 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 97 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2618643 Today 2 Topics 127849 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I don't think I'm in the same universe that I started in, people I know around me drastically change personalities from one day to the next. An elderly nursing home I'd seen being newly built is now a derelict structure not resembling anything like what I'd observed being constructed and is being used by urban explorers. If we're inside a biocentric universe then the programming can change and the more you keep thinking about it the more cracks start to show. I have seen a star in the night sky slightly get brighter then disappear twice in the last 5 years, I was sober on both occasions. Nothing outside of your mind is real, reality is being constructed by some kind of collective information that provides all the sensory data you need to believe there is a universe with physical particles and time. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
where are we, if there is no physical world? or are we in a matrix thing? You mention a disappearing star, was that a signal or a mistake by nature, a glitch? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The larntrix |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
its ok your just suffering from entropic paranoia, its normal i thnk |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"If i'm not me, then who the hell am I? " PKD was onto this back in the 70s... The main crux of this argument is that there is no physical Universe. It's our minds that construct it, so we observe a dualistic universe through our animal understanding of space and time, through the substrate of consciousness. Philosophers from the 6th century like Gaudapada had come to the same conclusions and called it Nonduality. I don't think this 'reality engine' (or software, if you wanted to think of it as a simulation like the Matrix) has a mechanism or entities in control of the game, like being deterministic. I think we are the process it's self, the collective consciousness at the very core of the process. Think about when you dream, you create a spacial temporal place that has a kind of unstable time element, where you jump from place to place and interact with people and objects. So you alone are pretty good at making your own convincing little world while you sleep. Anyway...i'm banging on here, just ignore me :) thinking too much again |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
but when i am not asleep...all these objects keyboard, house, trees, roads and so forth remain very stable, they are always the same as far as I can tell. so where is this info stored if not in a physical world thing? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if we knew that, the whole thing would probably reconstruct it's self into something even more complex, it never let's us see. Look up ' the double slit experiment' when you observe subatomic particles like electrons that are in super position, they behave differently. this suggests that our consciousness is somehow manipulating reality, the scientific term is ' collapsing the wave function ' |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
When i was a kid i used to imagine that everything outside of my view dematerialised into a void, obviously now i am an adult i believe reality exists independent of my consciousness. The idea of macro sized objects existing in a state of flux, a suspended amalgamation of probabilities until the observer collapses the wave function of the object into a fixed state is really mind blowing though. has alot of repercussions for philosophy. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
think stuff has to be really chilly to be in a superposition quantum state as heat introduces entropy into the system, could be wrong long time since i studied this stuff |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you control the world with your mind, it's like clay molded to your desires, as you already learned you can turn off and on the stars if you got cancer it's because you want cancer |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
am i/we part of somethings dream? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
something that ate chili before bed |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think Philip K Dick might be the most interesting guy who ever lived |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
O.O.B.E, very nice hippyflakes , have you heard the live 93 version? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
^i'll check it out |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
please do, the whole album is awesome and has me (fluffy) on the cover. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
what if one caveman was mean to another caveman and that is why there is now taxes. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the slit experiment : they monitor a change in results when a human is viewing the experiment. when viewing somethign we are in the same system and will have an effect...less so, if viewing a recording,of course. I have had questions regarding this. what if a cat is viewing the experiment? does the same reaction happen? and/or what if whist viewing the experiment and also recording the monitor output, one simply throws a towel over the monitor ....Then views the recording later to see how it effected the results. what if whilst viewing the experiment one turns on and off the monitor on and off on and off on and off.....does the change happen on each switch? or does it only happen once in a while? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
