Observations of the Dream World.
- Thread starter pharaohmoan
- Start date
'No photon exists until a detector fires, only a developing potentiality. Particle-like and wave-like behavior are properties we ascribe to light. Without us, light has no properties, no existence. There is no independent reality for phenomena nor agencies of observation.'
Niels Bohr
'The world in Copenhagen interpretation is merely potential before our observation, and is actual afterwards.'
Bryce S. DeWitt
'We have to imagine the system a-attentively trying out all potentialities out of which one actually emerges.'
David Bohm
And Enmos replies... 'Bullshit..''
Mmmm.... who am i going to set camp with here?
Niels Bohr
'The world in Copenhagen interpretation is merely potential before our observation, and is actual afterwards.'
Bryce S. DeWitt
'We have to imagine the system a-attentively trying out all potentialities out of which one actually emerges.'
David Bohm
And Enmos replies... 'Bullshit..''
Mmmm.... who am i going to set camp with here?
Yes. It perfectly is.
And i like it. It agrees well with my understanding of physics and life in general.
It is wrong, only depending on what interpretation of physics you desire to set camp with. There is of course, the independant theories of mind and spacetime, where neither have any connection to each other, or overall influence.
If we ignore this, will it lead to an inconsistant and incomplete theory of physics? If we are to answer for all the phenomena of the universe, surely there needs to be a theory of the mind as well??
If we ignore this, will it lead to an inconsistant and incomplete theory of physics? If we are to answer for all the phenomena of the universe, surely there needs to be a theory of the mind as well??
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Why ? Do we need a theory of the brick ?
You're making progress!
Huh? If you are referring to objective meaning then that exists completely independent of any human thought. If you mean subjective meaning (i.e. importance) then it's irrelevant.
Who said they do?
No more than rocks on Mars.
I never made that claim. What the Copenhagen Interpretation shows is that observers (defined as systems capable of receiving information) can collapse waves.
What the Copenhagen Interpretation does not show is any specific dependency on epiphenomena resulting from human biology such as consciousness, sapience, and perception.
The first statment is a little fuzzy but ok. The second second and third statements are just fantasies... another victim of anthropomorphization.
No issues there.
Looks good.
Objective meaning and suve meaning are tied crunchy, upon an observation, through the law $$P=|\psi|^{2}=\psi \psi*$$. Therefore, the observation of a conscious observer is unique to an atomic observer, and long live the observe-effect of quantum mechanics.
Please do show which branch of quantum physics models with consciousness being a variable... and don't say the Copenhagen Interpretation... because the word 'consciousness' isn't even mentioned there.
Quantum physics doesn't focus on human... oh what the hell, please do tour me through this drug-laden rabbit hole... first and foremost... what do you mean by adding detail to the universe?
While you're at it, here's a bit of information on human memory:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/aprilholladay/2007-03-12-memory-first_N.htm
Consciousness is not a variable as such, but i suppose it could be.
No, it is that the observer collapses a system in the Copenhagen, through the $$\psi \psi*$$ rule. The same squaring rule, may answer to how the internal world gives rise to the outside world. The relationship, is described as a subspacetime realm, where probability-waves undulate and square with a probability-wave in the outside world. The idea is taken rather seriously.
No, it is that the observer collapses a system in the Copenhagen, through the $$\psi \psi*$$ rule. The same squaring rule, may answer to how the internal world gives rise to the outside world. The relationship, is described as a subspacetime realm, where probability-waves undulate and square with a probability-wave in the outside world. The idea is taken rather seriously.
And i know enough about human memory. I know enough from a quantum viewpoint.
As for this journey, its not as bad as you make it out. The Observer-Effect, is afterall, a physics maintream theory that focuses on the effects a human has on measuring a system. And then, of course, there are the multitude of science journals and science books, which stress the role of the observer as being important, and needs to be modelled accordingly, if we require a unified theory of everything.
There is even a book published recently, where a physicist believes that the mind is totally the path to a theory of everything... can't remember the author now...
As for this journey, its not as bad as you make it out. The Observer-Effect, is afterall, a physics maintream theory that focuses on the effects a human has on measuring a system. And then, of course, there are the multitude of science journals and science books, which stress the role of the observer as being important, and needs to be modelled accordingly, if we require a unified theory of everything.
There is even a book published recently, where a physicist believes that the mind is totally the path to a theory of everything... can't remember the author now...
Ok so we're agreeing that consciousness is irrelevant.
What on earth is the "internal world"?
Odd, I've looked over several recent publications and havn't found anything of that sort being taken seriously or non-seriously. Have any references from non-pseudo science sources?
Yes. Penrose refers to them as being akin to ''Plato's World of Idea's.'' He has used these models successfully in his theory, again, where probability-waves undulate and square with a probability-wave in the outside world.
Just because the mind may not exist in time or space, doesn't mean it doesn't effect it in any way. In the (TTMOTI), Two-Time Measurement Observables Transactional Interpretation, is a unified theory of the Transaction Interpretation, and the theory of Two-Time Measurements. It uses the notion of time waves, one called the Echo Wave |E,t,1>, and an offer wave <t,2,O|, moving in the negative time direction.
These superluminal waves come together, and ''multiply'', creating a single answer. In fact, if similar waves are used when we make measurements, then our minds are like recievers, recieving transmissions of information from both the past and the future, where the two wave meet in the present state.
