The Universe Is Not Locally Real, and the Physics Nobel Prize Winners Proved It

I am not a physicist the observable Universe is my playground but as far as I can understand it Physics Nobel Prize Winners John Clauser, Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger have shown that the Universe Is Not Locally Real without observation , real means objects have definite properties , a ball is round whether you observe it or not but as entangled particles are in a state of Superposition having no defined properties until to they are observed the Universe is not locally real.

Yeah my head hurts too , here's a proper explanation.

One of the more unsettling discoveries in the past half century is that the universe is not locally real. “Real,” meaning that objects have definite properties independent of observation—an apple can be red even when no one is looking; “local” means objects can only be influenced by their surroundings, and that any influence cannot travel faster than light. Investigations at the frontiers of quantum physics have found that these things cannot both be true. Instead, the evidence shows objects are not influenced solely by their surroundings and they may also lack definite properties prior to measurement. As Albert Einstein famously bemoaned to a friend, “Do you really believe the moon is not there when you are not looking at it?”

This is, of course, deeply contrary to our everyday experiences. To paraphrase Douglas Adams, the demise of local realism has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Blame for this achievement has now been laid squarely on the shoulders of three physicists: John Clauser, Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger. They equally split the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics “for experiments with entangled photons, establishing the violation of Bell inequalities and pioneering quantum information science.” (“Bell inequalities” refers to the pioneering work of the Northern Irish physicist John Stewart Bell, who laid the foundations for this year’s Physics Nobel in the early 1960s.) Colleagues agreed that the trio had it coming, deserving this reckoning for overthrowing reality as we know it. “It is fantastic news. It was long overdue,” says Sandu Popescu, a quantum physicist at the University of Bristol. “Without any doubt, the prize is well-deserved.”

“The experiments beginning with the earliest one of Clauser and continuing along, show that this stuff isn’t just philosophical, it’s real—and like other real things, potentially useful,” says Charles Bennett, an eminent quantum researcher at IBM.
www.scientificamerican.com...#:~:text=Under%20quantu m%20mechanics%2C%20nature%20is,another%20no%20matter%20the%20distance.

And a 15 minute visual explanation.


Yeah , we live in a 2 dimensional Hologram played across the surface of a Black Hole (probably).

Since I haven't personally observed these scientists who won the physics novel prize, their credibility remains undefined and hypothetical.

So if you can't observe something, or sense it in some way, it doesn't exist?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Since I haven't personally observed these scientists who won the physics novel prize, their credibility remains undefined and hypothetical.

Here's a little on their background.

John Clauser
One of the most remarkable traits of quantum mechanics is that it allows two or more particles to exist in what is called an entangled state. What happens to one of the particles in an entangled pair determines what happens to the other particle, even if they are far apart. In 1972, John Clauser conducted groundbreaking experiments using entangled light particles, photons. This and other experiments confirm that quantum mechanics is correct and pave the way for quantum computers, quantum networks and quantum encrypted communication.
www.nobelprize.org...

Alain Aspect
In 1981–1982, Alain Aspect conducted groundbreaking experiments using entangled light particles, photons. These and other experiments confirm that quantum mechanics is correct and pave the way for quantum computers, quantum networks and quantum encrypted communication.
www.nobelprize.org...

Anton Zeilinger
In 1997–1998, Anton Zeilinger conducted groundbreaking experiments using entangled light particles, photons. These and other experiments confirm that quantum mechanics is correct and pave the way for quantum computers, quantum networks and quantum encrypted communication.
www.nobelprize.org...

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Tell that to the tree that I discovered had fallen on my camp roof.

a reply to: gortex
Had this thought from being a child on. But have read that these type of thoughts have to do with child development. Now I am curious about when one is a child, you're very unimprinted and less attached to explanations, that the child has less filtering mechanisms for reality.

I had the theory that things do not exist when no one is looking and no device is recording. I had no idea about light distribution and all that. But I had that feeling that it's all undefined. Not as in a simulation, as I had no idea about that yet and Matrix movie wasn't even produced. But I knew that mirrors reflect light so I knew that light is like something that can bounce around. And was like thinking, until that light does not hit any eyes or camera that captures it or leaves a bit of "light" doing that, that the material is "not there" yet.

Sort of like this. Intriguing. Makes me think about the Russian mirror experiment.

a reply to: gortex

I just closed my eyes and walked straight into a wall.


Feeling a bit stupid to be honest.