^ i think you get an episode of the xfiles with a poltergeist cat in it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i think the things you mention are essentially the observer entangling their own probability with the can which will make the waveform to collapse and either make the atom decay or not, where if the cat is totally isolated no information is passed between cat and observer i think with the towel over a monitor something to do with causality means that its essentially the same as viewing the cat yourself,. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i mean i wonder if a cat or other non human animal viewing the slit experiment with a recording of the results viewed at a later date by a human, causes these same changes. Or does it have to be a human viewing the slit experiment in real time with no lag for the changes of particles to waves. also if I view the slit experiment with an analog camera and monitor, it is near enough real time. but if i view the experiment with a digital system there will be more latency...so i wonder how much latency is allowed until there is no change in the results of the slit experiment? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah i think any sentient being would cause the photons to choose a path (collase the probability wave). yeah the latency is interesting idea, i'll look into it, if all fails i'll ask my brother at the weekend he did physics |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
freqy, a human doesn't have to observe the results, it's the measurement that collapses the wave function. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
tanx hyperflakes : ) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
mappatazee , so if we simply record with video and view it at a later date that also causes the phenomena? the act of measuring and monitoring? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
is it the more you know about a particles position the less you know about its velocity and vice versa, from what i understand measuring something defines it because your measuring device is bouncing photons off it collapsing the wave function its twistin my melon man |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
cool and totally bizarre. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
There is a physical world I have proof.... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
we're just living in the late 70s early 80s again. one of those eras full of assholes |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It gets even stranger....The clues keep stacking up that the universe isn't real . A few years ago a theoretical physicist Dr gates found an error correction code embedded in a supersymmetery equation . It was very similar to binary correction block codes you get in Web browser's |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Another point to make on the slit experimen: if the measuring device was affecting the particles you would get a more random pattern on the screen, but you don't. The electron begins as a particle then as it gets to the slit it goes through both holes and then acts as a wave, soon as we look it changes back to a particle.they know this as fact. They have even conducted a more advanced experiment, this time they observe only at microseconds before impacting the screen. The electrons go back in time and change their behaviour as particles. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
larn said: "soon as we look" mappatazee said: " freqy, a human doesn't have to observe the results, it's the measurement that collapses the wave function. " thats what i do not fully understand. "soon as we look" with our eyes? our equipment(cameras/CPUs/ recorders)? or does it need to be both? So, they set up a monitoring device in the system of this experiment, the wire of this monitoring component (lets say a camera) leads off to a computer or a tv screen or recorder. "soon as we look" it goes back to acting like a particle. So, does a human mind need to observe the monitoring equipment, either in real time or within a specific time frame, or can a camera collapse the wave function by itself, or a camera and a recorder, if a human views the tape say, 1 year later? if a camera/monitor, can do this without the need of real time human observation, then surly this is nothing to do with human observation. unless the quantum thing knows we will eventually view the recorded computer files of the monitor equipment. But then we could destroy 50 percent of the files we record. Then this experiment should/could only work 50 percent of the time? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
one of the current issues in quantum mechanics is that the interpretation for how it actually works and why is still up for interpretation, the Copenhagen interpretation is what is currently used |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
actually that video isnt that good, overly dramatic music, i'll find a better one |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if you have the time |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
tnx flakey. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
they're using detection devices that measures light and can detect Single photons, I imagine it's a sensor that feeds data to another box That gives out readings, I dont know exactly, but I guess that's how they get the result. so you want to know at which point does the wave function collapse, At the particle detector equipment or the very act of human observation ? our intuition tells us that it's the detector that is somehow doing it, but it's becoming more reasonable that consciousness is central to the experiment. There is another set-up were they use a "which way detector" with entangled particles that proves that the equipment is not affecting it. It's not easy to explain how it's set up so you'd have to look it up. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Your Chinese girlfriend isent real. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
everything about quantum mechanics seems to contrary to common sense, its a total headfuq |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Haha I Have to wonder sometimes. It is very hard to get your head around these concepts. The idea that 2 particles can become entangled and mirror actions from any distance is just crazy. Or if you were travelling at the speed of light and moved through your living room and some how were able to scan the dimensions of the room, it would be about 1" x 2" big |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
spooky action at a distance is very weird, |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I like the idea of multiverse with endless universes and endless versions of yourself. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if its true there must be an infinite number of times David Cameron got his cock out on prime ministers question time |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
