Quantum Experiment Confirms Reality Doesn't Exist Until Measured

a reply to: tridentblue

I think QM is just as mystical if you reject that idea that human mind is important:

It would be just as mystical, it is just that the role of consciousness would actually explain why quantum particles behave in this way.

They always behave in such a way that reality is "correct" from the viewpoint of the observer.

Professor Andrew Truscott may be an Associate, but not necessarily a reliable professor

I don't see anyone here with better credentials though.

I mean people are suggesting that there is an inherent flaw in his setup that has him confused.

Lets assume 'information can travel back in time' (face palm)... ok, ok.

originally posted by: HotMale
Sigh, I am not saying it does. It doesn't.

You need only visit the second link I posted above (labelled "Link2") to see that, apparently, it does.

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Can you qoute? I see nothing about information travelling through time.

And if you accept that this is true you have to agree that there is a mechanism that is allowing for information to travel connecting the outcomes.

I only see one mechanism that could possibly enable that.

Can you point out the mechanism?

a reply to: HotMale

They always behave in such a way that reality is "correct" from the viewpoint of the observer.

more like "on" and "off". a lot less dramatic than what you make it out to be. of course, taking the drama out of it really leaves the whole Fantasia vibe limping a bit doesnt it?

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: Harte

Can you qoute? I see nothing about information travelling through time.

And if you accept that this is true you have to agree that there is a mechanism that is allowing for information to travel connecting the outcomes.

I only see one mechanism that could possibly enable that.

Can you point out the mechanism?

you are very pushy for someone who doesnt have a degree in physics or any field related to it. theres a reason the resident experts havent stopped in for a chat, and thats because they know exactly where this thread is going.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Explain your "on and off" then.

you are very pushy

Because I asked for further informtion so I could respond to him?

theres a reason the resident experts havent stopped in for a chat, and thats because they know exactly where this thread is going

Damn straight!

Who are the resident experts anyway?

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: Harte

Can you qoute? I see nothing about information travelling through time.

And if you accept that this is true you have to agree that there is a mechanism that is allowing for information to travel connecting the outcomes.

I only see one mechanism that could possibly enable that.

Can you point out the mechanism?

My apologies, wrong link.
Here

My confusion was due to the use of these "soft" measurements in this other experiment.

Here's a quote from what I thought I was linking:

A quantum guessing game
In Physical Review Letters, Murch describes a quantum guessing game played with the qubit.

“We start each run by putting the qubit in a superposition of the two states,” he said. “Then we do a strong measurement but hide the result, continuing to follow the system with weak measurements.”

They then try to guess the hidden result, which is their version of the missing page of the murder mystery.

“Calculating forward, using the Born equation that expresses the probability of finding the system in a particular state, your odds of guessing right are only 50-50,” Murch said. “But you can also calculate backward using something called an effect matrix. Just take all the equations and flip them around. They still work and you can just run the trajectory backward.

“So there’s a backward-going trajectory and a forward-going trajectory and if we look at them both together and weight the information in both equally, we get something we call a hindsight prediction, or “retrodiction.”

The shattering thing about the retrodiction is that it is 90 percent accurate. When the physicists check it against the stored measurement of the system’s earlier state it is right nine times out of 10.

It's from a different source than the one above.

Harte

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: TzarChasm

Explain your "on and off" then.

you turned your computer on by yourself, im presuming, so i dont see the need.

a reply to: Harte

A succession of quantum experiments confirm its predictions—showing, bafflingly, that measurements performed in the future can influence results that happened before those measurements were ever made.

My request still stands. What do you think the connecting mechanism is? It cannot be physical.

a reply to: TzarChasm

You tried to refute a claim I made. In order to respond I need a clarification of your statement. You are not willing to provide it you say. And you are calling me a troll.

Again I ask you to stop trying to stifle discussion.

a reply to: HotMale

The quantum eraser experiment was first proposed by wheeler as a way to prove superposition. If a photon manifests itself as though it had come by a single path thru a detector, then if we measure it after it has traveled it would have to communicate with the past to make a change. Since logic dictates this is impossible because even the choice is random then we know something must be happeneing. This creates a time paradox the part you seem to accept paradoxes but when science encounters one we know we our wrong. So something else is happening we call this something superposition meaning our particle acts a s a wave taking both paths simultaneously.

superposition of states says something has the potentiality to manifest as a particle or wave, but during its time in flight is neither, then there is no time paradox. So quantum eraser confirms our interpretation of superposition to be correct. It isn't meant for someone to misinterpret as some form of control over time. Thus is pseudo science you see on hack websites. And the act of observation doesn't decide if a particle acts as a wave or a particle. They are always both what it does is let us see one or the other depending on the context of the experiment.Now here is a good place to start I suggest looking at the math at the end so you can understand why superposition is and how we come to the conclusions.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: TzarChasm

You tried to refute a claim I made. In order to respond I need a clarification of your statement. You are not willing to provide it you say. And you are calling me a troll.

