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.

 

So, Shrodinger's Cat was actually a ball bust all along...

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2013 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


No I am suggesting I dont care about psi and parnormal anything, I dont care if they all exist, they might as well, I dont care. It is more important to me to know about the fundamental nature of reality, then anything else that may stem from it. So I dont like you using stuff that science itself is unsure about, to try and prove something science and everyone is unsure about.




posted on Jul, 21 2013 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


In my case I spent 2 years exposed to an indigenous culture native to the island of Puerto Rico, it was an incredible experience.

Most if not all medications that today allows for the extension of life beyond what life expectancy was like say 150 years ago. WAS accomplished through the investigation and derivedfrom process's originally developed by indigenous cultures.

Essentially scientist were sent throughout the world t interact with indigenous cultures for the purpose
of procuring, chemically based treatments developed by these cultures.

So it is not some impossible feat to apply the same or similar research effort

David Bohm are amongst the more imminent researchers in human history. With respect to Bohm he was a physicist who fully supported the conclusion that psi was inherent to humans in nature.

In so far as Jung he like me spent considerable time interacting with Indigenous cultures and he developed the concept of the Collective Unconscious.



Bohm, Jung, Penrose, Stapp, Umezawa, Vitiello and Freeman were not born under a proverbial rock friend.

Based upon my experience's I choose not to ignore there conclusions in relation to topics here at ATS.


edit on 21-7-2013 by Kashai because: Added content



posted on Jul, 21 2013 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Kashai
 


I respect a lot of what ive seen of bohm, he was quite grounded in logic. Jung also had some interesting theories and ideas, like his archtypes and individuation. I dont get what you want to prove or are talking about, so what if psi ability exists, how is this relevant to the thread?



posted on Jul, 21 2013 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


Given quantum entanglement everything is potentially one.



It is widely accepted that consciousness or, more generally, mental activity is in some way correlated to the behavior of the material brain. Since quantum theory is the most fundamental theory of matter that is currently available, it is a legitimate question to ask whether quantum theory can help us to understand consciousness. Several programmatic approaches answering this question affirmatively, proposed in recent decades, will be surveyed. It will be pointed out that they make different epistemological assumptions, refer to different neurophysiological levels of description, and use quantum theory in different ways. For each of the approaches discussed, problematic and promising features will be equally highlighted.


Quantum Approaches to Consciousness

Further


Its not very hard to understand how knowing what a person is thinking without the use of classical means to do so, involves quantum entanglement.

As it is also very easy to understand that God created separateness so as to allow consciousness to develop.


edit on 21-7-2013 by Kashai because: Added content



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 06:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


Given quantum entanglement everything is potentially one.



It is widely accepted that consciousness or, more generally, mental activity is in some way correlated to the behavior of the material brain. Since quantum theory is the most fundamental theory of matter that is currently available, it is a legitimate question to ask whether quantum theory can help us to understand consciousness. Several programmatic approaches answering this question affirmatively, proposed in recent decades, will be surveyed. It will be pointed out that they make different epistemological assumptions, refer to different neurophysiological levels of description, and use quantum theory in different ways. For each of the approaches discussed, problematic and promising features will be equally highlighted.


Quantum Approaches to Consciousness

Further


Its not very hard to understand how knowing what a person is thinking without the use of classical means to do so, involves quantum entanglement.

As it is also very easy to understand that God created separateness so as to allow consciousness to develop.


edit on 21-7-2013 by Kashai because: Added content


I've been doing a lot of research into the physics of consciousness lately, and there are some great ideas being worked on that involve what physicists refer to as the Emergent System. A classic example of an emergent system is a tornado. It only exists as a result of a very specific confluence of factors, and ceases to exist as soon as any one factor slips out of the necessary % of relative presence within that confluence of factors.

What happens within the activity confluence of the human brain is what causes the burst of human consciousness to emerge, and the only difference between the conscious burst of awareness and the tornado is that the human brain is much more stable and consistent than a thunderstorm. Still, if you look into the physics of the Emergent System, you'll find that - as a concept - it really fills the bill in this case. They also believe that life itself, as a product of non-living molecules and substances, is also an Emergent System, and have for quite some time now. The big difference between life and consciousness, is that all scientists believe in life, but not all scientists believe in an emergent consciousness.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


Search Friedrich Hayek, with respect to Emergence.

