Quantum Mysticism and the Founders of Quantum Mechanics

originally posted by: mbkennel

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
you may be interested in this book www.amazon.com...
a reply to: neoholographic

The Tao of Physics is bad physics. The recently posted video of quantum information theory is better.

Although the "Tao of Pooh" was one of my favorite books when I was a teen.

a reply to: mbkennel

This is just pure nonsense. This is the point of the paper, there isn't any transmission virtual or otherwise of any particle. This is why it's titled:

The wave-function is real but nonphysical: A view from counterfactual quantum cryptography

You seem to be making it up as you go because nothing you have said pertains to anything that I posted.

What he does will rouse different detectors at Alice's end. In this way, Alice can infer Bob's action by checking her own detectors. But here is where it gets stranger: the photon didn't even have to leave Alice's side of the communication channel in order for her to know about Bob's choice.

As Salih says: "I believe the question of how information gets from Bob to Alice is a deep one speaking to the heart of the debate about the reality of the quantum state: if physical particles did not carry information between sender and receiver, what did?"

The photon didn't even have to leave Alice's side of the communication channel in order to know Bob's choice. There's no photons virtual or otherwise.

Like I said this is obvious and it's probably the reason you didn't respond to most of my post because you can't. Materialism just doesn't make sense.

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
you may be interested in this book www.amazon.com...



a reply to: neoholographic

That was a very good book. Here's some more good books.

The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe by Lynne McTaggert

The Extra-Dimensional Universe: Where the Paranormal Becomes the Normal by John R. Violette

Decoding the Universe: How the New Science of Information Is Explaining Everything in the Cosmos, from Our Brains to Black Holes by Charles Siefe

originally posted by: neoholographic

The photon didn't even have to leave Alice's side of the communication channel in order to know Bob's choice. There's no photons virtual or otherwise.

Stop focusing on photons: there's a wavefunction.

Like I said this is obvious and it's probably the reason you didn't respond to most of my post because you can't. Materialism just doesn't make sense.

Sure it does. The materialistic deterministic entity is the wavefunction, and when entangled there are non-local interactions. Wavefunction to wavefunction.

I've read McTaggart's The Intention Experiment. It made me wonder about where the whole idea of holy water came from




a reply to: neoholographic

originally posted by: SkippyBalls
a reply to: anonentity

No, not really, but I do find that consciousness does at least party explain what the unseen mechanism is behind these weird results, although it doesn't even begin to explain how this system really works.

I do know that the results of secondairy Quantum measurements always adapt to and correspond with the initial measurement with "information" apparently even crossing the boundaries of space and time as they are known to us.

There has to be a mechanism connecting these outcomes, and when you look at it there is in fact a mechanism connecting them, the conscious observer.

That's the best logic and seems to be an undeniable statement of fact. Which might mean that its consciousness which is entangled, with the non physical aspect of what matter is, being its waveform, state. Or going further perhaps its concentration, that defines the observational information. Defined reality being the memory , or past state of it.

I love the superposition explanation in this video, it just means everything is everything everywhere all the time FTW.

originally posted by: anonentity

originally posted by: SkippyBalls
a reply to: anonentity

No, not really, but I do find that consciousness does at least party explain what the unseen mechanism is behind these weird results, although it doesn't even begin to explain how this system really works.

I do know that the results of secondairy Quantum measurements always adapt to and correspond with the initial measurement with "information" apparently even crossing the boundaries of space and time as they are known to us.

There has to be a mechanism connecting these outcomes, and when you look at it there is in fact a mechanism connecting them, the conscious observer.

That's the best logic and seems to be an undeniable statement of fact.

I deny it. No consciousness or specific human ability necessary. Well, yes, QM in full wave function form is non-local because that's what the experiments say. The boundaries are "known to us" only in classical deterministic theories with relativity. But QM is fully relativistic now, meaning that all the appropriate symmetry operators and transformations are upheld. That's the actual content of Einstein when you get down to specifics: requirements on the laws of motion.

Which might mean that its consciousness which is entangled, with the non physical aspect of what matter is, being its waveform, state. Or going further perhaps its concentration, that defines the observational information. Defined reality being the memory , or past state of it.

Not consciousness, but measurement apparatus which happens to have an enormous number of degrees of freedom so it looks thermodynamically irreversible.

originally posted by: mbkennel


Everything is predicted entirely from the Heisenberg equations of motion. All these quantum mechanical experiments have outcomes which are precisely calculatable and verifiable with experimental results, just like Newtonian mechanics.

After some more reading I'm changing my mind on this, just a little bit. A slight non-unitary evolution operator (not in Heisenberg + Bohr 1926) will cause, in macroscopic systems, collapse in the presence of decoherence.

