The Nature of Knowledge in Quantum Mechanics

  • Thread starter Thread starter kebugcheck
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qm
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the role of observation in quantum mechanics (QM) and whether human observers hold any special significance compared to non-sentient entities like rocks. It emphasizes that in QM, "observation" refers to interactions between systems and their environments, not implying any unique status for conscious beings. The conversation critiques popular science interpretations of QM, advocating for a deeper understanding through rigorous study of the physics and mathematics involved. Participants express confusion over the apparent non-determinism at the microscopic level and question the transition from quantum to classical mechanics, particularly regarding the nature of observation. Overall, the dialogue highlights the complexities and unresolved issues within QM, particularly concerning the measurement problem and interpretations of the theory.
  • #31
Maui said:
When people say knowledge, they always mean knowledge of the observer as there is no other knowledge.

Now Dr Chinese clarified what he meant I am cool with it. But, as a point of semantics, I personally do not agree with your view of 'knowledge'. IMHO knowledge exists once it is recorded - not when an 'observer' knows about it. But this is a philosophical issue not of any real value IMHO - I simply mention it as something that's open to debate.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
80
Views
7K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 230 ·
8
Replies
230
Views
20K