Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Quantum decision affects results of measurements taken earlier in time

page: 2
35
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:32 AM
link   
i would recommend yo read david wilcocks book (source field investigations) as he talks about a super intellegence that he calls the source field, invisible to us and has a fluid like properties, and he suggests that all biological life, matter, consciousness, gravity eminates from this, it connects all things and it can communicate instantly with evey molecule around us.

seriously good science in that book, most of which is done by PHD'S at universities but wilcock has put all of it together over 30 years.




posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by pkpuck
i would recommend yo read david wilcocks book (source field investigations) as he talks about a super intellegence that he calls the source field, invisible to us and has a fluid like properties, and he suggests that all biological life, matter, consciousness, gravity eminates from this, it connects all things and it can communicate instantly with evey molecule around us.

seriously good science in that book, most of which is done by PHD'S at universities but wilcock has put all of it together over 30 years.


I cannot figure David out. He seems to be the lord of meltdowns and rejuvenation. Not a good track record if to be taken seriously, however some of his latest revelations seem to have real legs



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:45 AM
link   
reply to post by charlyv
 


Yes ive read that lots of people dislike his views but i have always been interested in what he has to offer, remember that he has only really organised and crunched other peoples scientific studies to offer a big picture into new science.

have you seen this recent post: divinecosmos.com...



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by pkpuck
reply to post by charlyv
 


Yes ive read that lots of people dislike his views but i have always been interested in what he has to offer, remember that he has only really organised and crunched other peoples scientific studies to offer a big picture into new science.

have you seen this recent post: divinecosmos.com...


Yes, this is the later stuff I was eluding to. He hit home on many of the financial de-bockles , especially the mass exits of top brass in banks. Funny how the media seemed to ignore most of that.....



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:59 AM
link   
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


what if you flip einsteins equation upside down so that mass decreases as you approach speed of light and then when you reach the speed of light you flip over out of space time into time space.

Also does anyone know what the implication of gravity being a wave and a particle at the same time?
edit on 4/24/2012 by pkpuck because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by charlyv
 


Yer i guess we will have to wait and see, but it is interesting how over 450 bank ceo's have resigned and thats on the rise!!



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Astyanax
Now then. These apparent temporal paradoxes are the result of
  1. thinking of the particles as objects, like marbles or bullets;



This is the crux of the matter. Photons are not particles, nor waves. They are photons, and behave like photons. Moreover, because of time dilation, photons take zero time to travel from one place to another (from their point of view), and the distance they travel is also zero (again, from their point of view).

These paradoxes are nothing new. This article just refers to a new version of it. Such photon related paradoxes have been known for about 100 years. One example that readily springs to mind is the fun results you can get out of a Mach–Zehnder interferometer, where you bounce photons off mirrors onto sensors, the paradox being that the photons behave differently at the mirrors depending on what kind of sensor you have later on in the optical path. ie: the photons already "know" what type of sensor they will hit, before they get there.
Edit - you can also show that a photon "knows" about objects that are not in the optical path.

edit on 24-4-2012 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by neoholographic
 

I'm afraid you haven't understood my explanation and are still thinking in terms of bullets and baseballs. I'm sorry I could not make myself clearer.

We are not talking about such discrete objects. We are talking about a quantum system that is described by an equation whose terms are independent although their values vary in time and space. Insist on one set of values at place x and time t, and you automatically constrain the values at a different place x' and time t' to lie within certain ranges. This holds true whether t' lies in the future of t or in its past.

edit on 24/4/12 by Astyanax because: an apology seemed in order.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by scarystuff
 


I read the article and understood most of it. What's happening here is not reading the future...it's using the future to secure the present. Basically, it's the "save" function of quantum processing.

See, they arranged the polarizations according to their own whims...but somehow, apparently, there is an underlying connection that is triggered by a similar process being done with the remaining half of the photons. If this connection is not triggered, the correlation will not happen.

Rather than focusing on the futuristic aspect of the experiment (as awesome as itis) we should focus on the implications this has regarding photons and the underlying connections they carry. After all, it isn't time we're messing with here...it's the fundamental nature of the photons, discovering a reaction that we had not been aware of.