I think it's purely physics: chaos, thermodynamics and time evolution. No multiverse, no woo, no consciousness, just physics of wave functions in a crazy insane Hilbert space.

a reply to: mbkennel

no woo

crazy insane Hilbert space.

This is why I don't feel like writing a lengthy post to reply to you. It's just no use.


There is no woo, but no attempt is made to explain inexplicable results.



Scientists with out a clue "describe" what they see and based on that they can "predict" the outcome of a similar experiment and with the next experiment they find that the results are in line with previous results, therefore it all makes sense.

Yeah right. At no point an actual explanation is given.

Just the cop out, "light is both a particle and a wave". Such a pathetic cop out.

They fire single particles, how can a single particle be a wave?

a reply to: mbkennel

Not consciousness, but measurement apparatus which happens to have an enormous number of degrees of freedom so it looks thermodynamically irreversible.

But if the info of the measurement is erased( the info is being made unavailable) the system acts like there was no measurement in the first place. This proves that it is not the actual measurement by the device, but the availability of the information that is causing the collapse of the wave function.

How do you explain that. Aparently the availabilty of info matters. Why would that matter if consciousness is not the factor.

No woo.

How do you explain entanglement and Quantum teleportation?

Why don't you, instead of coming up with bs hypothetical situations in order to "debunk" consciousness, come up with an actual explanation of the results, and why don't you stop acting like there is no mystery or woo involved at all.

Can you at least admit that there is a hidden mechanism at work here?

maybe the particle is causing a wave or a ripple in the Higgs field?

a reply to: SkippyBalls

linear thinking people like that can't go there


a reply to: SkippyBalls

a reply to: bottleslingguy

If that was the case then there should be an interference pattern in all cases, but there isn't.

linear thinking people like that can't go there

Yes, like I said, they are simply unable to grasp.

a reply to: SkippyBalls

Good post,

When you see materialist act like they have all the answers it's just a pipe dream. Materialism answers nothing and explains nothing. This is because the universe doesn't fit into a materialistic box.

Scientist are not finding what they call Naturalness where they predict Naturalness should be found. Instead their finding extraordinary fine tuning and order. This is why you have things like the Axis of Evil and the Vacuum Catastrophe.

It's like if I have 40 marbles in my hand and I'm shaking those marbles up. I then drop them to the floor. I should be able to predict that these marbles should be randomly scattered across the floor. When I look down though, I see To Be or Not To Be spelled out perfectly. Scientist are making observations and then forming predictions that should naturally flow from these observations and instead of Naturalness they're finding extraordinary fine tuning and order.



Materialism belongs in Middle Earth with the Hobbits.

The observers knowledge about which path information is very important because it's the observers CHOICE to carry out a measurement and to CHOOSE which observable they want to measure. The measuring apparatus doesn't make the choice or know which path information. It's like Schrodinger said:

The observer is never entirely replaced by instruments; for if he were, he could obviously obtain no knowledge whatsoever.... Many helpful devices can facilitate this work...But they must be read! The observer’s senses have to step in eventually. The most careful record, when not inspected, tells us nothing.

It tells us nothing because consciousness didn't make a CHOICE to know which path information so you're left with a probability distribution of mixed states until a CONSCIOUS OBSERVER comes along and CHOOSES to make a measurement to find out which path information.

Like I said, the only thing that has changed when you add a second slit in the double slit experiment is the uncertainty of the CONSCIOUS OBSERVER about which path information. If the observer doesn't choose to measure which path information then you will just have a wave function that evolves according to Schrodinger's equation.

have any of you looked into Amit Goswami's post materialist theories concerning downward causation?

a reply to: neoholographic

originally posted by: bottleslingguy
linear thinking people like that can't go there


a reply to: SkippyBalls

Personally, I can "go there". I in fact do understand the ideas some people have about consciousness affecting reality. I simply feel that there is much more evidence telling me that the universe is physical (immensely weird, yet still physical) than there is evidence telling me that there is some sort of universal conscious force which is driven by though and changes reality.

In fact , the only evidence there is of this "consciousness thought controlling reality" comes from people's misconception of the quantum world. People can't grasp the weirdness of the quantum world (and, as I said, it is incredibly weird) so they attribute metaphysical ideals (such as consciousness being a separate entity, and somehow able to control reality, or some Star wars-style "Force" that permeates everything, and that can be affected by pure thought) to something that is really just physical (weirdly physical, but still physical). People have misconceptions about what Schrödinger was trying to say with his cat thought experiment. People have misconceptions about what the double-slit experiment and the Quantum Eraser experiment were telling us. people have misconceptions about quantum entanglement. Non of these proves anything mystical about the universe, and non of these proves that there is a separate consciouness or "soul" that can live outside of our biochemical brains.

