tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post8051703783465257488..comments2024-02-28T14:41:47.313-07:00Comments on Flares into Darkness: No Reality!—Latest Quantum Weirdnessambisinistralhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03836786826294202405noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-66413328285119839742008-02-22T10:59:00.000-07:002008-02-22T10:59:00.000-07:00It is possible that everyone is observing the same...It is possible that everyone is observing the same thing only relatively. So the feed back or the experience each gets while observing could be different but while discussing with each other they may imply that they have all observed the same experience.As such such there are as many worlds as there are observers but all these worlds are only relatively same but not the same.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02139256846635830208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-4547070399747087932007-05-14T10:44:00.000-06:002007-05-14T10:44:00.000-06:00You dudes don't know it, but you've been 'vanished...You dudes don't know it, but you've been 'vanished' while I've been away. Now I am back, and so are you--for awhile.bobalharbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002916750686257873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-55094678777032116802007-05-12T23:20:00.000-06:002007-05-12T23:20:00.000-06:00Hey Buddy. Both links takes us back to the beginni...Hey Buddy. Both links takes us back to the beginning of the comments. Is that some sort of head game you're playing with us ;>)Barry Dauphinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15808109325931309525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-44803143645190356132007-05-12T11:56:00.000-06:002007-05-12T11:56:00.000-06:00heh heh, actually, that was an error. tho it was a...heh heh, actually, that was an error. tho it was apropos the topic.<BR/><BR/>I meant <A HTTP://EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG/WIKI/UNCERTAINTY_PRINCIPLE HREF="" REL="nofollow">link</A>.buddy larsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17760847873026506988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-43219544756005531192007-05-12T11:52:00.000-06:002007-05-12T11:52:00.000-06:00Here's the wiki on the "Uncertainty Principle".Here's the wiki on the <A HTTP://EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG/WIKI/UNCERTAINTY_PRINCIPLE HREF="" REL="nofollow">"Uncertainty Principle"</A>.buddy larsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17760847873026506988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-61171934201821991252007-05-11T22:27:00.000-06:002007-05-11T22:27:00.000-06:00reliapundit, the point is that it only exists *whe...reliapundit, the point is that it only exists *when* they're testing it. Not test, nothing to see.<BR/><BR/><I>personally; i think there may be more than just one "universe" and that each may have different rules/laws - just as in mathematics there are some rules which only operate or a relevant to for some sets of numbers. or... how color-mixing "rules" are different for light and liquid color/pigment.</I><BR/><BR/>Interestingly, some variants of m-theory say exactly this.Charlie Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14586506407851173416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-33462773178641299942007-05-10T07:49:00.000-06:002007-05-10T07:49:00.000-06:00I think that's what Spinoza was saying--God is all...I think that's what Spinoza was saying--God is all in the mind, and that is itself the ultimate proof of His existence.buddy larsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17760847873026506988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-34052063602139659932007-05-10T07:46:00.000-06:002007-05-10T07:46:00.000-06:00If we (and bees) create physical reality by observ...<I>If we (and bees) create physical reality by observing it--do we do the same with time?</I><BR/><BR/>That bit is going away, I mean the special role of the observer in QM. It was just a way of drawing a boundary between the quantum domain and the classical domain, and now the same problem is solved by quantum decoherence. Quantum mechanics seems to be self-consistent and doesn't need a special role for the classical observer, but it took a while to understand how that worked and meanwhile folks made do with the observer interpretation.chuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15164145672293455823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-42157869202247558822007-05-10T07:32:00.000-06:002007-05-10T07:32:00.000-06:00Well, it all comes down to consciousness, doesn't ...Well, it all comes down to consciousness, doesn't it?<BR/><BR/>And I don't mean necessarily human. A bee 'sees' a flower and drinks the nectar.<BR/><BR/>If we (and bees) create physical reality by observing it--do we do the same with time?<BR/><BR/>Or, since there does seem to be this reality of a planet earth, someone else must be doing the 'creating' for us at the quantum level. So is God the ultimate consciousness? The one who creates all because he observes all--at the quantum level?<BR/><BR/>God observes quarks so we can observe sunsets!<BR/><BR/>The ultimate gift?Sylhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03069871911665125873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-33380597196776569102007-05-09T18:40:00.000-06:002007-05-09T18:40:00.000-06:00...fairly early on in his career...Ummm, that's a ...<I>...fairly early on in his career...