Is Scale Related to Rate of Change in Quantum Mechanics?

[Fliption]

Originally posted by Royce
I've been away and busy for awhile and apologize for the late response. If I'm resurecting a better of dead thread I also apologize.
I wanted to tell both Eh and flipton theI found the book on Amazon and ordered it, should get it later this week.

Well, as far as I'm concerned this is not a dead thread. It seems Tiberius unloaded on all the new agers and then scrammed Because I have not agreed with what he is saying and yet this thread is sinking down the page

I think this topic should continue to be discussed and I think it should come up more often in other threads. It is apparent from this thread that few people understand it so maybe that's why it rarely gets mentioned.

If you run across some interesting things in that book and want to discuss them please start new threads on it. I am always interested and maybe we can get some others to participate. Depending on the nature of the question the thread may belong in either the physics forum or this one.

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Tiberius
I've seen this a lot in people's post on Quantum Mechanics and just to clarify this common misconception...

QUANTUM MECHANICS AND THE TALK ABOUT "OBSERVERS" AND "OBSERVATIONS" HAS NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH CONSCIOUSNESS OR LIFE OR LIVING THINGS "OBSERVING" THINGS.

In QM when they talk about observations collapsing wave functions, they are talking about devices that fire particles and measure the way they bounce back to measure the traits of OTHER particles. When this happens, those particles being fired into the system disturb that very system - that is ALL that is meant by "observation". It doesn't include or have anything to do with consciousness or anything mystical that people are always trying to attach to it. It simply means that when you fire a particle into another particle, it will disturb the particle being hit - basic common sense.

On the macro level wave functions are collapsed automatically by all of the particles bouncing into them. No consciousness affects any of this in the slightest and the universe would operate just as it does, even if you removed all life and consciousness from it.

People have taken that unfortunate choice of word "observation" and interpreted it to mean something to do with the awareness of conscious or intelligent beings, and it is simply a purely mechanical function having nothing to do with this. From this misinterpretation of the word "observation" they come up with all sorts of "mind over matter" silliness and claim that QM backs them up when it does nothing of the sort.

So, once and for all, let everyone here know that QM as a science has nothing to do with conscious beings or awareness.

This was explained on another thread and...I got it.

Tell me, did you come out of the womb with all the knowledge you have now? Or did you acquire it bit by bit?

This is how I learn compassion. Now, when I am tempted to put down lesser lights than mine, I'll remember how it felt when one who is better endowed between the ears than I attempted to discredit outright certain avenues of thought because of one misconception.

Thanks.

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Fliption
Well, as far as I'm concerned this is not a dead thread. It seems Tiberius unloaded on all the new agers and then scrammed Because I have not agreed with what he is saying and yet this thread is sinking down the page

I think this topic should continue to be discussed and I think it should come up more often in other threads. It is apparent from this thread that few people understand it so maybe that's why it rarely gets mentioned.

If you run across some interesting things in that book and want to discuss them please start new threads on it. I am always interested and maybe we can get some others to participate. Depending on the nature of the question the thread may belong in either the physics forum or this one.

Despite my reaction to the condescending tone of its orginator, I APPRECIATE this thread. I'm here to learn...and it will never be through MATH. I don't consider myself a "New Ager" and "metaphysics" is not a four-letter word. In fact -- as I have posted elsewhere -- it's quite RESPECTABLE according to "The American Heritage Dictionary":

METAPHYSICS: The branch of philosophy that systematically investigates the nature of first principles and problems of ultimate reality, including the study of being (ontology) and, often, the study of the structure of the universe (cosmology).

If my thinking leads me to conjecture that the Universe is conscious while another mind conjurs up "Superstrings"...well, that's part of the PROCESS of EXPLORING the POSSIBILITIES. And, who knows, in the end, we may BOTH be right!