You will find that as a philosophy related to consciousness, nature and how it "all" functions is the result of a "made order".I have no problem with evolution and if anything my education clearly presented. that man has been on earth for about 250,000. In my opinion God created the conditions necessary for life and from there allowed it to develop.My impression of prophets is that they are evolutionary spurts akin to Punctuated Equilibrium.

The interesting thing about Emergence is that it is very apparent in all aspects of nature.For me there is also the matter of consciousness as a factor that presents a non-random effect upon the randomness that is apparent in quantum mechanics.



edit on 22-7-2013 by Kashai because: modifed content



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 08:02 PM
link   
To be clear this is not just with respect to the issue's of Quantum Consciousness but also with relation to the mechanics inherent to biology as we understand it.

When a person brain process's information in such an ordered way as in Mankind how does that affect the quantum nature of his or her "environment".

As an example in relation to quantum entanglement.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 12:36 AM
link   
Time for a music break....



Any thoughts?



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kashai
reply to post by NorEaster
 


Search Friedrich Hayek, with respect to Emergence.

The interesting thing about Emergence is that it is very apparent in all aspects of nature.For me there is also the matter of consciousness as a factor that presents a non-random effect upon the randomness that is apparent in quantum mechanics.



edit on 22-7-2013 by Kashai because: modifed content


Thanks for the reference. I'll check him out.

Concerning consciousness as an environmental factor, my own research has caused me to see the Residual Fact Set, and not consciousness, as the means by which randomness is curtailed and progressive development is facilitated. Passively, of course, but kind of like how speed bumps passively regulate the speed of traffic in certain neighborhoods. Like how furniture determines the traffic patterns within rooms. Reality is densely populated with permanent Residual Fact Sets, and they emerge as a default ramification to factually represent that change happens relative to the whole of the reality confine as a contextual environment whenever something occurs.

Consciousness requires a sophisticated perception source. Residual Fact Sets only require occurrence. When building your version of reality, always go with what's most simple and readily available. Whatever you can find that has the least amount of moving parts. Consciousness is ultra-sophisticated. I knows that it exists, and it has an agenda. It's much too highly developed to be an environmental staple.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kashai
To be clear this is not just with respect to the issue's of Quantum Consciousness but also with relation to the mechanics inherent to biology as we understand it.

When a person brain process's information in such an ordered way as in Mankind how does that affect the quantum nature of his or her "environment".

As an example in relation to quantum entanglement.



Since a person's experience of consciousness is always delayed - from a half second to a full seven seconds - then there's no way for that person to direct the active aspects of his/her consciousness to physically affect any aspect of the material realm - at the quantum level or otherwise. This is why telekinesis is so rare, even though the human mind is inherently capable of affecting the material realm. Most human minds are already slammed with the work of processing all incoming data (from sensors and from the brain's own rumination/analysis activities) and have precious little extra to devote to messing with extra-curricular pastimes. Try moving a pencil across your table with your mind. Go ahead. My guess is that it won't move, but that's just because I know better than to equate possibility with likelihood, and the likelihood is that your mind is processing this sentence and contextually attributing the information as either significant or insignificant, relevant or irrelevant, required or ancillary, and running it all through a whole host of other "labeling" criteria as it then preps it for "immediate memory" so that you can "read this sentence" and experience it as conscious perception.

Your survival as a material human being absolutely hinges on your mind's devotion to that very simple, yet witheringly relentless and endless process. If you think that your own survival is less important to your own consciousness than what's happening at the quantum level - regardless of where at the quantum level this happening is happening - then you are misunderstanding the primary reason why you have conscious perception. As with all aspects of material existence, your brain/mind relationship is a survival system. The top-of-the-line survival system. If you can train it to do parlor tricks, then good for you, but it's sort of like teaching a dog to dance on its hind legs. You might be able to do it, but that will never mean that all dogs inherently dance on their hind legs just because you got one dog to do it.

edit on 7/23/2013 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 09:34 AM
link   
For anyone want to learn about Quantum Entanglement should look up Dr Amit Goswami who is Theoretical Quantum Physicist.

