Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Wigner's friend, the existence of the Immaterial soul, and death of materialism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Could we tell whether animals are conscious by teaching them to push a button whenever they see an interference pattern, and then run the experiment so that only they observe the results?

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by seer View Post
      How does that happen? What is the physical connection between the observer and the wave to cause this?
      To observe a quantum system, you have to interact with it in some way. So, bounce photons off an electron to determine its spin, have a photon run into a photodetector, etc. It's this process that ends with something in a defined state.

      Precisely how this forces things into that state is not understood at this point, but the phenomenon itself is well studied.

      Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      for everyone or just that observer?
      Pretty sure for everyone - if someone else goes back and measures the object, they should find it in the same state. And, if one person measures an entangled object, someone else will see the consequences in whatever it's entangled with.

      Not sure how extensively "everyone" has been characterized, though. A quantum object isn't like a museum exhibit that, given enough time, you can parade a whole city past to observe.

      Originally posted by Just Passing Through View Post
      There’s one thing about these double slit experiments I’ve never been able to get clear. Does the “observer” have to be conscious, and does the conscious observer have to know which slit the particle went through, or just that whichever slit it passed through was measured and is now potentially knowable?
      That's been the focus of the entire discussion here. Your thought experiments are interesting, but it looks like they're variations on issues that have already been considered - and we don't still don't know the answer.
      "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
        To observe a quantum system, you have to interact with it in some way. So, bounce photons off an electron to determine its spin, have a photon run into a photodetector, etc. It's this process that ends with something in a defined state.

        Precisely how this forces things into that state is not understood at this point, but the phenomenon itself is well studied.
        So when I look at an electron wave I am generating photons that interact with the wave and cause it to collapse?
        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by seer View Post
          So when I look at an electron wave I am generating photons that interact with the wave and cause it to collapse?
          You're not looking directly at a photon wave. Typically, what you're looking at is either a direct sensor that picks up the impact of electrons, or a digital imager that captures the glow of light as electrons bump into a phosphor. Even if you were, say, to "see" a flash of light as an electron hit your eye, what you'd be seeing was the interaction of the electron with proteins in your eye, not photons bouncing off the electron itself.
          "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Just Passing Through View Post
            Could we tell whether animals are conscious by teaching them to push a button whenever they see an interference pattern, and then run the experiment so that only they observe the results?
            There are many ways we can know most higher mammals show consciousness. One clear and specific example is many mammals dream, mourn the loose of their kind, and other primates also show rational decision making abilities.
            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

            go with the flow the river knows . . .

            Frank

            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
              Which interpretation of the Copenhagen interpretation?

              As far as i'm aware, the Copenhagen interpretation doesn't specify the qualities that an observer must have. So, i think that both my favored position and grmorton's would be compatible with Copenhagen.
              Doesn't an observer have to possess consciousness in order to be considered an observer? Lets say that there were no conscious observers existent in the world, nothing observing anything, what does the Copenhagen theory say would happen?

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by JimL View Post
                Doesn't an observer have to possess consciousness in order to be considered an observer? Lets say that there were no conscious observers existent in the world, nothing observing anything, what does the Copenhagen theory say would happen?
                Again, this is the whole basis of the discussion grmorton and i have been having. We have no way of scientifically determining how to answer your questions, and Copenhagen said nothing definitive about how consciousness was involved.
                "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                  Again, this is the whole basis of the discussion grmorton and i have been having. We have no way of scientifically determining how to answer your questions, and Copenhagen said nothing definitive about how consciousness was involved.
                  Obviously the universe saves on memory and CPU cycles by not rendering the parts of the universe that nobody is looking at. duh.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    Obviously the universe saves on memory and CPU cycles by not rendering the parts of the universe that nobody is looking at. duh.
                    You assume a far more efficient universe than the current evidence supports...
                    "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                      You assume a far more efficient universe than the current evidence supports...
                      Well the simulation theory would explain a lot about quantum mechanics.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by grmorton View Post

                        By an 'ultimate reality', Wigner is implicitly stating that the laws of quantum do not apply to consciousness.

                        In my next post, I will discuss an extension of Wigner's friend paradox that has been tested experimentally. It explicitly states that consciousness is not subject to the laws of quantum and thus does not arise from the material. Further the experiment shows a fundamental logical paradox which, if you believe in the multiverse, requires a privileged observer for its solution--that is, a God.

                        My friend Gordon Simons and I have written up a comprehensive and understandable (we have tested it) paper which I have placed on my blog which can be found here.

                        “There was a young man who said "God
                        Must find it exceedingly odd
                        That the sycamore tree
                        Continues to be
                        When there's no one about in the quad."

                        Reply:
                        "Dear Sir: Your astonishment's odd;
                        I am always about in the quad.
                        So the sycamore tree
                        Continues to be
                        Observed by Yours faithfully, God.”

                        Ronald Knox

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by The Barbarian View Post
                          “There was a young man who said "God
                          Must find it exceedingly odd
                          That the sycamore tree
                          Continues to be
                          When there's no one about in the quad."

                          Reply:
                          "Dear Sir: Your astonishment's odd;
                          I am always about in the quad.
                          So the sycamore tree
                          Continues to be
                          Observed by Yours faithfully, God.”

                          Ronald Knox
                          cute...
                          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                          Comment

                          Related Threads

                          Collapse

                          Topics Statistics Last Post
                          Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                          48 responses
                          135 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post Sparko
                          by Sparko
                           
                          Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                          16 responses
                          74 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post shunyadragon  
                          Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                          6 responses
                          48 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post shunyadragon  
                          Working...
                          X