Quantum Experiments, Proof that Human Consciousness influences Particles

reply to post by masterp

Absolutely not. If the which-path information was kept, a non-interference pattern would be displayed.

Actually no, if the data was kept but no one ever observed that data, the interference pattern would be displayed. That is why deleting the data results in an interference pattern. The information can never be observed even though it had been captured.

'Observe' does not mean 'a human sees'. It means 'a particle interacts with it'.

No, it means 'consciousness sees'. Please consider this quote:

The act of measuring a particle with a photon imparts the photon with the particles information which comes back to the measuring device and is then transferred onto electrons which move through the device and allow an image to appear on the screen

Wrong. They are not "measuring a particle with a photon"... they are "measuring the photon to get information about the particle". This is a crucial difference. Most skeptics would claim that measuring the electron interferes with it because the photons used to measure the electron interfere with the electron. However, this line of reasoning is absurd because a camera does not shoot photons, it simply measures photons which are already there. Whether you stick a camera next to the slits or not, that electron is still going to be affected by photons. Photons are already buzzing about all over the place. The process of measuring some of those photons does not change the experiment at all imo, it simply gathers information about the experiment, information which was always there. So even without this new experiment presented by the OP (which is amazing btw), it's still possible to prove the electron was affected by the observer.

Observing the data after the experiment means to make a particle interact with the experiment. Perhaps, in the quantum world, things stay entangled for a long time.

Are you are saying that the information obtained from the experiment is still entangled in some way with the electron from the experiment, and that observing this data changes the state of the electron in the past. So you are saying there's an entanglement linked through time and observing the data causes an effect which ripples through time? Even if that were the case, there's no valid reason for why observing that data should be any different from locking it away forever. It still implies that consciously observing the data causes an effect which ripples through time merely by looking at the data. And looking at that data does not have to involve any particle interaction other than looking at a computer screen. So you would be suggesting the photons from that screen link back to the photons measured by the camera, which link back to an interaction with the electron. Please explain yourself more clearly if I'm wrong about this.

reply to post by masterp

Sorry, but the erasing of the which-path info has a direct relationship to the pattern on the screen, even if the which-path info is erased after the experiment.

Tell me something I haven't been saying the whole thread. Tell me why that is. There is only one explanation.

It's easy: the outcome is connected to the parameters in the quantum world, even if we do not see it any more. If we change the parameters, the outcome changes.

That is a description, not an explanation. Also the parameters in the physical process are not changed.

It is because the action of 'observing' is initiated by the experimenter.

Now you are getting somewhere.

The experimenter could also be a device. i.e. a device could erase the which-path info. The outcome would be the same, i.e. the non-interference pattern will be replaced with the interference one.

Proof, links to experiments set up that way? Still doesn't explain how a past result changes to fit the info known to the experimenter in the present.

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Actually no, if the data was kept but no one ever observed that data, the interference pattern would be displayed.

I say no, but let's give you the benefit of the doubt. Where do you derive the above from?

Originally posted by ChaoticOrderNo, it means 'consciousness sees'. Please consider this quote:

The act of measuring a particle with a photon imparts the photon with the particles information which comes back to the measuring device and is then transferred onto electrons which move through the device and allow an image to appear on the screen

Wrong. They are not "measuring a particle with a photon"... they are "measuring the photon to get information about the particle". This is a crucial difference. Most skeptics would claim that measuring the electron interferes with it because the photons used to measure the electron interfere with the electron. However, this line of reasoning is absurd because a camera does not shoot photons, it simply measures photons which are already there. Whether you stick a camera next to the slits or not, that electron is still going to be affected by photons. Photons are already buzzing about all over the place. The process of measuring some of those photons does not change the experiment at all imo, it simply gathers information about the experiment, information which was always there. So even without this new experiment presented by the OP (which is amazing btw), it's still possible to prove the electron was affected by the observer.

Oh no. The observation part is done with a mechanical device which polarizes the incoming photon and produces another one. Please read the experiment's description, it is spelled clearly. This polarization is the act of "observing", not us humans viewing the results on the screen.

Originally posted by ChaoticOrderAre you are saying that the information obtained from the experiment is still entangled in some way with the electron from the experiment, and that observing this data changes the state of the electron in the past. So you are saying there's an entanglement linked through time and observing the data causes an effect which ripples through time?