I mean, quantum theory is incredible enough with me needing to explain it away the magical mysticism. That's the boring way out; i.e. just explain it away with a wave your hand and say with a mysterious voice "it's mystical and magical" rather than trying to actually figure out how it works.

I mean, since you seem to be able to think in some special non-linear way that I cannot, then please explain why conscious thought should affect a drop of rain hitting a rock on some lifeless planet in some anonymous galaxy half way across the universe from us? Why would it matter to that rain drop and rock whether or not there is some sort of mysterious consciousness in the universe? Are you telling me that in a universe with no consciousness, the act of that raindrop hitting that rock would be different?

If so, then why and how?

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People
It is not conscious 'thought' which effects reality. Nothing can appear without consciousness - thought is an appearance in consciousness.
Consciousness is like an ocean and a thought is just like a wave in the ocean - no thing is made of anything other than consciousness, just like no wave is made of anything other than the ocean.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Everything you said is basically hogwash. It's strictly based on your own personal belief system and nothing more. You interpret things this way because it's what you want to believe. This is why you use terms like magical and Star Wars Force. This simply shows the weakness in everything you're saying because you can't refute other peoples interpretations that may not agree with you. So everyone that doesn't agree with your materialist belief system has be hoping for a Star Wars Force or thinking magically. They can't just be people who looked at the evidence and they reach a different conclusion than you have. You can't respect that because you're blinded by your belief system. This is why you said:

In fact , the only evidence there is of this "consciousness thought controlling reality" comes from people's misconception of the quantum world. People can't grasp the weirdness of the quantum world (and, as I said, it is incredibly weird) so they attribute metaphysical ideals (such as consciousness being a separate entity, and somehow able to control reality, or some Star wars-style "Force" that permeates everything, and that can be affected by pure thought) to something that is really just physical (weirdly physical, but still physical).

This whole diatribe is just nonsense. So your perception of QM must be absolutely right and must agree with your materialist belief and everyone else that looks at the evidence and reaches a different conclusion than you must just be their misconception.

I don't understand why people can't see how blind these statements are when they're typing them.

The fact is, people can look at Quantum Mechanics and easily come to the conclusion that a materialist interpretation is a pipe dream. All people are saying if QM supports materialism then why does the conscious observer have a choice as to which observable of the wave function they wish to measure?

Why isn't this choice of measurement described by Schrodinger's equation?

Why when you add a second slit to the double slit experiment does uncertainty increase? The only thing that's uncertain is the conscious observers knowledge as to which path information. Why does the observers knowledge of which path information matter?

Schrodinger pointed this out himself:

The observer is never entirely replaced by instruments; for if he were, he could obviously obtain no knowledge whatsoever.... Many helpful devices can facilitate this work...But they must be read! The observer’s senses have to step in eventually. The most careful record, when not inspected, tells us nothing.

Without a conscious observers CHOICE you will just have a wave function that evolves according to Schrodinger's equation. Why does the conscious observer's choice determine what aspect of the wave function we will observe? The observers choice shouldn't matter if Consciousness played no role and everything followed a strict materialist interpretation.

The problem you're having is materialism doesn't explain anything. Materialism is a Philosophy and it's something that people believe in because it doesn't have an explanatory power when it comes to the nature of reality.

Materialism can say, if you throw a rock in the water it will make waves. Materialism can't say why I chose to throw the rock in the water or why did I choose to skip the rock on the water or maybe I chose not to throw the rock in the water at all.

Why does CONSCIOUS CHOICE create reality down to microscopic scales? Schrodinger's equation doesn't describe the CHOICE of the Observer just probabilities that the Conscious Observer can choose between. So you have uncertainty on a microscopic and macroscopic level until the conscious observer makes a CHOICE.

So to act like people building a theory of consciousness based on quantum mechanics is far fetched just doesn't make any sense beyond a personal materialist belief system.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

I mean, since you seem to be able to think in some special non-linear way that I cannot, then please explain why conscious thought should affect a drop of rain hitting a rock on some lifeless planet in some anonymous galaxy half way across the universe from us? Why would it matter to that rain drop and rock whether or not there is some sort of mysterious consciousness in the universe? Are you telling me that in a universe with no consciousness, the act of that raindrop hitting that rock would be different? If so, then why and how?

There is no universe without consciousness. Consciousness is the universe. You are actually well on your way to getting it, you are just getting it backwards.

Without a conscious observer there is no need for the program to render a particular material 3D reality.

We are basically playing an online 3D person action game on a particular interactive map. We all play with our own avatar and our reality overlaps and we are all bound by the same physical rules of that world(they can be bent)

And by we I mean the small divided parts of a single consciousness that DESIGNED the program. (I said it.)

Speculation, I know.