Turns out, we don't know energy that well yet. Time for more experiments!



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Just a stupid thought.....

Could you imagine the implications of figuring out how to use this for communications?

Thinking of Star Trek and subspace communication.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Torsion field emanations can travel at least as fast as 100 x the speed of light.

Thought likely travels via torsion fields.
So...if this is factored in...it is then possible for Victor's decision to precede the photons sent to Alice and Bob...and then, of course, also affect the photons BEFORE their respective measurements.

No violation of causality if the cause is traveling via a field that exceeds the speed of the field in which the photons are traveling...which is the effect.

Right?
edit on 4/24/2012 by queenannie38 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by queenannie38
 


Torsion field emanations can travel at least as fast as 100 x the speed of light. Thought likely travels via torsion fields.

I didn't know what a torsion field was, so off to Wikipedia for me. This is what I found


'Torsion field' can refer to:
  • A torsion tensor in differential geometry

  • The field used in Einstein–Cartan theory and other alternatives to general relativity that involve torsion of spacetime

  • Torsion field (pseudoscience), a field alleged to make faster-than-light communication and paranormal phenomena possible

Which of these three links should I follow?

edit on 24/4/12 by Astyanax because: of link grot.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


I think this thread here at ATS will be the most helpful...somewhat long, though, so you might want to check this article out, because it pretty much lines it out in detail yet not tedious detail.

And as far as Wiki, I think this one is the relevant one, although the designation of it being a 'pseudoscience' is not warranted, IMO...it is certainly a very new area of study and perhaps one that by necessity must include data that isn't the same sort of empirical data expected....however, if this DOES have to do with thought...what choice do we have other than to delve off into a new and unknown frontier? The ocean and space were unknown until we delved off into their uncertainties...but that's how uncertainties became more and more certain to the best of our findings.
Besides, science is about consistent, repeatable outcomes...it is the METHOD used that matters, not the characteristics of the data...the scientific method can be applied to these new frontiers the same as the ones we have grown used to, I think...and to me, just the fact that the scientific study of consciousness and/or thought is such a pariah in the scientific world is a direct refutation of the scientific method, itself!

But that's just me. But the second article I think is a good place to start...easy to understand, too.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by pkpuck
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


what if you flip einsteins equation upside down so that mass decreases as you approach speed of light and then when you reach the speed of light you flip over out of space time into time space.


EXACTLY.
We travel through space every day...even just walking to the kitchen from our desk is spatial travel...but time continues at its expected pace.
Time travel, then should be as easy if we could understand that our position in space would not change any more drastically than the time when we travel in a spatial manner.



Also does anyone know what the implication of gravity being a wave and a particle at the same time?


I think it might mean that the force of gravity would be so powerful I'd never be able to walk to the kitchen again...I would be like a neutron star with all that gravity if it were particulate.

But I don't know, for sure.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
What if quantum information travels along a 1-dimensional (vector) path, while light travels along a 2-dimensional (curved) path? We already know light is 2D. Then the (quantum) information wouldn't be traveling through space-time, but rather between it. This could also be the realm of gravity. As far as I know, we (humanity) don't have any equipment that detects vectors, only waves.

Just throwin it out there.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by queenannie38
 


I think this thread here at ATS will be the most helpful...somewhat long, though, so you might want to check this article out, because it pretty much lines it out in detail yet not tedious detail.

I looked at both. They essentially tally with the description in the third Wikipedia article.


The designation of it being a 'pseudoscience' is not warranted, IMO...it is certainly a very new area of study and perhaps one that by necessity must include data that isn't the same sort of empirical data

Not actually scientific, then, since it is based on faith rather than facts (aka 'empirical data').


however, if this DOES have to do with thought...what choice do we have other than to delve off into a new and unknown frontier?

Subatomic particles are not subject to direct manipulation by consciousness. A human presence or absence does not change the outcome of a quantum measurement as far as anyone can tell. These matters have nothing to do with thought. They almost certainly have a good deal to do with how animals like us perceive and interpret our surroundings, but that is quite a different matter.