Indeed, that is exactly what I mean: the information obtained from the experiment is still entangled with the electron from the experiment. Erasing that information sends a signal back in time which changes the non-interference pattern to the interference once, and hence the outcome changes in the presence.

Originally posted by ChaoticOrderEven if that were the case, there's no valid reason for why observing that data should be any different from locking it away forever. It still implies that consciously observing the data causes an effect which ripples through time merely by looking at the data. And looking at that data does not have to involve any particle interaction other than looking at a computer screen. So you would be suggesting the photons from that screen link back to the photons measured by the camera, which link back to an interaction with the electron. Please explain yourself more clearly if I'm wrong about this.

"Observing" does not mean "human looking at the data". Please. The linking between consciousness and the experiment is ad hoc, not supported by any of the experimental data.

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by masterp

 

Sorry, but the erasing of the which-path info has a direct relationship to the pattern on the screen, even if the which-path info is erased after the experiment.

Tell me something I haven't been saying the whole thread. Tell me why that is. There is only one explanation.

It's easy: the outcome is connected to the parameters in the quantum world, even if we do not see it any more. If we change the parameters, the outcome changes.

That is a description, not an explanation. Also the parameters in the physical process are not changed.

It is because the action of 'observing' is initiated by the experimenter.

Now you are getting somewhere.

The experimenter could also be a device. i.e. a device could erase the which-path info. The outcome would be the same, i.e. the non-interference pattern will be replaced with the interference one.

Proof, links to experiments set up that way? Still doesn't explain how a past result changes to fit the info known to the experimenter in the present.

Easy: time travel to the past. A signal is sent back in time which changes the timeline, so the present is changed.

EDIT:

In this experiment:

en.wikipedia.org...

The which-path information is erased mechanically.

Nice OP!

I am off to work but will be back in a few hours. This link (if read in its entirety) will offer a lot of insight regarding particles and Consciousness. LOVE IT!

www.sufimessage.com...

Vibrations turn to atoms and atoms generate what we call life; thus it happens that their grouping, by the power of nature's affinity, forms a living entity. And as the breath manifests through the form so the body becomes conscious. In one individual there are many fine and small beings hidden: in his blood, in his brain cells, in his skin, and in all planes of his existence.

reply to post by masterp


Why would it do that if wich path information is not available? What would it matter to the quantum world if wich path info is available? Why would it change the timeline when time doesn't exist in QP. Time is a function of human perception. You just debunked yourself.

It would only be significant if it is related to the consciousness of the experimenter. You are making increasingly more illogical statements to avoid the explanation staring us right in the face.

Your prerogative.

Originally posted by MamaJ
Nice OP!

I am off to work but will be back in a few hours. This link (if read in its entirety) will offer a lot of insight regarding particles and Consciousness. LOVE IT!

www.sufimessage.com...

Vibrations turn to atoms and atoms generate what we call life; thus it happens that their grouping, by the power of nature's affinity, forms a living entity. And as the breath manifests through the form so the body becomes conscious. In one individual there are many fine and small beings hidden: in his blood, in his brain cells, in his skin, and in all planes of his existence.

Consciousness has nothing to do with the outcome of the experiment.

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by masterp

 

Why would it do that if wich path information is not available? What would it matter to the quantum world if wich path info is available? Why would it change the timeline when time doesn't exist in QP. Time is a function of human perception. You just debunked yourself.

It would only be significant if it is related to the consciousness of the experimenter. You are making increasingly more illogical statements to avoid the explanation staring us right in the face.

Your prerogative.

It would change the timeline because one of the physical parameters is changed.

Your question, "why this happens", is simple: that's how nature works. It has nothing to do with consciousness.

Why does a planet billions of light years away rotate around its star? not because we humans are here, of course.

Finally, time is not a human perception. Time is a dimension,affected by gravity, and proven by the atomic clock experiment used to prove special relativity.

reply to post by masterp

In this experiment: en.wikipedia.org...

That is one of the exp. I've been refering to the whole time.

Off course it is setup with a "device"' that 'erases" the wich path info. But the findings are still checked by a human.

Further proof that you are not getting this. How else do you think the info was erased? By burning a piece of paper with the info on it?

