Observing changes the outcome how can we observe?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Teo1
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the observer effect in quantum mechanics, emphasizing that the observer is inherently part of any observable event. It asserts that while the effects of observation are minimal and primarily significant at the quantum level, they have been extensively studied over the past 80 years. The conversation highlights the limitations of human perception and understanding, suggesting that the universe operates independently of observers, and that the observer effect may be more temporal than absolute. The dialogue also critiques simplistic interpretations of cosmology and the nature of observation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Quantum Mechanics principles
  • Understanding of the observer effect
  • Basic knowledge of cosmology
  • Familiarity with experimental physics methodologies
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of the observer effect in Quantum Mechanics
  • Study the various interpretations of Quantum Mechanics, including Copenhagen and Many-Worlds
  • Explore the relationship between observation and measurement in experimental physics
  • Investigate the philosophical implications of observation in cosmology
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, philosophers of science, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of quantum mechanics and the nature of observation in the universe.

Teo1
[SOLVED] Observing changes the outcome.. how can we observe?

Since it is now known that the observer is part of ANY observable event, don't we need to redo oh so many so called factual observations?

Is it even possible to observe something without the observer changing the outcome?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Teo1 said:
Since it is now known that the observer is part of ANY observable event, don't we need to redo oh so many so called factual observations?

No.

Is it even possible to observe something without the observer changing the outcome?

No. Since we understand this, and have for about 80 years, this had been taken into consideration. In fact the last 80 of physics have been filled with discussions and experiments designed to test and understand this fact.

It is important to realize that the effects of observing are very, very small, and are typically only significant at the quantum level. We are usually talking about the effects photons on other subatomic particles. There are a couple of schools of thought resutling from Quantum Mechanics that hint at deeper, macroscopic effects, that is effects for large objects, but this stuff is still highly theoretical and but one or two interpretations that compete with about a dozen other theories.
 
Last edited:
It is true that no observation of any kind can be made with any amount of accuracy, but for a more important reason than the effets of that observation.

We forget sometimes that we view the world with an imperfect tool, and will never even hope to fully comprehend anything we observe. Pidgeons can see geometrical patterns in light, and dolphins can change the frequency of their communications. Face it, we are not all knowing, and can never hope to be.
 
The universe evolved just fine without any observers [er, us in particular] for a very long time. The universe has also been kind enough to let us watch the video of how it all happened. The fact it is behaving in exactly the same way now as it did long before we even existed, suggests the observer effect is temporal, at best.
 
Chronos said:
The universe evolved just fine without any observers [er, us in particular] for a very long time. The universe has also been kind enough to let us watch the video of how it all happened. The fact it is behaving in exactly the same way now as it did long before we even existed, suggests the observer effect is temporal, at best.

How do you know all this? Our understanding of cosmology is based on our present day quantum theories, which are radiacally observational (at least in the most common interpretation). AFAIK the stupid creationist idea that the universe was created yesterday with all its properties, like CMB, and the records of all the scientific experiments all up to date to fool us, is logically undefeatable. Not that I'm proposing it, just suggesting that everything isn't as cut and dried as 19th century scientists believed.
 

Similar threads

Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 190 ·
7
Replies
190
Views
16K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
4K