Wrong. To observe, you need the light on.
If the light is on, whether or not you observe it, there is no interference pattern.
If the light is off, whether or not you are watching, there is one.
Your video got this badly wrong.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Question about Multi-Verse / Many-Worlds Theory
- Thread starter dybmh
- Start date
Wrong. To observe, you need the light on.
If the light is on, whether or not you observe it, there is no interference pattern.
If the light is off, whether or not you are watching, there is one.
Your video got this badly wrong.
Have you watched the video? They are not changing the light on/off state when the observer is added. But still results change.
Your video got this wrong.
Watch the Feynman video. He talks about this extensively between about 33 minutes and 39 minutes. In fact, the whole lecture is on the double slit experiment.
BTW, Feynman was a Nobel Prize winning physicist who specialized in quantum theory (one of the people who formulated QED).
Last edited:
Please, really? All those smart people not understanding what Polymath understands, I'm sure.
I think you resisting as reaction to not liking the implications of consciousness is perhaps the more likely take-away here.
No, it is that your video got it wrong.
Once again, don't believe me. Watch the video of the Nobel prize winning physicist who goes over exactly this point.
BTW, the movie from which this video came, 'What the Bleep Do We Know' is absolutely awful. At one point, my (physicist) girlfriend and I (and I have taken, and passed the first time, the PhD quals in physics) watched it and counted the mistakes and factual inaccuracies in it.
We got about 15 minute in and gave up because there were too many.
That movie is a perfect example of the garbage that is presented about quantum mechanics. It is, in no way, authoritative on what it described.
We got about 15 minute in and gave up because there were too many.
That movie is a perfect example of the garbage that is presented about quantum mechanics. It is, in no way, authoritative on what it described.
You mean the people that did the experiment don't know the procedures they followed?
They are just telling us what they did and what happened. How could they get that part wrong.
The video is NOT from people who did the experiment! They aren't even scientists!
If you want to know about the *real* experiments, watch the Feynman video.
This is, by the way, very well-known material in physics. There isn't even any debate about it *in physics*. It isn't the consciousness that affects the interference pattern. it is the light that is used to detect the 'which-slit' information about the electron.
If I understand properly, Multi-verse and Many-Worlds theory hinges on unobserved quantum particle behavior.
If this is correct, why is unobserved particle behavior relevant for us? We're not quantum sized particles, and even if we were, as soon as anyone of us observes anything... the quantum behavior collapses? The net result is null? And therefore there is only 1 universe, 1 reality, right?
Actually the multi-verse and/or the many worlds (?) is not necessarily based on only the known behavior of Quantum particles, but based on Quantum Mechanics and what is known of the physics of our universe, Quantum particle behavior is not observed, but it is consistently researched and understood in physics. I started a thread on the advances of Quantum Mechanics and Quantum behavior and nature of Quantum particles. I may cite some of the recent research here again, but Quantum Mechanics
The nature of Quantum Mechanics and Quantum particles is not as mysterious as once perceived.