It would change the timeline because one of the physical parameters is changed.

What would that be?

Your question, "why this happens", is simple: that's how nature works. It has nothing to do with consciousness.

Again not an answer or explanation. Fallacy.

Finally, time is not a human perception. Time is a dimension,affected by gravity, and proven by the atomic clock experiment used to prove special relativity.

To use your own tactics, gravity doesn't exist cause it can't be measured. Links please to the proven exp. that proves time exist outside of human perception.

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by masterp

 

In this experiment: en.wikipedia.org...

That is one of the exp. I've been refering to the whole time.

Off course it is setup with a "device"' that 'erases" the wich path info. But the findings are still checked by a human.

Further proof that you are not getting this. How else do you think the info was erased? By burning a piece of paper with the info on it?

edit on 25-4-2012 by RandomEsotericScreenname because: (no reason given)

The pattern changes from non-interference to interference as soon as the mechanical detectors erase the which-path information, not when humans go to check the results.

So you actually think that the pattern changes from non-interference to interference when a human checks the screen?

reply to post by masterp

The observation part is done with a mechanical device which polarizes the incoming photon and produces another one.

Ok, fair enough, I can see how that would work.

Indeed, that is exactly what I mean: the information obtained from the experiment is still entangled with the electron from the experiment. Erasing that information sends a signal back in time which changes the non-interference pattern to the interference once, and hence the outcome changes in the presence.

Ok, I'm glad I understood you properly. However, let me ask you this. What if the data was displayed on a screen but no one was there to observe it. What if the light from that screen was then captured by another camera and 'polarized'. According to you, interaction with that data sends a signal back in time, so logically that process should send a signal back in time and change the result of the experiment. However, I am willing to bet you the experiment would not change. You could encrypt the data, send it around the world via the internet, convert the data to sound or light... but if no one ever actually observed that data it wouldn't make a difference to the experiment.

This is obvious because once the data from the original experiment is captured by the camera, it changes nothing about the experiment... not UNTIL the data is deleted or observed by a consciousness, they are the only two process known the alter the state of the original experiment. That is direct proof that the polarization does nothing, it is direct proof that no matter what you do to the data (outside of deleting or observing it), it has not effect on the original experiment. It's a purely informational process, not a physical one. That is clear imo. It all comes down to whether a conscious observer sees the data or doesn't see the data.

reply to post by masterp


It's not about directly checking, it's about being available.

And yes in this case it is,

The delayed choice quantum eraser, allows the decision whether to measure or destroy the "which path" information to be delayed until after the entangled particle partner (the one going through the slits) has either interfered with itself or not. Doing so appears to have the bizarre effect of causing the outcome of an event after the event has already occurred. In other words, something that happens at time t apparently reaches back to some time t - 1 and acts as a determining causal factor at that earlier time. However, the interference pattern can only be seen retroactively once the idler photons have already been detected and the experimenter has obtained information about them, with the interference pattern being seen when the experimenter looks at particular subsets of signal photons that were matched with idlers that went to particular detectors.

The pattern changes from non-interference to interference as soon as the mechanical detectors erase the which-path information, not when humans go to check the results.

They don't really erase, they make it so that it is not determinable wich path it took. There is no extra manipulation compared to the first detection in doing so, that could interfere and restore the wave function, it's the availability that counts.

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Ok, I'm glad I understood you properly. However, let me ask you this. What if the data was displayed on a screen but no one was there to observe it. What if the light from that screen was then captured by another camera and 'polarized'. According to you, interaction with that data sends a signal back in time, so logically that process should send a signal back in time and change the result of the experiment. However, I am willing to bet you the experiment would not change. You could encrypt the data, send it around the world via the internet, convert the data to sound or light... but if no one ever actually observed that data it wouldn't make a difference to the experiment.

This is obvious because once the data from the original experiment is captured by the camera, it changes nothing about the experiment... not UNTIL the data is deleted or observed by a consciousness, they are the only two process known the alter the state of the original experiment. That is direct proof that the polarization does nothing, it is direct proof that no matter what you do to the data (outside of deleting or observing it), it has not effect on the original experiment. It's a purely informational process, not a physical one. That is clear imo. It all comes down to whether a conscious observer sees the data or doesn't see the data.

edit on 25-4-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)

No. The interference pattern appears as soon as the mechanical devices erase the which-path info. It is spelled clearly in the experiment.

