Quantum Physics

[IsleWalker]

Originally Posted by ThoughtOnFire

Plus, if all was one through quantum entanglement, then changing a single particle would change every particle in existence.

ThoughtOnFire--Let me address this directly. Entanglement, to me, doesn't imply that every particle is entangled with every other particle. There is a relationship that has bound them together. I suggest it is love or mutual experiencing in an incarnation. Now that may eventually involve every particle, but it wouldn't have to.

That OK with you?

Lora

Originally Posted by paper

I am intrigued by quantum physics and what you have written, however do not have the background to really understand it. I did read The Intention Experiment by Lynne Mc Taggart and enjoyed it but didn't understand everything. I am reading The Seat of the Soul by Gary Zukav now but I admit that I first tried to read it several years ago and didn't get far. Now that I have more experience, I do understand it. When the student is ready..

Check out the global consciousness project and how intent can change the randomness of the random numbers.

Originally Posted by ThoughtOnFire

This is a simple riddle to solve. When you are on a train and looking out the window watching the train tracks opposite. You can see the planks like this:

Now of course since the train is moving, the planks are going by. If you focus your gaze to remain straight, the planks seem to be moving as a wave.

And if you watch a single plank as it goes by, moving your eyes with it as it comes and then goes by, the plank appears as a particle.

It's just that.

Well I can see how the cross beams may look like a wave in that case but in the experiment the particles are 'acting' like waves not just looking like waves. So the puzzling fact is that by looking at the path the particle is traveling we change its behavior from that of a wave to that of a particle.

P.S. there are even more bizarre experiments out there that show if you observe a particle at the end of the experiment that it acted like a particle from the start but if you don't observe it at the end it acted like a wave the whole time. So how did it know we were going to observe it at the end...or maybe time doesn't really exist.

Originally Posted by ThoughtOnFire

Plus, if all was one through quantum entanglement, then changing a single particle would change every particle in existence.

It's more like all information is entangled because as with the experiment moving the particles don't have an effect on the others motion.

Originally Posted by IsleWalker

I agree with all that's being said--I've felt that way for years. I've had a thing on String Theory (M-theory) posted on my computer since 1985 I think.

But until science "proves" the existence of even one of those dimensions, then it will never be widely accepted. Even now the knock on it is that it's a philosophy not a theory.

In order to "prove" something, scientific method requires that it be "objectively" provable--i.e. the same for multiple individuals. That will never happen because, as we know, no two people can experience anything the same. Objectivity is a pipe dream, an unobtainable fiction. It doesn't really exist.

So unless/until that is let go of, we are stuck where we are, I'm afraid.

Lora

P.S. Or put another way--because everything is a subjective reality doesn't mean it's not reality.

Scientist are 'natural philosophers', they seek understanding and knowledge. Science doesn't really prove anything it only theorizes relationships and predicts outcomes. There are no science facts...only theories that can be revised (if the mainstream scientist are open minded). I agree that subjective reality is the only reality that is provable but only to yourself. "I think therefore I am" - Descartes, This is the only fact that I know.
Also I think we will have experimental data to help us understand multiple universes in the near future.

[ThoughtOnFire]

Originally Posted by exaft

Well I can see how the cross beams may look like a wave in that case but in the experiment the particles are 'acting' like waves not just looking like waves. So the puzzling fact is that by looking at the path the particle is traveling we change its behavior from that of a wave to that of a particle.

P.S. there are even more bizarre experiments out there that show if you observe a particle at the end of the experiment that it acted like a particle from the start but if you don't observe it at the end it acted like a wave the whole time. So how did it know we were going to observe it at the end...or maybe time doesn't really exist.



It's more like all information is entangled because as with the experiment moving the particles don't have an effect on the others motion.