I even said to myself "follow the science, just follow the science".

No, it exists, but it’s properties do not follow what we know as the laws of physics, is how I read it at least. Meaning that something, without being observed, could be and most likely isn’t what we see it to be. Our perception of things and how our brains rationalize them into what we perceive as “reality” is a construct that at our peak of processing power can observe and see.

“If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”

The answer(s) to this question now seems to be infinite.. because the way I understand it based on reading into this a bit, is that not only does the tree make a sound, but without being observed (heard in this specific case) the “tree” may not be a tree at all, and the “ground” may not be the ground we know. Without something there to perceive the observation with senses, the tree falling might as well sound like rain pattering on a roof.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

a reply to: 19Bones79
You did it wrong

a reply to: TDDAgain


My experiment may be flawed.

There's a pesky fly here somewhere he must've caught on to my experiment and was observing the unobserved.

What?

Cool, sounds like programmed render distance, if we discover to much of the universe I bet we will begin lagging. soon they will find out we are just avatars in a giant simulated universe.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: TzarChasm

Since I haven't personally observed these scientists who won the physics novel prize, their credibility remains undefined and hypothetical.

Here's a little on their background.

John Clauser
One of the most remarkable traits of quantum mechanics is that it allows two or more particles to exist in what is called an entangled state. What happens to one of the particles in an entangled pair determines what happens to the other particle, even if they are far apart. In 1972, John Clauser conducted groundbreaking experiments using entangled light particles, photons. This and other experiments confirm that quantum mechanics is correct and pave the way for quantum computers, quantum networks and quantum encrypted communication.
www.nobelprize.org...

Alain Aspect
In 1981–1982, Alain Aspect conducted groundbreaking experiments using entangled light particles, photons. These and other experiments confirm that quantum mechanics is correct and pave the way for quantum computers, quantum networks and quantum encrypted communication.
www.nobelprize.org...

Anton Zeilinger
In 1997–1998, Anton Zeilinger conducted groundbreaking experiments using entangled light particles, photons. These and other experiments confirm that quantum mechanics is correct and pave the way for quantum computers, quantum networks and quantum encrypted communication.
www.nobelprize.org...

How does quantum encryption serve the interests of us common plebeians?

a reply to: Narvasis
Generally, that is how I have come to understand all of that as well. Whatever it all is, exists, just in what form or state is pretty much left up to us, or, whoever or whatever is doing the observing. Didn't some grand Christian theologian centuries ago figure that it all exists because God is the Big Observer?

a reply to: gortex

Sounds like cult of the quantum stuff to me.

So many theoretical physicists now we need a differing opinion every week.

Job security and all that...

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Genesis 0:1: And God said: " Here's looking at you, kid."

Don't you just love it when they mention the speed of light? What does that even mean? How fast we visualize light starting and ending at two points? How can we even measure such a thing as "light"? We cannot even observe our reality, as a whole, with our physiological limitations... And anywhere you go everything is completely different. Due to ... Everything from geomagnetism, gravitational forces, the very DNA of each planetary body's atmosphere and it's influences differ based on whether it's within a star system, how many moons orbitting... Not to mention the light source. Taking all of this into consideration... there's no speed limit on light as it's speed is constantly influenced by the atmosphere it's travelling through. So by stating... "Faster than light" or any implication of such staggering obliviousness.... It is simply pud whacking and cartwheels, sensationalism without any modern scientific basis, old world religious buffoonery to line pockets. As voyager 1 and 2 discover more things that turn everything we know of physics on its head... We learn how much more we are truly in the dark.

What constitutes a observer. A human being? A dog? A flea? A blade of grass? A single bacterium? 1 prion? What about digital observation? Is it safe to assume all of known cosmos is being observed at all times because the force of heavenly bodies and their influence can be measured so they have tangible properties at all times.

Maybe it’s more likely we don’t fully understand super position?

a reply to: gortex

a reply to: 19Bones79

Satellites! Now it all makes sense! They watch us 24/7 to keep the Earth real.

SAT - See All Thingy
SAT - So All Terrestrial
SAT - Stuff Always True.

See? 3 letters. Three times. Three sentences. The holy trinity. 3-letter agencies. The pyramid and eye on the dollar bill. Three stooges.

a reply to: 19Bones79


Nice smile for that one Bones. Thanks.

I been trying to explaing about 2 Years that the WuFlu China virus dont exist,

The " trust the science " folks created it without real observation .