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by masterp

 

It's not about directly checking, it's about being available.

And yes in this case it is,

The delayed choice quantum eraser, allows the decision whether to measure or destroy the "which path" information to be delayed until after the entangled particle partner (the one going through the slits) has either interfered with itself or not. Doing so appears to have the bizarre effect of causing the outcome of an event after the event has already occurred. In other words, something that happens at time t apparently reaches back to some time t - 1 and acts as a determining causal factor at that earlier time. However, the interference pattern can only be seen retroactively once the idler photons have already been detected and the experimenter has obtained information about them, with the interference pattern being seen when the experimenter looks at particular subsets of signal photons that were matched with idlers that went to particular detectors.

The above does not mean the interference pattern appears only if the experimenter looks at the result.

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
They don't really erase, they make it so that it is not determinable wich path it took. There is no extra manipulation compared to the first detection in doing so, that could interfere and restore the wave function, it's the availability that counts.

edit on 25-4-2012 by RandomEsotericScreenname because: (no reason given)

Yes, that's what they mean by 'erase'.

reply to post by masterp


Yes because the info is not available anymore. You keep going on about mechanical devices like it proves something. Off course they use mechanical devices, how else would they check, with the naked eye?

The above does not mean the interference pattern appears only if the experimenter looks at the result.

That is a logical fallacy, if no human looks in whatever way, noone will know what the pattern looks like. You can't say that.

reply to post by masterp

No. The interference pattern appears as soon as the mechanical devices erase the which-path info. It is spelled clearly in the experiment.

What? How does that even make sense, where does the experiment say that? It says that the result changes in front of their eyes as if it were magical? How can the result change after it has already happened? The initial result depends on future events. If the data is collected and then deleted in the future, then there will be an interference pattern as normal. However, if the data is collected and then observed by someone the INITIAL result will be a non-interference pattern. I was interpreting your theory to mean the initial result is depend on future interactions with the data, interactions which go beyond simple observation or non-observation.

Originally posted by RandomEsotericScreenname
reply to post by masterp

 

Yes because the info is not available anymore. You keep going on about mechanical devices like it proves something. Off course they use mechanical devices, how else would they check, with the naked eye?

The above does not mean the interference pattern appears only if the experimenter looks at the result.

That is a logical fallacy, if no human looks in whatever way, noone will know what the pattern looks like. You can't say that.

edit on 25-4-2012 by RandomEsotericScreenname because: (no reason given)

No, it's not a logical fallacy. Things happen when we don't look.

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by masterp

 

No. The interference pattern appears as soon as the mechanical devices erase the which-path info. It is spelled clearly in the experiment.

What? How does that even make sense, where does the experiment say that? It says that the result changes in front of their eyes as if it were magical? How can the result change after it has already happened? The initial result depends on future events. If the data is collected and then deleted in the future, then there will be an interference pattern as normal. However, if the data is collected and then observed by someone the INITIAL result will be a non-interference pattern. I was interpreting your theory to mean the initial result is depend on future interactions with the data, interactions which go beyond simple observation or non-observation.

I suggest you carefully reread the delayed experiment's description in Wikipedia:

en.wikipedia.org...

The flow of events is:

1) the experiment is executed.
2) the experiment finishes.
3) the non-interference pattern appears on the screen.
4) the which-path info is erased.
5) the interference pattern appears on the screen.

In other words, an event that happens after another event affects that event.

reply to post by RandomEsotericScreenname

It's not about directly checking, it's about being available.

I would beg to differ. It is about checking. I'm willing to bet the deleted information could be restored through advanced techniques. Nothing is really entirely deleted, it's possible to reverse the deletion process. The fact the data exists means nothing. If you were to restore the data then look at it the pattern would change - but it wouldn't change when you deleted the data because it would know you're going to restore it. The photons which interacted with the electron in the beginning hold data from the experiment, there's no technical difference to capturing those photons or letting them go about their business. The data still exists in both cases. That is why I believe keeping the data for an infinite amount of time (without looking at it) would be the same as deleting it. What matters is the direct conscious observation of that data. Knowing which path the electron really took causes the wave function to collapse and give the electrons position a finite measurable value.