COOPERATION has proven to be a more effective (and enlightened?) way than "territorialism" to conduct a society...or a relationship. Perhaps we -- the human race -- would make better progress in learning about the Universe if the left-brainers and the right-brainers would "make nice"...sharing info in each other's languages in the spirit of mutual support...and ADMIRATION.

Cause I sure as HECK admire left-brainers...even the smug ones.

..tho I find the humane ones -- like Tom -- more useful .

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Tom
And of course, it doesn't help matters when dimwits like Frijtof Capra write "literature" like Tao of Physics. People read that garbage and think they actually know quantum mechanics.

Oh well.

 

[Royce]

M. Gaspar,
Here all this time I thought Tiberius was chewing me out. Welcome to the QM Dimwit Club of PF. So far we have three self admitted members. I nominate Flipton for president.
I got the book but haven't had a chance to more than look at it. I thought it funny that it is written by Gribbin, one of my favorite authors who writes scientific books for us nonscientifists. AMoung his other books that I've read was "In Search of Schrodinger's Cat" which is where I got a lot of my information on QM from.
He is one of the pop-culture authors that Tiberius accused me of reading. Don't you love the irony of it.
But that usually what happens, to me any way. Everytime I pop off about something I usually end up with my foot in my mouth.

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Royce
M. Gaspar,
Here all this time I thought Tiberius was chewing me out. Welcome to the QM Dimwit Club of PF. So far we have three self admitted members. I nominate Flipton for president.
I got the book but haven't had a chance to more than look at it. I thought it funny that it is written by Gribbin, one of my favorite authors who writes scientific books for us nonscientifists. AMoung his other books that I've read was "In Search of Schrodinger's Cat" which is where I got a lot of my information on QM from.
He is one of the pop-culture authors that Tiberius accused me of reading. Don't you love the irony of it.
But that usually what happens, to me any way. Everytime I pop off about something I usually end up with my foot in my mouth.

Well, if there are three of us, I think we can bring him DOWN!

Someone, SUMMON TIBERIUS!

Listen : I can't remember who said it, but they said they wouldn't join a club that would have them as a member! The QM Dimwit Club certainly falls into that category for me.

When I saw "Clarification on QM" offered as a thread by Tiberius, I actually got excited (edit: well, "anticipatory", anyway). I was going to get some info from someone who knew beans. But then it took those beans and spit them in my eye ...whether he was aiming a "me" or not.

I've done some mentoring myself in my time, so I guess I was expecting content, generosity and encouragement.

Wrong again, Gaspar! Can't you get ANYTHING right?!

 

[M. Gaspar]

I'm on a roll...

I see that Tiberius is NOT a "PF Mentor" ...don't know why I thought he was (gee, that membership is looking better and better )

Anyway, back to the recommended -- and denigrated -- books!

 

[Royce]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar

Listen : I can't remember who said it, but they said they wouldn't join a club that would have them as a member! The QM Dimwit Club certainly falls into that category for me.

I think it was Mark Twain. I'm not much of a joiner either; but, in this instance I was volunteered. They only other club that I would like to join is the Procrastinators Club of America but I haven't gotten around to it yet, maybe after they have their first meeting I'll sign up.

When I saw "Clarification on QM" offered as a thread by Tiberius, I actually got excited (edit: well, "anticipatory", anyway). I was going to get some info from someone who knew beans. But then it took those beans and spit them in my eye ...whether he was aiming a "me" or not.

I've been shot down so many time here that I feel like a very inept WW I pilot. Some times it was, of course, justified and I had it coming. Other time it was just some one take pot shot at me. You are not the only one M. G. Everyone seems to be fair game around here at one time or another. Any way you have no choice in the matter you have been deligated as a founding member of the QDC of PF.

Between being assigned books to read and books I want to read and keeping up with all the posts I'm running out of time to sleep. Thank God I'm not this busy at work.

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Royce
I've been shot down so many time here that I feel like a very inept WW I pilot. Some times it was, of course, justified and I had it coming. Other time it was just some one take pot shot at me. You are not the only one M. G. Everyone seems to be fair game around here at one time or another. Any way you have no choice in the matter you have been deligated as a founding member of the QDC of PF.

Guess what: I'm over it already.

Must be the up-side of a short attention span!

Still, I would have preferred that Tiberius return to the scene of his crime ...ya know, man's inhumanity to dimwits? But I'm sure we'll catch up with each other down the road...and that I won't be playing road kill to his hit and run.

As to membership: OK, I accept...except that I've already been LEFT OUT of the acronym: shouldn't it be QMDC of PF? I'll work up a logo.

Meanwhile, I think we need to go elsewhere to get that "Clarification on QM" we were enticed here with.

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Tiberius
Yes - There is quite a lot more to QM that the tiny area I covered. I don't blame all the confusion on mystics. In fact, a lot of it is the fault of scientists. Many of them don't see a need in explaining things clearly to non-scientists (which is why people like Sagan are so important). In addition, the use of the word "observation" was a poor choice and they should have seen the confusion coming a mile a way. And lastly, there still are a lot of unanswered questions, which is why scientists are still employed. But I DO blame the mystics who have intentionally jumped on the "observation" word to support their wild claims in order to sell more books. I also blame those mystics who blindly follow those books and refuse to listen to people who try to clear it up.

I was re-reading this thread to "mine" any actual info contained therein on the subtleties of Quantum Mechanics. Fact is, I eschew "mystics" myself. However, on these threads, it seems to me, that there are more people here than not who are eager "to listen to people who try to clear" things up. And SOME of us might even have a contribution to make after we get the info in "our language".

My argument is not with your position regarding misinformation, nor even the fact that scientists themselves are often LOUSY COMMUNICATORS. My issue is with your attitude toward me and other right-brainers.

For instance, I've never heard Sagan say: "Hey, idiots! So you think you know something about science...?"

The Universe may or may not be conscious...but you'll have to concede there is consciousness "in" it. Thus, any cosmological theory that does NOT include the nature and evolution of consciousness is an INCOMPLETE THEORY.

My interest is not "woo woo". And my participation is not irrelevant.

 

[Royce]

Never thought of it that way. Here I thought a short attention span was a deficit. Learn somthing new every day!
I accept your suggested change and it has been entered into the minutes of the first meeting of QMDC of PF.

Seriously, I do think, along with Flipton, that Tiberius was over simplifying QM and just unloading on what he thought were a bunch or couple of New Agers. I'd never heard the term before this thread. My understanding of the obsever being a person or mind and a part of the experiment is not original with me nor anyone book or author. The outcome of the experiment does seem to be influenced by what the observer is looking for and trying to determine. Far great mind than mine have repeatedly said this and as Flipton asked then what about the many world theory that came out of the Copenhegen conference? I can understand that it may now be out dated speculation but it still has not been resolved to everyones satisfaction.
I don't know what our reading now; but, I do suggest "In Search for Schrodinger's Cat" by John Gribbon. He also wrote a sequel "In Search for Schrodinger's kittens as well as a number of other good books on science, physics and chosmology; easy to read and good primers for us nonscientists.

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Fliption
...I will say however, going back to the original topic of this thread, that I don't see how the idea that particles aren't like billiad balls allows what Tiberius was originally claiming. I contend that there is more to QM then Tiberius has stated. Rather than blame all the confusion on mystics, I think there should be a lot more discussion of QM in both the physics and the philosophy forum.

I've captured this shorter quote just to save on space. Please continue to share your interpretations.

But the real question is: why are YOU a charter member of QMDC? (No offense, Royce.)

Meanwhile, you and Royce have been added to my VERY SELECTIVE "Buddy" list...but you're not in "good company" because I'm adding Tiberius, too.

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Royce
Learn somthing new every day!

No. That's Altzheimers!

I accept your suggested change and it has been entered into the minutes of the first meeting of QMDC of PF.