Again I ask you to stop to trying to stifle discussion.

you asked for a clarification of "on and off". i dont know how to clarify further and it honestly strikes me as a ploy because who needs to clarify on and off??? wave form, particle form. back and forth depending apparently on being actively measured. although frankly, i dont measure everything i see and it still gets in the damn way.

your claim was that particles "always behave in such a way that reality is correct" this implies that particles have luxury of conscious choice and that they have so many different options to choose from in any given moment. both of which are erroneous assumptions. the range of active conditions in any given particle is dictated purely by moment-to-moment physics.

a reply to: dragonridr

What the eraser actually proves is that the availability of path info causes interference/non interference.

The availability of path info is the only variable, and why would it matter if the info is available or not?

a reply to: TzarChasm

you asked for a clarification of "on and off". i dont know how to clarify further and it honestly strikes me as a ploy because who needs to clarify on and off??? wave form, particle form.

There is no random on and off.

It is off when we look, and on when we don't look. Observation is the only variable.

your claim was that particles "always behave in such a way that reality is correct" this implies that particles have luxury of conscious choice and that they have so many different options to choose from in any given moment.

It implies that reality is being governed by a program that makes sure that reality conforms to the observers observation.

Again, why are future measurements affecting past results?

although frankly, i dont measure everything i see and it still gets in the damn way.

You don't "measure" everything you see?

a reply to: TzarChasm

your claim was that particles "always behave in such a way that reality is correct" this implies that particles have luxury of conscious choice and that they have so many different options to choose from in any given moment.

It is not even a claim, it is a fact shown by these experiments.

What you are doing is ignoring the facts because you don't like the implication. It's called intellectual dishonesty.

It doesn't make these results go away.

originally posted by: HotMale
a reply to: Harte

A succession of quantum experiments confirm its predictions—showing, bafflingly, that measurements performed in the future can influence results that happened before those measurements were ever made.

My request still stands. What do you think the connecting mechanism is? It cannot be physical.

You're gonna ask me?

All I can tell you is that the equations in QM are not time dependent - they work both ways - they're time-symmetric.

Maybe at that level, there's no difference between the past and the future.

If spacetime is real, and at the quantum level, space is a "foam," forward and backward in time could be part of that foam (assuming, again, space and time are two aspects of a single thing.) That would be "physical," if such a thing as "physical" can exist on that scale.

But you should ask the guy (Murch) that determined this, not me. Not sure that's possible without talking to him. I mean, we can't exactly wade through the mathematical explanations, can we? And that's probably what you'd find in anything he published on it (outside of articles like the two I linked.)

I doubt very seriously that anyone can say what the mechanism is anyway. Murch just published this year. But I bet he has some ideas on it.

Harte

a reply to: neoholographic

NO..

Hate to give the one liner, but NO...

This is bullcrap... Space exists whether we measure it oR not...

Life is not that imp0rtant, we are not over the space of creation...

We use senses and instruments to measure this reality, it is not a hologram, since we are breathing in it....

I agree with whoever above that said Mind over matter.

If the Sun suddenly goes out and 5 minutes later I wake up and look outside the window. Then my looking at the Sun brings it back into "existence" for the next 3 mins? If someone was waiting for it to go out before moving in I just killed the guy? lol

a reply to: HotMale

I'm suggesting no such thing I'm saying your not understanding the article. He didn't say observation causes the outcome in the past to change that is your interpretation.And he gave you two possibilities one being absurd that observation effects the past. Of course this is the one you choose. Or he says that the particles act AZ waves. This is the only two conclusions that can be made and since changing the past is not an option this created paradoxes constantly. Meaning our universe would literally be constantly I'm flux.

So logic tells us that your wrong and if you read his article he's telling you yoir wrong you just don't understand the way science is taught. But don't believe me feel free to email him he will respond I get emails all the time on articles. Ask him if observation controls time.You really have no clue the havoc your interpretation would cause.

Meh, they will argue either way...

Yet I provide a fact we are breathing physical air, to utilize our senses to adhere to this space we call reality...


LOL

Carry may the ignorant prevail...


Their is no argument thou.. The chemical compounds on our planet, provides our lives as organisms to exist, and adhere this strange reality we live in...

the irony is when we think our lives are more important than our reality...

that is when vanity, and the perversion of vain, proves we are ignorant idiots in the big scheme of things...

This thread is none the less a a vain portrait of man's ego...

Nothing personal to the rich egotistical person that thinks we exist in a hologram..