Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Spirituality & Beliefs > Science & Spirituality

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #141  
Old 19-04-2012, 02:41 AM
Kepler
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoguy423
That is what I thought to be the case as well... But further researching about Schrodingers dead cat proved otherwise... When the detector detects the particle say... even after the fact... the result in the detector is still a wave... until upon you look at it and it collapses into a result. To see what the result is without being conscious of it is impossible, because you cannot look at it without actually looking at it.... Crazy I know... but that is the analogy... or the reality... depending what you believe.
This is the classic von Neumann scheme measurement problem in QM, and is precisely what is addressed in the Yu & Nikolic paper I linked to previously.


Quote:
Originally Posted by whoguy423
The reason for my view is that I keep thinking about the pseudo science experiments whereby random dices or marbles or whatever is rolled dropped or whatever ... and their patterns examined.

First done without someone in the room... then done with someone watching... and some experiments have shown signs of conscious influence... this is by no means acceptable proof... even for me... but I have an open mind.
Do you have a source for this? Looks interesting.


Quote:
Originally Posted by whoguy423
According to quantum de-coherence... the consciousness of the observer would actually cause the waves to all snap into one place which would result in showing the exact location of where the pebble entered the pond.
"According to quantum decoherence" how? Do you have any sources about how decoherence is caused by consciousness?


Quote:
Originally Posted by whoguy423
I'm not saying that de-coherence needs consciousness to occur... but consciousness causes de-coherence or seems to... (the seems to, cannot be proven either way).
Why does it seem to? Again, do you have a source? And why do you say "it can't be proven either way?"

I usually try to provide relevant links in all of my posts, backing up my assertions. It would be helpful if you did the same.

Thanks for the posts, whoguy.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 19-04-2012, 02:45 AM
JaysonR JaysonR is offline
Knower
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Alaska
Posts: 152
  JaysonR's Avatar
btw
This:
Quote:
The reason for my view is that I keep thinking about the pseudo science experiments whereby random dices or marbles or whatever is rolled dropped or whatever ... and their patterns examined.

First done without someone in the room... then done with someone watching... and some experiments have shown signs of conscious influence... this is by no means acceptable proof... even for me... but I have an open mind.
Wouldn't show consciousness.
It shows physical presence of matter changing.

To show consciousness, one would have to invite people into the room for the test but not tell them that dice are being rolled.

Then doing the same with their knowledge, and turning the blinder around (but not removing it from the room) so they can see the results.
__________________
I would like more people to embrace their religion; not the religion they belong to. The religion of life, instead, that comes from being them.
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 19-04-2012, 11:56 AM
Free Bird
Posts: n/a
 
*Brain explodes!*
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 19-04-2012, 06:00 PM
Kepler
Posts: n/a
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Free Bird
*Brain explodes!*
Yeah, that tends to happen.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JaysonR
=
To show consciousness, one would have to invite people into the room for the test but not tell them that dice are being rolled.

Then doing the same with their knowledge, and turning the blinder around (but not removing it from the room) so they can see the results.
Yeah. It will be interesting to hear the details of the experiments.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 19-04-2012, 07:57 PM
JaysonR JaysonR is offline
Knower
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Alaska
Posts: 152
  JaysonR's Avatar
Kepler,
I think I have an idea of how an experiment could be done simply to test the basic concept of the "crests of matter" theory I've been referring to.

If what we are looking at are indeed particles at the edges of matter in like fashion to water molecules at the crests of waves (or, rather, molecules a foot above the crests), then we may be able to borrow relative behavior.
If I were to put two ocean waves by each other and look at the molecules a foot above the crests, then I would see impact from each "system" on the independent-yet-entangled molecules a foot above the crest of each "system" (wave).

Therefore, it may be possible to set up an experiment whereby a double slit experiment is done side by side in adjacent rooms.
Each room would have a screen/detector (screen for build-up tests | detector for post slit, pre-screen tests [leaving both setups "on" all the time would be ideal]), and not a person (as people are of various motion and mass).
At first, use a thick divide between them. Then the divider would be halved in thickness. And finally it would be reduced to a mere vale/screen.

The setup's would be positioned to both be near this divide between them, parallel to each other.

Each round of testing would run:
Do a double slit on side A without side B.
Repeat 5 times.
Then side B without A.
Repeat 5 times.
Then side A and side B.
Repeat 5 times.
Then side A starting and side B starting shortly thereafter.
Repeat 5 times.
Then side B starting and side A starting shortly thereafter.
Repeat 5 times.

After this, change the divider width and repeat the process for the new divider width.

The same types of particles are used in side A and side B.

(ideally, it would be very nice to "paint" the particles from A and B different "colors", but I can't think of a way to do this without affecting them adversely from their "natural" state)

The only thing that changes is the on and off of more particles in the total system (total system is local system A and B), as much as possible to control anyway.


If the theory has any merit, then when B starts after A, or A starts after B, or A and B run together; the results should seem to be impacted from another source which correlates to the opposite system.

It would be interesting to do this in a variety of slit manners, but the first that comes to mind is the electron interference build-up test.
Then it would be interesting to redo the entire experiment with the implications of the "Double-slit experiment, copenhagen, neo-copenhagen and stochastic interpretation of quantum mechanics" tests of 1987, that examined atomic inhibition of slits and the affect upon the interference results, in mind.

Equally, it would be interesting to design an arrangement of single slit on one side and double slit on the other, as well as opposing single slits on A and B.
__________________
I would like more people to embrace their religion; not the religion they belong to. The religion of life, instead, that comes from being them.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 21-04-2012, 05:20 AM
hybrid hybrid is offline
Master
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,192
  hybrid's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kepler
Bell's theorem is about locality and realism.

From the wiki page:
Exactly the fact that either one of our notion of locality and realism must be false leads us to the word nonlocal to describe this new physical reality.

Furthermore, alain aspect follow suit the epr, bell with his own experiment and his conclusion was that entanglement of particles is only possible if the force field velocity that connects the paired particles is faster than light speed.

That the guiding wave, in the general case, propagates not in ordinary three-space but in a multi-dimensional configuration space is the origin of the notorious "non-locality" of quantum mechanics. It is a merit of the de Broglie- Bohm version to bring this out so explicitly that it cannot be ignored. (John Stewart Bell)

*

Last edited by hybrid : 21-04-2012 at 06:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 21-04-2012, 05:45 AM
Angelca
Posts: n/a
 
thank you for sharing
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums