Recent content by ChadGPT

I agree that it does not seem to be possible using human beings, but I find the arguments that one could use quantum computers and advanced AI to perform the experiment convincing. Quantum computers already use methods to perfectly isolate systems in order to prevent decoherence, so that part...

Okay then, that would explain why they are saying this is a no-go for assumptions like "Absoluteness of Events (AoE)". If Particle A is measured by Friend A to be "spin up", then assuming that AoE is true, this should mean this is an objective fact about the particle that should be true for all...

For clarification, here are some diagrams of how the EWFS experiment is setup in the Cavalcanti version:

Thank you for your reply, that helps clarify a few things. I think I wasn't clear the way I worded the final question though. I didn't mean to suggest that Friend A and Friend B measure the same particle. In the EWFS, Friend A and Friend B are in two space-like separated labs, which each contain...

Brukner's Original Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.05255 Brukner's second paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.00749 Cavalcanti's Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.05607

Brukner, Renner, and Cavalcanti recently won the Paul Ehrenfest award for their work deriving new no-go theorems involving an Extended Wigner's Friend Scenario, but I'm having trouble understanding certain aspects of how this thought experiment works. I'm trying to understand it conceptually...

The "consciousness causes collapse" hypothesis logically follows from the "consciousness causes collapse" interpretation. Given that a "consciousness causes collapse" interpretation exists, and given that the interpretation entails the hypothesis, I have therefore stated what I have stated in...

I mean you can just look at all the material out there that proposes to refute the claims of the "consciousness causes collapse" interpretation: http://www.danko-nikolic.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Yu-and-Nikolic-Qm-and-consciousness-Annalen-Physik.pdf Such refutations agree with me that...

Okay, thank you all for your help. "Von Neumann-Wigner Interpretation" is just a way of denoting "conscious causes collapse." Come up with a different name if you like, but regardless there is an interpretation of QM that makes this claim. I don't think it matters what you call it, and I don't...

Hyperbole.

Thanks fellas, I have two more questions and then I think I'm tapped out: 1) Why isn't an absorber considered an eraser? Is it theoretically possible to recover which-path information from an absorber in some way that is not possible using a diagonal polarizer as an eraser? For instance, the...

Consider a double slit experiment with detectors at each slit but which have no memory of their own, and which each relay the w-w information to a recording device that stores the information in a readable way to a conscious observer. Now run the experiment with the detectors on and the...

There does seem to be a contradiction though. Consider a double slit experiment with detectors at each slit but which have no memory of their own, and relay the w-w information to a recording device that stores the information in a readable way to a conscious observer. Now run the experiment...

Thank you everyone for your replies, this is clearing up a lot for me now. Please leave the thread open for a little while longer as I digest these answers and see if I have any more questions.

Thank you for your responses @PeterDonis and @DrChinese, I think this conversation is heading in a healthy direction now. It is just commonly known as the "consciousness causes collapse" interpretation. There are many sources...