Quantum Experiments, Proof that Human Consciousness influences Particles

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.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.

reply to post by miniatus


Apperently the experimenter's consciousness is clearly part of it.

reply to post by miniatus

I don't know why it tells you that, but that's not what it says to me.. it tells me that the known state was erased from the measuring device, which seems to unlink that state from the photon at the same time.. if your human consciousness were doing it, simply knowing the state would not allow it to be erased..

If this does not prove you aren't getting this at all.....

It is erased because the human allows it to be erased. If it is erased the info can not be known. If it can't be known, the particle will be everywhere, goes through both slits, interferes with itself,and creates an interference pattern.

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by miniatus

 

They are referring to erasing the information from the measuring device.. this tells me that the mere act of measuring has altered the state of the photon .. erasing that information from the measuring device allows the state to return to as it was before it was measured..

With the measurement one could say the particle is potentially influenced, but how is the particle influenced again if they erase it from the measuring device?

Yes it is allowed to return to the state it had before the wich path info was known, correct, by making the info unavailable, not by influencing the particle again.

This should tell you that measuring in the first place is NOT what altered the state of the particle, but the mere fact that the info is erased and unavailable, to something or someone.

Since there are no conscious things, I would say again that the only logical explanation is human consciousness.

Perhaps the resonance of the act of having that data recorded creates it's own energy wave. Thus effecting the experiment. While the data is recorded, in a place other than a human mind, it is relative to the existence of this timeline. When the data is erased it creates a new reality and that reality is based on a specific set of rules that determines the results we see?

I am edging around an idea here and I know I didn't really get it out well, but I too will get back to this thread! : )

reply to post by swan001


Swan, since you are a phycisist, don't you have anything else to add besides your kneejerk reaction to the first paragraph of my thread I put quite some time into, and the "exactly man, star" comment you made out of spite because I called you out on it, to a guy that clearly also doesn't have a clue about it.

No apology for not having the decency to read my whole thread before posting your drive-by debunk attempt?

For a phycisist you sure haven't said a single thing of worth.

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.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

Quick debunk this, buddy.

Originally posted by swan001
reply to post by queenannie38

 

Then you agree that human eye only cannot influence the particles, as the particles are only influenced by the devices it passes in.

How does the human eye = with consciousness?
It isn't the same thing at all...the eye is just a device to measure the same as any sort of mechanical detector used in these sorts of experiments...but the eye does not process the information gained from the measurement it acquires nor does it have any will, or volition...it just does what the nervous system tells it to do, so to speak. It collects information. It is not consciousness and it is not the actual 'observer.' The eye is a tool just like a scanning electron microscope or a magnifying glass.

However, the command to collect that information, whether it be given to a biological detector (eye) or technological one (microscope, etc.,) arises from the consciousness...the will, or volition of one or more human beings is the initiator behind any collection of information. It is never a machine and can never be.
The idea of 'observing' is not limited strictly to the mechanical aspect of data collection.

Even when the experiment is using a randomly generated variable to determine or influence the action of the particle, the means for that random generation comes from someone's will...and the experiment itself, is completely driven by the human mind and without that, would not happen. If the experiment doesn't happen, the particles are not affected...the lack of influence is the lack of involvement by the human will or consciousness.

The observer is the consciousness of the will that drives the activity that eventually is shown to have some sort of influence on the particle. To say the particles are only influenced by the device begs the question of WHO influences the device?

reply to post by EarthChilde


One can think of all sorts of even more illogical things, if it helps one ignore the blatantly obvious explanation that is staring us right in the eyes.

The time in wich the theory I offered here will be seen as self evident is not that far away anymore.

reply to post by queenannie38


Well one could say, that the physical act of measuring can influence the measured particle, because it interacts with it in order to measure it, but the experiments I posted prove that this is not what is causing the collapse of the wave form.

Originally posted by miniatus

They are referring to erasing the information from the measuring device.. this tells me that the mere act of measuring has altered the state of the photon .. erasing that information from the measuring device allows the state to return to as it was before it was measured.. I don't see how that has anything to do with human consciousness.. it seems to have everything to do with the act of measuring..

The amazing thing about the Q-Eraser Experiment seems to be that the which path information can be captured .. altering the photon's state, and then it can be restored by merely erasing it.. that's pretty amazing to me.. I still don't see the leap to human consciousness

That's because there isn't any but nevermind that, the OP will argue that there is regardless of the logical flaws. Perhaps he's right but the bottom line is that there is nothing we have that can adequately measure the direct relationship between consciousness and, in this case, particulate matter or wave regressions. Most certainly it is not postulate.

