- #1
Loren Booda
- 3,125
- 4
What experiment has demonstrated the physicality of the observer itself? Either all objects are potential observers, or none are.
Is the observer a physical entity?
- Thread starter Loren Booda
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Physical
In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of an "observer" and its different definitions in various theories. The question is raised whether any object, including quantum objects, can be considered a true "observer" in a physical sense. The potential subjectivity and limitations of such an experiment are also discussed.
- #2
Danger
Gold Member
- 9,799
- 253
Wow, cool question! I wouldn't think that such a thing can be done. The observer would have to be his/her own subject of observation, so there could never be repeatablility by another researcher. Therefore, no verification of the results. It would be a totally subjective observation, subject to error based upon the researcher's perspective. I think... a little too deep for me, but I suspect that quantum mechanical effects would rule it out. 
- #3
pmb_phy
- 2,952
- 1
The term "observer" has a different meaning in different theories. In relativity an observer is synonymous with a coordinate system. In quantum theory an observer is something else altogether (I don't recall the definition off-hand).Loren Booda said:
Pete
- #4
Loren Booda
- 3,125
- 4
Good point, Pete.
How many definitions of observers do you all know, and how might they apply to the question at hand?
How many definitions of observers do you all know, and how might they apply to the question at hand?
- #5
HallsofIvy
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
- 42,989
- 975
Loren, I don't know about you, but I am definitely physical!
- #6
- 13,349
- 3,122
Pete,you mean "reference system"...
Daniel.
Daniel.
- #7
gerben
- 511
- 1
Loren Booda said:
Has the physicality of anything been demonstrated?
The question can be asked for any object, like:
Has the physicality of the sun been demonstrated?
Has the physicality of HallsofIvy been demonstrated?
To answer the question one needs to know what kind of action is meant by "demonstrating physicality".
- #8
- 13,349
- 3,122
Judging by Dubito,ergo cogito;cogito,ergo sum ,i'd say that the mere attempt of yours to prove you exist is a good enough proof,because if u hadn't existed,you'd not be able to attempt a proof...
Daniel.
Daniel.
- #9
Picklehead
- 42
- 0
Could quantum objects be considered the only true 'observers' in the physical sense?
- #10
Tournesol
- 804
- 0
What other objects are there ?
- #11
HallsofIvy
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
- 42,989
- 975
How about if HallsofIvy punches you in the nose? Would that prove he is physical.
(And, hey, I just had a physical! That proves I'm physical!)
(And, hey, I just had a physical! That proves I'm physical!)
- #12
Loren Booda
- 3,125
- 4
Tournesol,
As the number of quantum objects becomes large, their collective entity is considered classical in nature by the correspondence principle. (A rule which seems to be violated by very low temperature condensates?)
HallsofIvy,
I once calculated the Planck momentum (the maximum transferrable by a single quantum) to be approximately the kick of a mule!
As the number of quantum objects becomes large, their collective entity is considered classical in nature by the correspondence principle. (A rule which seems to be violated by very low temperature condensates?)
HallsofIvy,
I once calculated the Planck momentum (the maximum transferrable by a single quantum) to be approximately the kick of a mule!
- #13
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 8,142
- 1,756
In the QM sense this sounds to me like a re-statement of The Measurement Problem.
Btw, I have put together some interesting links on TMP and Consciousness at the bottom of the first page here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=58374
1. What is meant by "observers" in the context of this question?
"Observers" refers to conscious beings who are able to perceive and interpret their surroundings through their senses.
2. Are observers considered physical entities?
This is a debated topic in the scientific community. Some argue that observers are purely physical in nature, while others argue that consciousness is a non-physical aspect of the human experience.
3. How does quantum mechanics relate to the question of observers being physical?
Quantum mechanics, specifically the principle of superposition, suggests that particles can exist in multiple states simultaneously until they are observed. This raises the question of whether the act of observation is what causes a particle's wave function to collapse into a single state, and if so, does this mean that observers play a physical role in the behavior of particles?
4. Can non-human entities, such as animals or machines, be considered observers?
This is a complex question with no definitive answer. Some argue that only conscious beings with self-awareness can be considered observers, while others believe that any entity with the ability to perceive and interact with its environment can be classified as an observer.
5. How does the concept of observers being physical impact our understanding of reality?
If observers are indeed physical entities, it could have significant implications for our understanding of the world and our place in it. It could also challenge traditional views of determinism and free will, as the actions of observers could potentially influence the behavior of particles and events in the physical world.
Similar threads
-
General Discussion
-
Quantum Physics
-
General Discussion
-
General Discussion
-
General Discussion
-
Cosmology
-
General Discussion
-
General Discussion