Scientists investigate water memory

reply to post by Harte


I dont mind think what you will. I can only show you its up to you from then on in... You are not presenting a clear reason why you do not believe the theories of QM or shown me any alternatives...

Have a little look at this current thread...

Quantum Mechanics

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Old old old.. 2011 and posted before

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by Harte

 

I dont mind think what you will. I can only show you its up to you from then on in...

You are not presenting a clear reason why you do not believe the theories of QM or shown me any alternatives...

You haven't stated any theories of quantum mechanics.

You stated that consciousness affects reality.

That idea appears nowhere in QM.

Perhaps you should read the linked thread yourself. As a Physics teacher, I doubt the problem lies with me.

Harte

reply to post by Harte

In a study reported in the February 26 issue of Nature (Vol. 391, pp. 871-874), researchers at the Weizmann Institute of Science have now conducted a highly controlled experiment demonstrating how a beam of electrons is affected by the act of being observed. The experiment revealed that the greater the amount of "watching," the greater the observer's influence on what actually takes place.

www.sciencedaily.com...

These types of experiments as indicative to me that the observer can effect reality please tell me why I am wrong..

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by Harte

 

In a study reported in the February 26 issue of Nature (Vol. 391, pp. 871-874), researchers at the Weizmann Institute of Science have now conducted a highly controlled experiment demonstrating how a beam of electrons is affected by the act of being observed. The experiment revealed that the greater the amount of "watching," the greater the observer's influence on what actually takes place.

www.sciencedaily.com...

These types of experiments as indicative to me that the observer can effect reality please tell me why I am wrong..

The effect described does not affect the reality of the situation. It merely causes the electrons to be measurable.

Does your reality consist of measuring individual electron quantum states?

Harte

reply to post by Harte


Thank you for your replies...

We both agree that the observer effects reality then. I guess we could debate until we are long in the tooth to what degree and on what level this effect takes place. So I will stand by my statement that we do effect reality through our observation of the world.

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by Harte

 

Thank you for your replies...

We both agree that the observer effects reality then. I guess we could debate until we are long in the tooth to what degree and on what level this effect takes place. So I will stand by my statement that we do effect reality through our observation of the world.

I believe the statement was that consciousness affects reality, not observation.

Harte

reply to post by Harte


Classic science as I am sure you know works on a subject / object view of the world. The object its perceived to exist by the subject. That perception is consciousness. So I still stand by statement..)

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by Harte

 

Classic science as I am sure you know works on a subject / object view of the world. The object its perceived to exist by the subject. That perception is consciousness. So I still stand by statement..)

Pouring an acid into a base also changes reality. You no longer have acid and base.

That can be done through automation as well.

Harte

reply to post by Harte


It is kinda well known that we can physically effect reality. Effecting reality just through the act of observation is a relatively new concept to science..)

reply to post by purplemer


It doesn't "matter" to the photon what or who observes it.

The photon "knows" it's being oserved.

And collapses its waveform accordingly.

Harte is right.

Watch a bit of your video again...



Measurement = Observing.

No concousness necessary.

Only observation.

Even automated.

reply to post by Theflyingweldsman


Thank you for your reply. I watched the video but I am still not with you on it. The extracted from the video what I though was of relevance.


'the very act of measuring or observing which slit it went through meant it only went through one'

'the observer collapsed the wave function simply by observing.'

In the first quote they are lumping measuring and observing together in the second they are simply saying the act of observing collapses the wave..

If for example you recorded it on a machine. All you are doing is moving the wave function to a different level. The machine is just like the cat in the box. Until it is observed the wave does not collapse. It is the same thing.

reply to post by purplemer

If for example you recorded it on a machine. All you are doing is moving the wave function to a different level. The machine is just like the cat in the box. Until it is observed the wave does not collapse. It is the same thing

Yes, but it seems as if it's the "wave" that is conscious.

It make descisions according to its environment.

The truth is that no-one completly understands it.

The fact is, the more experiments they do, the spookier the results get...


Quantum delayed-choice

Quantum systems exhibit particle- or wavelike behavior depending

on the experimental apparatus they are confronted by.

This wave-particle duality is at the heart of quantum mechanics.

Its paradoxical nature is best captured in the delayed-choice thought experiment,

in which a photon is forced to choose a behavior before the observer decides what to measure.

Here, we report on a quantum delayed-choice experiment in which

both particle and wave behaviors are investigated simultaneously.

The genuinely quantum nature of the photon’s behavior is certified via nonlocality,

which here replaces the delayed choice of the observer in the original experiment.

We observed strong nonlocal correlations,

which show that the photon must simultaneously behave both as a particle and as a wave.

Or this one...


Entanglement-Enabled Delayed-Choice Experiment

Wave-particle complementarity is one of the most intriguing features of quantum physics.

To emphasize this measurement apparatus–dependent nature,

experiments have been performed in which the output beam splitter of a Mach-Zehnder

interferometer is inserted or removed after a photon has already entered the device.

A recent extension suggested using a quantum beam splitter at the interferometer’s output;

we achieve this using pairs of polarization-entangled photons.

One photon is tested in the interferometer and is detected, whereas the other allows us

to determine whether wave, particle, or intermediate behaviors have been observed.

Furthermore, this experiment allows us to continuously

morph the tested photon’s behavior from wavelike to particle-like,

which illustrates the inadequacy of a naive "wave or particle" description of light.

We may not even have the language to describe the behaviour of photons or electrons at all.

Here are some Interesting reads;


What is wave/particle duality?

The photon has 2 faces

Heisenberg's uncertainty priciple explained

Interpretation of quantum mechanics wiki

Quantum Procrastination

Real-time single-molecule imaging of quantum interference


Tfw.

book marking for a read later
thanks op

reply to post by purplemer


The memory of water is a very interesting issue. Here is my attempt with Emotional interaction of water, which lasted three months.
memory-ofwater.blogspot


CONCLUSION - memory of water is true. The best water is from mountain.
But the best is to live in a friendly positive environment in concert with its surroundings

reply to post by Austro


Thanks for that. I only just had time to read your link. It is nice to see you have done your own experiments with positive effects. It would be good if you could put a thread up about it...

reply to post by Theflyingweldsman


The act of "observation" is more than just passive, it's active, because energy is being used to "observe" from the instrument itself. There isn't a collapse of a "wavefunction" in reality, it's only after the fact in terms of mathematics. We go from having what seems to be random splatter, to more predictable, and therefore a collapse of the "wavefunction".

Not sure how many times physicists have to mention this before it sticks.

As for water memory, yea... there are far too many holes in that one.

Dr Emoto (sp) didn't allow anyone to verify his results or look over his data. If that isn't telling.

How many people in this thread are aware that most of the people with scientific credentials who participated in the movie "what the bleep do we know" have criticized it, saying their words were taken out of context, and that they do not endorse the message portrayed in it?

webedoomed
How many people in this thread are aware that most of the people with scientific credentials who participated in the movie "what the bleep do we know" have criticized it, saying their words were taken out of context, and that they do not endorse the message portrayed in it?

I am, for one.
Ramtha's School of Quantum Flapdoodle


Harte