It is the METHOD used that matters, not the characteristics of the data... the scientific method can be applied to these new frontiers

The method of science is to verify, or rather attempt to falsify, hypotheses based on empirical data. It is in direct conflict with the kind of credulous acceptance you advocate.


The scientific study of consciousness and/or thought is such a pariah in the scientific world is a direct refutation of the scientific method.

I'm sorry, but whoever told you the study of consciousness is a scientific pariah was lying to you. By the way, the study of consciousness is not the study of paranormal phenomena.


he second article I think is a good place to start...easy to understand, too.

Sadly, any scientifically literate person can see that it is quite unscientific.

edit on 24/4/12 by Astyanax because: its fangs were a bit to sharp.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


What if the missing link is the fact that this information travels thru an adjoining dimension in order to be able to instantly connect with its entagled partner in distant space?



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by scarystuff
 


According to information theory, no information can be transmitted faster than light, and so, perhaps the experiment is flawed in a way similar to neutrinos being faster than light.

If what the article says is true, then Alice and Bob receive information from the future, violating the 'no information' theory, but they also validate the theory of relativity: it may be possible that Alice/Bob take decisions now based on what Victor does in the future, due to the differences in reference frames.



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 07:21 AM
link   
reply to post by scarystuff
 


I made a post in my Quantum experiments thread that speaks about this exactly, a result gotten in the past changing itself to future circumstances after it already happened.


The delayed choice quantum eraser, allows the decision whether to measure or destroy the "which path" information to be delayed until after the entangled particle partner (the one going through the slits) has either interfered with itself or not. Doing so appears to have the bizarre effect of causing the outcome of an event after the event has already occurred. In other words, something that happens at time t apparently reaches back to some time t - 1 and acts as a determining causal factor at that earlier time.



Scully and Drühl found that there is no interference pattern when which-path information is obtained, even if this information was obtained without directly observing the original photon, but that if you somehow "erase" the which-path information, an interference pattern is again observed.In the delayed choice quantum eraser discussed here, the pattern exists even if the which-path information is erased shortly later in time than the signal photons hit the primary detector.


The non interference pattern is already on the screen before they erase the wich path info, yet when the experimenter checks the screen later, it still shows an interference pattern.

How is that possible? It's only possible because after the fact, the wich path info is not available, so the pattern on the screen adapts to the experimenter not knowing the wich path, even though it was available at the time the particles hit the screen.

The pattern on the screen adapts to human consciousness. How else would you explain it?


However, the interference pattern can only be seen retroactively once the idler photons have already been detected and the experimenter has obtained information about them, with the interference pattern being seen when the experimenter looks at particular subsets of signal photons that were matched with idlers that went to particular detectors.


They are saying that the interference pattern only shows itself after the experimenter knows if the wich path info is available or not, by looking if the idlers were picked up by the detectors that are related to the wich path info not being known in this case.

You have to have an understanding of the setup of the exp to understand this.

en.wikipedia.org...

Why else would it matter what the experimenter knows, if human consciousness is not the deciding factor?
edit on 25-4-2012 by RandomEsotericScreenname because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Be careful what you read on quantum mechanics, it's a science mixed in fact, fiction, opinions, theoretical theories, and plan stupid ideas. I have seen some dumb quantum mechanics theoretical stuff like consciousness effects light. Don’t believe it! Here’s a little food for thought, Science hasn’t even gave us a 100% accurate model for an atom, yet they are saying the understand particles smaller than an electron. Light is not effected by consciousness, here’s the deal, you just can’t measure light without change its wave function because there is no passive way to measure a wave, you have to put something in front the wave for it to hit. A wave hitting something changes the wave. Yet instead of science saying, the act of measuring light changes light, they say the act of “consciousnessly” knowing changes light. Scientist like confusing people and make crazy claims, it’s how they get non-scientific people curious to fund their research. Quantum entanglement is another one of these crazy theories, Einstein was smarter than most all of us and he thought it was stupid. That should tell you something right there.





new topics

top topics



 
35
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join