You're making me smile, Royce...and you wouldn't like me when I smile... (Hulk reference: very highbrow. See? I DO belong!)

I don't know what our reading now; but, I do suggest "In Search for Schrodinger's Cat" by John Gribbon. He also wrote a sequel "In Search for Schrodinger's kittens as well as a number of other good books on science, physics and chosmology; easy to read and good primers for us nonscientists.

I don't know about YOU, but I feel as if I'm reading a book a day on these threads! And writing one, too!

I got to get a life.

 

[Royce]

I made him a charter member as was my right as the founder because he had the audacity to disagree with Tiberius. (We should quit picking on him.)

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Royce
I made him a charter member as was my right as the founder because he had the audacity to disagree with Tiberius. (We should quit picking on him.)

He's outa town (an assumption based on no posts since Friday!) so let us pick away! He'll swat us like flies when he returns!

I'm having too much fun. PM. Gotta go.

 

[Fliption]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
He's outa town (an assumption based on no posts since Friday!) so let us pick away! He'll swat us like flies when he returns!

SWAT! I am back and will now crush you like a bug!

Looks like you 2 have got this thread all figured out. It is certainly good to see that other people are reading about QM and have the same questions I do. It means I am not alone. It is also encouraging to me that you guys see this thread for what it truly is. It was certainly not a clarification on QM. It still could be if either Tiberius or some of the people who agreed with him initially would come in and discuss it. I have tried to explain why I think that Tiberius' "clarification" is misleading but no one has responded. I agree with you guys...looks like we may need to get this clarification elsewhere.

As for membership into this club... I will admit I belong. But I also would argue that everyone who posted in this thread ALSO belongs!
Unless of course a prerequisite to getting in the club is that you have to admit you are ignorant. Some people might not fit all the criteria then.

 

[Royce]

While ignorance is certainly a criteria, it is the addmission of ignorance and/or confusion and/or lack of understanding that is the primary requirement for membership in QMDC of PF! This of course eliminates Tiberius from membership as he, as well as others, are absolutely sure of everything and that everything has been absolutely PROVEN by science.

Yes, I'm being nasty. I hope Tiberius is out of town too or I'm really going to get swatted down, probably with a sledge hammer.
(We/I really have to stop picking on him.)

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Fliption
SWAT! I am back and will now crush you like a bug!

Wait a minute. I thought we were talking about Tiberius.

Why would you, Fliption, crush me -- and, of course, Royce -- like "bugs" when you're a bug, too? Maybe you're a BIGGER bug...but not as BIG as Tiberius!

And isn't he well-named? He just seems MONU MENTAL! .

Let's see if he's big enough to share what he knows -- or what he thinks he knows -- and "deliver the goods" on this thread.

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Royce
I hope Tiberius is out of town too or I'm really going to get swatted down, probably with a sledge hammer.
(We/I really have to stop picking on him.) [/B]

I'm not picking on him. I'm killing time until he returns.

And he WILL return.

But I agree with you: enough about Mr. T and more about QM .

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by Fliption
SWAT! I am back and will now crush you like a bug!

Looks like you 2 have got this thread all figured out. It is certainly good to see that other people are reading about QM and have the same questions I do. It means I am not alone. It is also encouraging to me that you guys see this thread for what it truly is. It was certainly not a clarification on QM. It still could be if either Tiberius or some of the people who agreed with him initially would come in and discuss it. I have tried to explain why I think that Tiberius' "clarification" is misleading but no one has responded. I agree with you guys...looks like we may need to get this clarification elsewhere.

Please explain again what it is that you disagree with, in Tiberius' post. It seemed perfectly sound to me.

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by Mentat
Please explain again what it is that you disagree with, in Tiberius' post. It seemed perfectly sound to me.

He hurt our feelings.

Scroll back.

 

[Mentat]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
He hurt our feelings.

Scroll back.