First, we would need to integrate the TI theory of a complex-valued retarded wave of a quantum state vector | S > that moves forward through time, as Cramer calls it, an ‘’offer wave’’ in the present state:
| O (t, 1) >
Which then moves to the future: t >1 When it does so, it will activate an echo wave state vector which Cramer calls ( a complex-conjugated advanced wave) <E(2)|, toward the present time
<E(t, 2)|
The field of probability distribution allows the ‘’transaction’’ to be complete through probability amplitude:
<E(t, 1)|O(t, 2)>
The field requires on exact values of the initial state, and if the original wave does not contain the correct information, then the waves simply cancels out. But each time a successful transaction transpires, a collapse in the wave function follows.
Such processes might reveal solutions to the strange nature in which two complimentary events, one in the past, and another in the future, may ''square'' an answer into the present. This world of squaring is taken highly seriously.
Just because the mind may not exist in time or space, doesn't mean it doesn't effect it in any way. In the (TTMOTI), Two-Time Measurement Observables Transactional Interpretation, is a unified theory of the Transaction Interpretation, and the theory of Two-Time Measurements. It uses the notion of time waves, one called the Echo Wave |E,t,1>, and an offer wave <t,2,O|, moving in the negative time direction.
These superluminal waves come together, and ''multiply'', creating a single answer. In fact, if similar waves are used when we make measurements, then our minds are like recievers, recieving transmissions of information from both the past and the future, where the two wave meet in the present state.
First, we would need to integrate the TI theory of a complex-valued retarded wave of a quantum state vector | S > that moves forward through time, as Cramer calls it, an ‘’offer wave’’ in the present state:
| O (t, 1) >
Which then moves to the future: t >1 When it does so, it will activate an echo wave state vector which Cramer calls ( a complex-conjugated advanced wave) <E(2)|, toward the present time
<E(t, 2)|
The field of probability distribution allows the ‘’transaction’’ to be complete through probability amplitude:
<E(t, 1)|O(t, 2)>
The field requires on exact values of the initial state, and if the original wave does not contain the correct information, then the waves simply cancels out. But each time a successful transaction transpires, a collapse in the wave function follows.
Such processes might reveal solutions to the strange nature in which two complimentary events, one in the past, and another in the future, may ''square'' an answer into the present. This world of squaring is taken highly seriously.
Then you should know that I can make you remember and forget things by stimulating your brain with EM. You should also know that I can permanently make you forget things by removing parts of your brain.
That's not entirely true. General science tends to focus on the observer effect for human observers but in physics it's most often targeted at the result of instruments that by necessity alter the state of what they measure in some manner. For instance, in electronics, ammeters and voltmeters need to be connected to the circuit, and so by their very presence affect the current or the voltage they are measuring. Likewise, a standard mercury-in-glass thermometer must absorb some thermal energy to record a temperature, and therefore changes the temperature of the body which it is measuring.
I'm sure some physicists believe in telekensis... what really matters are discoveries and model predictions.
Penrose as in Sir Aurthur Penrose? Can you post a reference to his theory?
'Mind' is an epiphenomenon resulting from the structure of the human brain. It is explicitly bound to spacetime. There is no reason to think that it affects spacetime in a special way.
That has the look and feel of Wolf's influence, but I have no immediate objections to it as it is only speculating on wave interaction.
Last edited:
''Penrose as in Sir Aurthur Penrose? Can you post a reference to his theory?''
Well, Roger Penrose. There may be reference to this in his book ''Shadows of the Mind.''
There is also reference to Roger Penroses comments in the award winning book 'Yoga of Time Travel', which is of course written by Dr Wolf.
'''Mind' is an epiphenomenon resulting from the structure of the human brain. It is explicitly bound to spacetime. There is no reason to think that it affects spacetime in a special way.''
It is argued that there is no proof the mind is any phenomenon of the brain, nor is there any proof the mind exists in any sort of time and space. (I believe, as do a few scientists, that the mind somehow is time). If it is time, then real focal points, such as collapsing the state of a system, is surely a physical phenomenon being created upon a measurement? We can disturb and create the universe, including the indformation in the universe, and thoughts may very well add detail, that we aren't normally aware of, and far too discrete to probably even be measured. We may very well find that thoughts on a system, determine a system in a statistical way. This was also highlighted by Heisenberg, in musings of his concerning ''mindless ramblings created things.''
Well, Roger Penrose. There may be reference to this in his book ''Shadows of the Mind.''
There is also reference to Roger Penroses comments in the award winning book 'Yoga of Time Travel', which is of course written by Dr Wolf.
'''Mind' is an epiphenomenon resulting from the structure of the human brain. It is explicitly bound to spacetime. There is no reason to think that it affects spacetime in a special way.''
It is argued that there is no proof the mind is any phenomenon of the brain, nor is there any proof the mind exists in any sort of time and space. (I believe, as do a few scientists, that the mind somehow is time). If it is time, then real focal points, such as collapsing the state of a system, is surely a physical phenomenon being created upon a measurement? We can disturb and create the universe, including the indformation in the universe, and thoughts may very well add detail, that we aren't normally aware of, and far too discrete to probably even be measured. We may very well find that thoughts on a system, determine a system in a statistical way. This was also highlighted by Heisenberg, in musings of his concerning ''mindless ramblings created things.''