It has been said that non-local quantum communication has been well established in the science community and there have been 2000 different experiments conducted in 2000 different labortories that have verified this. I would add more too this thread when I have time.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by samaka
 


When you have time can you describe the general theory as to how entanglement works, the physical mechanism that is occurring in space and time, with the matter, and what at its most basic, it means physically for matter to be 'entangled'?



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSubversiveOne
reply to post by NorEaster
 


Awesome.

Another quantum foolery I find seduces the easily seduced is the idea that atoms are mostly empty space, leaving some solipsists to proclaim, quite wrongly, that everything is mostly empty space. This, of course, is refutable by walking into a wall or biting into a rock. But nonetheless, the view that we are mostly empty space is perpetuated in spiritual woo woo (Osho for instance). Sure, there is mostly empty space in an atom, but it is still an atom, and we are composed of atoms, with very little empty space between them. A bundle of balloons is composed of a bundle of balloons, not the air that keeps them solid.

Quantum mechanics, though interesting, is creating a religious revival of sorts, with implications such as "God particles", "quantum entanglement", "Quantum observer effect", and so fourth.




"Quantum foolery?" I'd like to see your evidence for this claim. To be clear, I'm specifically referring to your saying that the notion of atoms being mostly empty space is "quantum foolery."

If it is "foolery" then it's very mainstream "foolery." I watched a university lecture just the other week where the professor was discussing this concept.

Anyway, I await your evidence, as this sounds quite interesting....



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


Hey Fungi,

As far as I know a mechanism for what causes two particles to remain entangled is not well known, if at all. Any attempt to explain the phenomenon would be purely philosophical at this point.

Suffice to say that enough experiments have been conducted to confirm this instantaneous relationship between particles. And the more that's observed the more bizarre it gets it seems.

For instance current research being conducted indicates that observed entanglement between two particles can occur not only in states separated by space, but also by time.. weird



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by elysiumfire
AdJebsen:

If, mathematically, we can say that we don't know the state of a particle until it is observed, and therefore it, mathematically, simultaneously holds both states...


Of course, you are referring to the situation of not being able to 'measure' and 'know' both a particle's position and its momentum simultaneously. We can know one at the forfeit of knowing the other. The measurement is an act of observation by an observer. Yes, we can indeed provide an abstraction of the situation prior to making a measurement of a particle's position, or alternatively, a measurement of its momentum using mathematics, which will state in the abstract that the particle must be in both states simultaneously until an act of observation is made upon it.

This abstraction is not, however, stating anything 'real' about the particles existential reality. All particles have the potential to be in one of three states: rest phase; excited phase; and momentum when kicked out of position by a sufficient external energy...it cannot be in more than one phase at a time, no matter how abstract a statement mathematics conceptualizes.

Of course, you will claim I am only perceiving things in the classical macro sense, but the truth is, there is only ever classical mechanics involved.

Schrödinger's cat in the box is indeed to our expectation either alive or dead, but because we have not made an observation to determine the cat's actual state by opening the box to see, it is useful to some degree to assume that it is both 'alive' and 'dead' at the same time. This is not an abstraction of the cat's reality, it is an abstraction of the limit of our knowing. The cat, of course, cannot be both alive and dead in reality, but one or the other, and our making an observation upon it does not determine its state, it only determines what we come to know of its state (either alive or dead), only.

Schrödinger's cat is a conceptualized ontological puzzle that shows quite starkly the absurdity of the idea of superposition in real terms of existence. Nature would not allow for 'superposition' as such a state would be being and non-being, existence and non-existence simultaneously, and as information cannot be exchanged (energy interaction) between the two states, it's absurdity is plain to see.

We have to be vary cautious when we are dealing with conceptual ideas, and insure we do not treat them as factual without the empirical evidence and scientific measurement to support them.
edit on 19/7/13 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)

edit on 19/7/13 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)

edit on 19/7/13 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)


I think this is called, in a nutshell.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 




Your survival as a material human being absolutely hinges on your mind's devotion to that very simple, yet witheringly relentless and endless process. If you think that your own survival is less important to your own consciousness than what's happening at the quantum level.