I was referring to why you disagreed with his explanation of QM. I am perfectly aware of his having inadvertantly insulted you, when talked about people who read books written by people who misunderstood QM.

 

[Fliption]

Originally posted by M. Gaspar
Wait a minute. I thought we were talking about Tiberius.

Why would you, Fliption, crush me --

I thought you were talking about me based on below



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Royce
I made him a charter member as was my right as the founder because he had the audacity to disagree with Tiberius. (We should quit picking on him.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He's outa town (an assumption based on no posts since Friday!) so let us pick away! He'll swat us like flies when he returns!

I'm having too much fun. PM. Gotta go.




When he said in parenthesis "we should quit picking on him", I thought he was talking about me. But I guess you could read it 2 ways

 

[Royce]

Mentat, to answer your question, There is more to wave functions than just probabily of position and momentum and from everything I've read the observer is a necessary and intragal part of any QM experiment. The pop culture authors I've been reading and quoting or at leasst paraphrasing are Gribbins, Feynman, and such others. We or at least I have never heard of New Agers before this thread. While he named no names we assumed that he was talking about MG and me as we were speculating on QM and consciousness and awareness.

 

[Fliption]

Originally posted by Mentat
I was referring to why you disagreed with his explanation of QM. I am perfectly aware of his having inadvertantly insulted you, when talked about people who read books written by people who misunderstood QM.

Mentat, I would recommend you go back and read my earlier posts. I think it's pretty clear where there may be problems with what he is saying. It appears he has over simplified a theory that many respected scientists have admitted they are stumped on. It appears to me that if his explanation is true then QM is nothing but an extension of classical physics. I am certainly open to other views on it as I have said that this topic is one that I have many questions about. But in this case I would have to reconcile in my mind the view that Tiberius has presented with just about everything else I have read on the topic.

 

[Les Sleeth]

Just speaking for myself, I want to apologize to Tiberius. After seeing some of the things that have been said, I feel I might have been responsible for inspiring a less than "welcome" attitude here.

I tried to joke about it in an another post (which I deleted), but I think I need to say it outright and upfront. Tiberius . . . welcome. I hope you stick around.

 

[M. Gaspar]

Originally posted by LW Sleeth
Just speaking for myself, I want to apologize to Tiberius. After seeing some of the things that have been said, I feel I might have been responsible for inspiring a less than "welcome" attitude here.

I tried to joke about it in an another post (which I deleted), but I think I need to say it outright and upfront. Tiberius . . . welcome. I hope you stick around.

Surprisingly, I feel the same way.

 

[Royce]

I agree, Les. We have been chatting and amusing ourselves to keep this thread alive in hopes that Tiberius or anyone else would come in and educate us or at least attempt to clarify it for us. Admittedly at first our feeling were hurt, our feathers ruffled, whatever and we were getting even; but, that has long since passed. We await the teacher to come.

I questioned reviving this thread and thought it maight have been better to let it die. I'm beginning to think that is the case.

Having said that I must admit that we have had fun, even if it was at Tiberius's expense and I've made a couple of new friends so all was not wasted.

 

[Fliption]

Hmmm well I hope it isn't perceived that I have displayed an unproductive attitude in this thread. It certainly wasn't my intent. Hence I feel no need for atonement. I'm a bit dissapointed that it appears I will have to continue to wait to have a good QM discussion in these forums.

I have not given up on it though. While I don't think it was Tiberius' intent to have an open discussion with this thread, that doesn't mean that he/she isn't willing to have one in another thread. Or anyone else that particpated here for that matter. I was hoping to prod them into that in this thread, but it may be that everyone is just too busy at the moment to respond with thoughtful input. I definitely understand that!

 

[Eh]

Flipton,

I'm just curious as to what specifically you've read from physicists that throws confusion over the issue? They are notorious for being sloppy with the english language, but I haven't seen any that say consciousness is a necessary property of an "observer". So is there anything particular?