My thought here is that the observation of the quantum is merely at it's infantile state and the wave/particle riddle will be solved later when scientists develop new observation and understanding of that observation. The train example showed that it's just the illusion of changes in perceptual observation that turned the train planks into either seemingly a wave passing by or a particle passing by. The reality was that the planks didn't change, the only thing that changed was the subjective experience of the apparent movement of the planks. The only difference, I feel, between the planks and the quantum level is that we have a concrete understanding of the objectivity of the train planks themselves, they are there on the ground, we can feel them, see them, weigh them, there is no denying they are not even moving, etc, etc. But physicists are only beginning to study and grasp the quantum level, it's all mysterious and unknown. If we were on the same page of understanding the train planks as physicists are the quantum level, then we wouldn't know what the train planks were... we'd see them waving as we looked out the window of the train, and then we'd watch one pass as a particle, but we wouldn't know anything more, not even what level of physical reality the train planks existed in. So we'd be saying the same thing physicists now do about the quantum level but with the train planks, like this: "Those train planks change into wave-planks or particle-planks based on how we choose to observe them". But that's entirely wrong, the train planks, as we know, aren't changed by our perceptual observation as we watch out the window from our train ride, nor are they even moving, we are.

As above so below. I believe there are quantum equivalents of the train planks, that are neither waves nor particles, and/but/yet only appear to our subjectivity as waves or particles apparently based on our observations. I hope the quantum physicists discover these quantum train planks soon, and put an end to this silliness.

Funny, how people make comments like that ThoughtOnFire, until a discovery is made. Wan't not long ago that people didn't believe the God particle would be discovered? And yet, last year it was? If while the LHC is down right now and they sift thru all that data, and somehow find a 'singlet' in there you'll see :)
Keep in mind, it wasn't that long ago that submarines and airplanes were thought to be wild fancy, and now they are all reality. I think they will figure out how to break thru the 'brane' and find a way thru time or into other realities. Have you followed any of the work done by Marshall Barnes at all?

[ThoughtOnFire]

I'm astonished at how none of you can even consider my words as a possible explanation.

[IsleWalker]

Originally Posted by ThoughtOnFire

My thought here is that the observation of the quantum is merely at it's infantile state and the wave/particle riddle will be solved later when scientists develop new observation and understanding of that observation. The train example showed that it's just the illusion of changes in perceptual observation that turned the train planks into either seemingly a wave passing by or a particle passing by. The reality was that the planks didn't change, the only thing that changed was the subjective experience of the apparent movement of the planks. The only difference, I feel, between the planks and the quantum level is that we have a concrete understanding of the objectivity of the train planks themselves, they are there on the ground, we can feel them, see them, weigh them, there is no denying they are not even moving, etc, etc. But physicists are only beginning to study and grasp the quantum level, it's all mysterious and unknown. If we were on the same page of understanding the train planks as physicists are the quantum level, then we wouldn't know what the train planks were... we'd see them waving as we looked out the window of the train, and then we'd watch one pass as a particle, but we wouldn't know anything more, not even what level of physical reality the train planks existed in. So we'd be saying the same thing physicists now do about the quantum level but with the train planks, like this: "Those train planks change into wave-planks or particle-planks based on how we choose to observe them". But that's entirely wrong, the train planks, as we know, aren't changed by our perceptual observation as we watch out the window from our train ride, nor are they even moving, we are.

As above so below. I believe there are quantum equivalents of the train planks, that are neither waves nor particles, and/but/yet only appear to our subjectivity as waves or particles apparently based on our observations. I hope the quantum physicists discover these quantum train planks soon, and put an end to this silliness.

ThoughtOnFire--

This rule of quantum mechanics doesn't seem that mysterious to me if you add a perspective from higher than 3D.

So, from 3D we are waveforms with infinite possibilities of what we can "be". That applies to all matter. Even a copper molecule has infinite possibilities of what it could be.

From 3D when we look at a particular waveform--say, kelp-- then it is a particle.

If you imagine looking at that same waveform that has been pinned down to one definition in 3D, but look at it from "above" (I know--not exactly accurate; just a construct), then you would still see the waveform with still infinite possibilities, but one which had "incarnated" as something.