I am taking about day to day activity of consciousness in general and its effect upon our surroundings.

Essentially even as an example a spoken word affects air molecules causing them to move in response to the sound and its patterns as a result of speech.

Hypothetically speaking say you are an alien from an advanced civilization onboard a mining spacecraft.

Your society does not allow your culture of mine solar systems that have intelligent life. So as you are passing Sol you activate your "quantum entanglement life detector". As the scanner interacts with earth it registers the activity of conscious life due to the non-random effect upon the quantum environment generated by human beings.

The materials that pretty much make up our solar system was all created at the same time. Any reaction no matter how small or insignificant has an effect upon everything created at the same time. Therefore any non- random behavior that we engage in (picking up your news paper from the front yard every Sunday) affected every other particle created at the same time.

We are entangled with our quantum environment even a blink of an eye generates an effect upon every other particle created at the same time instantaneously (as in EPR Paradox and Bells Inequality).


edit on 23-7-2013 by Kashai because: Added content



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


To suggest that a Random Universe can have probabilistic aspects. So as to form order in the classical sense implies that probability is inherent to randomness, why?

You mention simplicity but something from nothing is not simple.


edit on 23-7-2013 by Kashai because: Modifed content



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
Since a person's experience of consciousness is always delayed - from a half second to a full seven seconds -

We can only verify that a person's experience of consciousness is delayed in relationship to the interaction with shared reality. A "tornado" has no delay in interacting with itself.

Our perception of the events going on in an online video game is delayed relative to our perception of the events going on in our living rooms.
edit on 23-7-2013 by ErgoTheEgo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by samaka
 

When you have time can you describe the general theory as to how entanglement works, the physical mechanism that is occurring in space and time, with the matter, and what at its most basic, it means physically for matter to be 'entangled'?


a longwinded response......

all quantum particles are members of a system of particles. the behavior of that system of particles, collectively, is called the wavefunction. the wavefunction is a statistical description of the state of the system. i prefer the term 'statefunction' because we are ultimately interested in arriving at a description of the system's state.

a statefunction is an extremely versatile concept. for example, if you go turn the water on at your kitchen sink and place your hand under it, you will quickly arrive at a measurement of the system's state: somewhere between hot or cold. you begin with a single measurement of the state function, and succesive measurements become superposed upon each other, resulting in a very complex refinement of the initial state.

now, if you think carefully upon your own ability to perform such measurements, you hopefully will agree that for any SINGLE measurement of the water temperature, your mind is only able to decide either HOT or COLD. WARM is the fiction that your mind generates over the coarse of many measurements, with each measurement taken further refining the state function (a statistical description of the system). so, in this example, WARM is a superposition of measured states. there is, in reality, no measurement of the system which is WARM. all measurements are only HOT or COLD. the statefunction is a superposition of individual states.

1.hot 2.hot 3.hot 4.hot 5.hot -----superposition---->> statefunction= HOT! *pull hand away*
1.hot 2.cold 3.cold 4.cold 5.hot -----superposition---->> statefunction= meh, kinda warmish


it is easy to see that the statefunction is operable across a span of time (successive measurements)... it sorta sits "above" the system in terms of time and space, in exactly the way that members in this thread have been discussing emergent phenomena.

finally, if we know the statefunction ahead of time, warmish water, then if we take an initial measurement of 'hot', we know that a successive measurement will be 'cold'. THE STATEFUNCTION DEMANDS IT. it is not as though the first and second measurements are communicating with each other, so much as they are members of a statefunction which is structuring their measured states across an imaginary dimension.

so, all in all, entanglement really is a mechanical process. it looks 'spooky', but the entangled measured states were part of the system in the first place.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 10:38 PM
link   
Essentially our solar system is the result of a supernova that resulted in a stellar nebula.

As an example the Eagle Nebula is about 9.5 light years.

We are quantum entangled with pretty much everything that exist potentially within that distance.

Meaning that at the very least what we are doing, affects every particle of matter within that distance instantaneously despite distance.

Also the idea that randomness has anything to do with probability is related to inductive reasoning.

Any thoughts?
edit on 23-7-2013 by Kashai because: Added and modifed content



new topics




 
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join