It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Mr Headshot
There is no tv.
Are you bringing up the Schrodinger's cat thing?
Uncertainty ftw
en.wikipedia.org...ödinger's_cat
Originally posted by amatrine
If you put a camera on the tv when you are out of the room,. you will get a video of the tv playing. Would a non living camera count as an observer?
On an interesting note, you video a computer you get a jumpy screen from the pixels.
[edit on 22-12-2009 by amatrine]
A camera acts as an observer, so that wouldn't work.
Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by amatrine
This is because the human eye sees at 60 frames per second. Most cameras record at less than 60 frames per second. That's why you see the jumpy screen.
Originally posted by Vanitas
A camera acts as an observer, so that wouldn't work.
How so?
Isn't THAT the important question here?
"Observing", as the term is usually understood, implies consciousness (which doesn't necessarily equal sight). Doesn't it?
If it doesn't... WHAT, then, qualifies as "observing"?
(And to all those "diagonal" readers who may be reading this: no, I did not mean to imply that a camera is somehow spookily "conscious".)
[edit on 26-12-2009 by Vanitas]