</I><BR/><BR/>Ummm, that's a bit of an exaggeration. Let's call 1905 the beginning of Einstein's "superman" phase and end it with the publication of his 1915 theory of gravity. That doesn't mean he became irrelevant at that point, he continued to make contributions up to nearly 1930. For instance, he recognized the significance of De Broglie's thesis, indeed, was responsible for its acceptance, and that work influenced Shrodinger's developement of wave mechanics. And Einstein was also part of that: Einstein and Schrodinger exchanged 13 letters in the years 1925-1926. Einstein also brought attention to the work of Bose (Bose-Einstein statistics), made contributions to non-equilibrium thermodynamics, and generalized parts of the old quantum mechanics (quantization via action-angle variables). So, really, his contributions didn't really peter out until nearly 1930, at which point the new quantum mechanics was in full swing and Dirac, Heisenberg, and the rest of that crowd were leading the parade. Einstein was then about fifty; I think he had a remarkably productive run.chuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15164145672293455823noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-20568382090563928142007-05-09T16:30:00.000-06:002007-05-09T16:30:00.000-06:00Reality is for people who can't cope withReality is for people who can't cope withbuddy larsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17760847873026506988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-89631812220451175952007-05-09T15:49:00.000-06:002007-05-09T15:49:00.000-06:00After all, what is reality anyway? Nothin' but a ...<I>After all, what is reality anyway? Nothin' but a collective hunch. My space chums think reality was once a primitive method of crowd control that got out of hand.</I><BR/><BR/>—Jane Wagner, <I>The Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe</I><BR/><BR/>MHA? E-mail?lonerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13329414340481290010noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-25038296848407566102007-05-09T14:17:00.000-06:002007-05-09T14:17:00.000-06:00Now You See Me Now You Don't<A HREF="http://www.fritjofcapra.net/shiva.html" REL="nofollow">Now You See Me Now You Don't</A>bobalharbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002916750686257873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-26506593341293067012007-05-08T22:03:00.000-06:002007-05-08T22:03:00.000-06:00A weakness of solipsism, for sure. What can valida...A weakness of solipsism, for sure. What can validate it for you?buddy larsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17760847873026506988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-19228466476766588322007-05-08T21:52:00.000-06:002007-05-08T21:52:00.000-06:00giving the uneasy consequence that reality does no...<I>giving the uneasy consequence that reality does not exist when we are not observing it</I><BR/><BR/>Who is this "we"?Morganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13849696277722291312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-55226357900591593802007-05-08T20:15:00.000-06:002007-05-08T20:15:00.000-06:00DAUPHIN: brillIantly highlarryus!DAUPHIN: brillIantly highlarryus!Reliapundithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12942299527008194753noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-77014712463192759912007-05-08T19:43:00.000-06:002007-05-08T19:43:00.000-06:00If reality doesn't exist, I blame Bush.If reality doesn't exist, I blame Bush.Barry Dauphinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15808109325931309525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-18620768650558821592007-05-08T19:36:00.000-06:002007-05-08T19:36:00.000-06:00What do you get when you cross a physicist with a ...What do you get when you cross a physicist with a mafioso? An offer you can't understand.buddy larsenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17760847873026506988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-53132394947491228162007-05-08T18:33:00.000-06:002007-05-08T18:33:00.000-06:001 - if reality doesn't exist, then what were they ...1 - if reality doesn't exist, then what were they testing and where were they testing it?<BR/><BR/>2 - recently is saw a jpeg online from nasa - i think - of a 3D xray-mapping of dark matter and dark energy - a map of where this "stuff" HAD to be in order to explain why there are vast gaps and globs of visible matter and visible energy throughout the visible universe - why it isn't evenly distributed and why it is expanding at an accelerating rate, (and not slowing down).<BR/><BR/>the image looked like an AWESOME amd complex lattice-work - one which indeed DID SEEM TO connect everything - and everywhere.<BR/><BR/>this may have been the first pic' of "the face of God" as the poem goes...<BR/><BR/>link to pic' here:<BR/><BR/>http://weblogsky.midasnetworks.com/<BR/>postimages/1084_topphoto.jpg<BR/><BR/>personally; i think there may be more than just one "universe" and that each may have different rules/laws - just as in mathematics there are some rules which only operate or a relevant to for some sets of numbers. or... how color-mixing "rules" are different for light and liquid color/pigment.<BR/><BR/>and perhaps dark energy/dark matter connects them all.<BR/><BR/>maybe "it" even consciously/willfully creates the universes and makes the rules.<BR/><BR/>and keeps track of each and everything in each universe - the way each telecom company keeps track of each cellphone. only bigger, better, faster.<BR/><BR/>like... as if it was tracked by a computer 15 billion years bigger/better/ and faster.<BR/><BR/>like.... maybe this IS God. maybe.<BR/><BR/>just saying...Reliapundithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12942299527008194753noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16821859.post-52958988449225185852007-05-08T17:10:00.000-06:002007-05-08T17:10:00.000-06:00Why in the world would realty want to exist when n...Why in the world would realty want to exist when not being observed, just to 'hang out'? The Hindoos had this figured long ago, if there is matter, there is always mind. No matter, well, never mind.<BR/><BR/>Now, go away awhile.bobalharbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002916750686257873noreply@blogger.com