Nature of Conciousness and Observable Reality

[wthree]

Ok, many of you here know about the double slit experiment and other experiments in quantum physics which appear to indicate that reality on a subatomic level is changed by observation.

I won't go into details but two examples are the double slit experiment:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1YqgPAtzho&feature=fvst

And a curious case where particles 'spin' both anti-clockwise and clockwise until they are observed.

This raises many questions about our reality and how it is changed by observation.

But the real questions are:

Why does observation apparently change the behavior of the particles?

If it is observation, what is observing the particle?

How far does this extend?


I don't expect anything more than speculation, the answers after all, are still a mystery.


One question that should be answered is what happens if: You go through the split experiment and observe which slit the particle enters after it enters, but before the light has reached the equipment. Thereby changing the past.

[politicallycorrect]

The heisenberg uncertainty principle has been used as one reason why matter changes when it is observed, supposedly all things change when they are subject to observation.. think about how much you change when someone observes you...

There's a documentary (torrented) somewhere that discusses the nature of water and our impact upon it.. according to the documentary there were major differences in the structure of the water when subjected to good and bad thoughts as well as vocal energies.. it's a fascinating documentary. [I will try and find it]

I'd say that because we are all just energy, our interaction with energy can change the nature of reality... we can change the structure of water with a thought or a word and yet we fail to realise the impact of our words upon others.. who are made up of???

energy is the constant.. energy is life.

[elijahb]

Ok, many of you here know about the double slit experiment and other experiments in quantum physics which appear to indicate that reality on a subatomic level is changed by observation.
Heisenbergs Uncertainty principle aka the Copenhagen interpretation it has to be remembered is and has been challenged since its inception by physicists and philosphers alike because it includes undefined measurement processes that convert probability functions into non-probabilistic measurements. Einstein once remarked ""Do you really think the moon isn't there if you aren't looking at it?"

Steve Weinberg raised an important issue as well when he touched on the subject that it was wrong to use the process of classical measurement in relation to Quantum physics, quite rightly, how can one expect a rational result if one measures something 'quantum' with 'classically' defined tools. He had this to say;



Physics Today, November 2005, page 31:

"All this familiar story is true, but it leaves out an irony. Bohr's version of quantum mechanics was deeply flawed, but not for the reason Einstein thought. The Copenhagen interpretation describes what happens when an observer makes a measurement, but the observer and the act of measurement are themselves treated classically. This is surely wrong: Physicists and their apparatus must be governed by the same quantum mechanical rules that govern everything else in the universe. But these rules are expressed in terms of a wave function (or, more precisely, a state vector) that evolves in a perfectly deterministic way. So where do the probabilistic rules of the Copenhagen interpretation come from?

Considerable progress has been made in recent years toward the resolution of the problem, which I cannot go into here. It is enough to say that neither Bohr nor Einstein had focused on the real problem with quantum mechanics. The Copenhagen rules clearly work, so they have to be accepted. But this leaves the task of explaining them by applying the deterministic equation for the evolution of the wave function, the Schrödinger equation, to observers and their apparatus."



I'd say that because we are all just energy, our interaction with energy can change the nature of reality... we can change the structure of water with a thought or a word and yet we fail to realise the impact of our words upon others.. who are made up of???

I love this quote. But it isn't the act of 'observation' that changes anything about reality. It is the power of thought or word... which fundamentally is the power of 'vibration'