empty space. If you look at Quantum field theory, what we call matter is just actually flux from a virtual field(virtual quanta). This pushes us further to redefine matter. If it originally some flux in a virtual field, then what exactly is this matter?
The atom is a basic unit of matter consisting of a dense, central nucleus surrounded by a cloud of negatively charged electrons.
...
The principles of quantum mechanics were used to successfully model the atom.
Matter does not actually exist, it is a field projected by consciousness. A field of conscousness. What we call matter are just dense thought-forms. The so-called virtual field of quantum field theory is the etheric plane of esoteric wisdom, and this is preceeded by even finer field manifestations. Ending at pure consciousness.
Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Indigo_Child
We are basically witnessing the integration of new age science with old age science, with old age science being gradually replaced with new age science.
No, we actually are not. I demonstrated this in that one clip. What we are witnessing is the purposeful act of new agers trying to hang onto their narcissistic beliefs by sensationalizing and muddying quantum theory. [/quot
All I want to say is.....yeah, what he said.