I think of twisted rubber bands or string. Each twist (experience/learning/growth) increases the energy, the frequency of the "waveform" of the rubber band. At some point it creates a loop off of the twists. These can be thought of as "lives" or incarnations. The energy in that loop is slowed down somewhat, but it is still part of the original string.

Multiply this by--however many "strands" we may have and that explains almost everything to me. To me that's a concept I can understand with.

When we focus on any part of the "string" we get at least part of the quantum packet of information--the sensations, feelings, sights, smells, sounds, knowing.

As others were saying, it seems so evident to me that this scientific theory together with experiences that many have--makes perfect sense and is the way science needs to move. But, as I said, with the construct that only reproducible phenomena are considered "real"--they will never get there.

The problem with observation of other dimensions is that each person will perceive a different thing. It doesn't mean they aren't seeing something real, but by definition it will be different.

At least that's how I see it! Others, not so much

Lora

Originally Posted by ThoughtOnFire

My thought here is that the observation of the quantum is merely at it's infantile state and the wave/particle riddle will be solved later when scientists develop new observation and understanding of that observation. The train example showed that it's just the illusion of changes in perceptual observation that turned the train planks into either seemingly a wave passing by or a particle passing by. The reality was that the planks didn't change, the only thing that changed was the subjective experience of the apparent movement of the planks. The only difference, I feel, between the planks and the quantum level is that we have a concrete understanding of the objectivity of the train planks themselves, they are there on the ground, we can feel them, see them, weigh them, there is no denying they are not even moving, etc, etc. But physicists are only beginning to study and grasp the quantum level, it's all mysterious and unknown. If we were on the same page of understanding the train planks as physicists are the quantum level, then we wouldn't know what the train planks were... we'd see them waving as we looked out the window of the train, and then we'd watch one pass as a particle, but we wouldn't know anything more, not even what level of physical reality the train planks existed in. So we'd be saying the same thing physicists now do about the quantum level but with the train planks, like this: "Those train planks change into wave-planks or particle-planks based on how we choose to observe them". But that's entirely wrong, the train planks, as we know, aren't changed by our perceptual observation as we watch out the window from our train ride, nor are they even moving, we are.

As above so below. I believe there are quantum equivalents of the train planks, that are neither waves nor particles, and/but/yet only appear to our subjectivity as waves or particles apparently based on our observations. I hope the quantum physicists discover these quantum train planks soon, and put an end to this silliness.

Hey there, I think you are on the point I was trying to make. You said "The train example showed that it's just the illusion of changes in perceptual observation that turned the train planks into either seemingly a wave passing by or a particle passing by." and "the train planks, as we know, aren't changed by our perceptual observation as we watch out the window from our train ride"

So in your example it is merely an optical illusion and nothing about the planks actually changes when we look at them or just straight ahead. In the experiment the actual behavior of the particle changes IF we observe how it got from the source to the screen(which slit it goes through). When we observe it the electron will travel as a particle but if we do not observe it it travels as a probability wave and has those properties such as it can interfere with itself.

So the fundamental problem I have with your example is that the planks don't change their action due to observation but the particles do.

[ThoughtOnFire]

Originally Posted by exaft

Hey there, I think you are on the point I was trying to make. You said "The train example showed that it's just the illusion of changes in perceptual observation that turned the train planks into either seemingly a wave passing by or a particle passing by." and "the train planks, as we know, aren't changed by our perceptual observation as we watch out the window from our train ride"

So in your example it is merely an optical illusion and nothing about the planks actually changes when we look at them or just straight ahead. In the experiment the actual behavior of the particle changes IF we observe how it got from the source to the screen(which slit it goes through). When we observe it the electron will travel as a particle but if we do not observe it it travels as a probability wave and has those properties such as it can interfere with itself.

So the fundamental problem I have with your example is that the planks don't change their action due to observation but the particles do.

All I'm suggesting is that there may be quantum train planks.