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by EarthChilde

 

One can think of all sorts of even more illogical things, if it helps one ignore the blatantly obvious explanation that is staring us right in the eyes.

The time in wich the theory I offered here will be seen as self evident is not that far away anymore.

Wow, Sorry you are so touchy. I wasn't denying your position. I was merely suggesting that there may be something to it and it may include time energy as a factor, which is certainly an aspect of quantum mechanics.

Yeesh. Relax.

reply to post by AlchemicalBinoculars

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname

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.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.

reply to post by miniatus

 

Apperently the experimenter's consciousness is clearly part of it.

Any thoughts on this?

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname

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.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.

reply to post by miniatus

 

Apperently the experimenter's consciousness is clearly part of it.

If you say so but the whole idea is completely without evidence.

reply to post by EarthChilde


I apologize, got worked up because of some of the biased reactions. Sorry.

reply to post by AlchemicalBinoculars


What do you mean without evidence, that qoute is from a peer reviewed research.

Well, kudos for at least saying I could be right.

Believe, in time this will be the new paradigm.

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by EarthChilde

 

I apologize, got worked up because of some of the biased reactions. Sorry.

Bias is now disagreement?

Ask yourself why you are so invested in a concept that it impossible to measure? Why is that?

Originally posted by AlchemicalBinoculars
Quantum existence is tied to the environment, opposite to the independence of macroscopic objects. If you want to isolate the environment to the human consciousness, have at it.

It doesn't make it so.

I'm not sure what you mean by "quantum existence," but the very nature of quantum mechanics...that is, the workings of the quantum system...is inherently rooted, or perhaps focused is the better term, in the mysterious link between the environment and the observer....it is not a study of environment alone but rather the strange effects upon the environment and the part played in all of it by the 'observer.'

I do not think even macroscopic objects can be said to be independent, though, in any way...any change in an object that can be seen with the eye must come via some sort of force that influences the object other than inertia.
Usually it is detectable just as the object is...likewise in the microscopic, the source or origin of the influencing force is out of our visual range just as the object itself, is.

The "environment" is the object...the particle...the state of the particle at any given time...AND in contrast...consciousness, if that indeed is the source of influence, is the "observer" of that /object/environment/particle.

reply to post by AlchemicalBinoculars


I wasn't talking about you, but if the shoe fits be my guest.

Like I said, at least you say that I could be right.

Ask yourself why you are so invested in a concept that it impossible to measure? Why is that?

What kind of logic is that, why shouldn't I be?

And it's not like I'm making this up, it's all based on evidence, why don't you respond to the claims made in that peer reviewed piece of research?

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by queenannie38

 

Well one could say, that the physical act of measuring can influence the measured particle, because it interacts with it in order to measure it, but the experiments I posted prove that this is not what is causing the collapse of the wave form.

Exactly!

The difference is not imagined and is at the heart of the issue, imo.
Pun not intended.

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by AlchemicalBinoculars

 

I wasn't talking about you, but if the shoe fits be my guest.

Like I said, at least you say that I could be right.

Ask yourself why you are so invested in a concept that it impossible to measure? Why is that?

What kind of logic is that, why shouldn't I be?

And it's not like I'm making this up, it's all based on evidence, why don't you respond to the claims made in that peer reviewed piece of research?

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

You have zero, nada no evidence linking consciousness to anything in this thread. I made this statement three times and will not again.

What you have is an overly invested interest in a theory that you plucked off the Internet.

Calm down.

Originally posted by queenannie38

Originally posted by swan001
reply to post by queenannie38

 

Then you agree that human eye only cannot influence the particles, as the particles are only influenced by the devices it passes in.

It isn't the same thing at all...the eye is just a device to measure the same as any sort of mechanical detector used in these sorts of experiments...

Untrue. The electron detector detects the presence of the electron by interacting with it when the electron passes in the slit. To replicate the experiment without an electron detector but with your eye instead, you would have to insert your eyeball in the slit.
Don't try it.

reply to post by AlchemicalBinoculars

You have zero, nada no evidence linking consciousness to anything in this thread. I made this statement three times and will not again.

It would be unwise if you did, cause I clearly have the evidence, proof even like
I said before.

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 wave 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?

Btw, almost everything here on ATS is based on stuff plucked from the internet. Yes I learned the basics on the internet and researched those experiments and have been doing so for years.

The fact that I don't have a physics degree is actually an advantage in some part, because I'm not held back by paradigm bias.