Physicists Just Found a New Quantum Paradox That Casts Doubt on a Pillar of Reality

[Cooky]

I'm not quite understanding... Is the author actually attempting to say that the presence of a human being, with eyes and a calculable mind, actually interferes with the nature of particles by his viewing it?

...Are they suggesting that aiming a telescope into space can effect something very far away, just by viewing it?

Physicists Just Found a New Quantum Paradox That Casts Doubt on a Pillar of Reality

 

[sayak83]

I'm not quite understanding... Is the author actually attempting to say that the presence of a human being, with eyes and a calculable mind, actually interferes with the nature of particles by his viewing it?

...Are they suggesting that aiming a telescope into space can effect something very far away, just by viewing it?

Physicists Just Found a New Quantum Paradox That Casts Doubt on a Pillar of Reality

No. The observers are photons in the experiment, not human beings.

 

[sayak83]

I'm not quite understanding... Is the author actually attempting to say that the presence of a human being, with eyes and a calculable mind, actually interferes with the nature of particles by his viewing it?

...Are they suggesting that aiming a telescope into space can effect something very far away, just by viewing it?

Physicists Just Found a New Quantum Paradox That Casts Doubt on a Pillar of Reality

Main paper is this,
Experimental test of local observer independence
In quantum mechanics, an "observer" is any quantum system (may be a photon or an electron) that changes in a predictable manner while interacting with another quantum system (the one being observed). An act of observation means that the interaction has happened and the state of the "observer" has changed as a result of this. Quantum mechanics does not require a human or any conscious entity whatsoever to be the observer.

 

[Rizdek]

I'm not quite understanding... Is the author actually attempting to say that the presence of a human being, with eyes and a calculable mind, actually interferes with the nature of particles by his viewing it?

...Are they suggesting that aiming a telescope into space can effect something very far away, just by viewing it?

Physicists Just Found a New Quantum Paradox That Casts Doubt on a Pillar of Reality

Think of it this way. Say a wildlife biologist wants to study the habits of deer. How does she go about it? Somehow, she has to gather info of their movements and actions. But the very action of studying them can affect their actions so that she may not be seeing what they do WITHOUT her being there or without her equipment hidden along a trail or some drone swooping overhead. Likewise, a physicist needs to use some gadget to study some quantum action or particle. The gadget may emit some sort of particle/energy that, when it bounces off the particle, they're hoping it will tell them something about that particle. But the tool they are using to study it has its own impacts on the particle and they're so small that it might actually cause them to behave differently than if the physicist had not been studying it. I don't think they suspect that observing photons from distant stars will affect those stars. Even if they aim lasers at the moon to get precise measurements, those lasers have such little energy that there is probably no fear that they'll somehow impact the motion of the moon.

 

[George-ananda]

I'm not quite understanding... Is the author actually attempting to say that the presence of a human being, with eyes and a calculable mind, actually interferes with the nature of particles by his viewing it?

Many great scientists of the post-materialist movement are saying things just like that. We assume the physical world is just following laws as that is what we see at the macroscopic level.

Quantum Mechanics is in the end suggesting reality is effected by consciousness. These things seems too revolutionary for many and I see many attempts to claim consciousness is not a player.

Some philosophical traditions like Advaita (non-dual Hinduism) hold that all of reality is a creation of Cosmic Consciousness (Brahman). Quantum Mechanics is a hint that there is indeed something mysterious to Consciousness.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Consciousness for you, and existence of 'physical energy' in these various forms for me. But reality is different from the perceived. Science will come around to what Hindu philosophies said ages ago.

"Sages who searched with their heart's thought discovered the existent's kinship in the non-existent."
Rig Veda: Rig-Veda, Book 10: HYMN CXXIX. Creation. (Nasadiya Sukta)

 

[exchemist]

Many great scientists of the post-materialist movement are saying things just like that. We assume the physical world is just following laws as that is what we see at the macroscopic level.

Quantum Mechanics is in the end suggesting reality is effected by consciousness. These things seems too revolutionary for many and I see many attempts to claim consciousness is not a player.

Some philosophical traditions like Advaita (non-dual Hinduism) hold that all of reality is a creation of Cosmic Consciousness (Brahman). Quantum Mechanics is a hint that there is indeed something mysterious to Consciousness.

QM makes no such suggestion, as @sayak83 points out in post 3.

Kindly refrain from misrepresenting science.

 

[WalterTrull]

I'm not quite understanding... Is the author actually attempting to say that the presence of a human being, with eyes and a calculable mind, actually interferes with the nature of particles by his viewing it?

...Are they suggesting that aiming a telescope into space can effect something very far away, just by viewing it?

Physicists Just Found a New Quantum Paradox That Casts Doubt on a Pillar of Reality

Take a peek at some Richard Conn Henry

 

[Brickjectivity]

I'm not quite understanding... Is the author actually attempting to say that the presence of a human being, with eyes and a calculable mind, actually interferes with the nature of particles by his viewing it?

...Are they suggesting that aiming a telescope into space can effect something very far away, just by viewing it?

Physicists Just Found a New Quantum Paradox That Casts Doubt on a Pillar of Reality

The most relevant bit is:
"We showed that if this were the case, there would be limits to the correlations Alice and Bob could expect to see between their results. We also showed that quantum mechanics predicts Alice and Bob will see correlations that go beyond those limits."

The experiment tries to entangle people through a single entangled photon pair. The article claims QM theory predicts the two people ought to manifest some sort of entangled quality. I don't know if QM goes that far or not. Its a theory which deals with particle so tiny that the velocity and position cannot be known simultaneously, and with larger objects Physicists use classical Physical models not quantum models. At the end the article admits that no conclusion could be reached.

 

[ChristineM]

I'm not quite understanding... Is the author actually attempting to say that the presence of a human being, with eyes and a calculable mind, actually interferes with the nature of particles by his viewing it?

...Are they suggesting that aiming a telescope into space can effect something very far away, just by viewing it?

Physicists Just Found a New Quantum Paradox That Casts Doubt on a Pillar of Reality

I'm wondering where they found their quantum people for this experiment?

 

[George-ananda]

QM makes no such suggestion, as @sayak83 points out in post 3.

Kindly refrain from misrepresenting science.

I think you are the one misrepresenting science in this case.

As I said some will not accept consciousness affecting reality.

 

[shunyadragon]

I'm not quite understanding... Is the author actually attempting to say that the presence of a human being, with eyes and a calculable mind, actually interferes with the nature of particles by his viewing it?

...Are they suggesting that aiming a telescope into space can effect something very far away, just by viewing it?

Physicists Just Found a New Quantum Paradox That Casts Doubt on a Pillar of Reality

I may look into it further, but based on this third hand layman's article I see nothing new. Actually no new paradox nor doubts cast. It does not cast doubt based on peer reviewed research with evidence. It is subjective conjecture as to what a paradox is in science. At best it is 'arguing from ignorance' based on maybe unknowns in Quantum Mechanics.

If you want to pursue this further let's go with some peer reviewed research that justifies this claim.

 

[Thief]

I'm not quite understanding... Is the author actually attempting to say that the presence of a human being, with eyes and a calculable mind, actually interferes with the nature of particles by his viewing it?

...Are they suggesting that aiming a telescope into space can effect something very far away, just by viewing it?

Physicists Just Found a New Quantum Paradox That Casts Doubt on a Pillar of Reality

and even on the events right in front of us.....

yep.... some people believe observation alters the reality

but then again....some people can't see straight

 

[Thief]

As I said some will not accept consciousness affecting reality.

telekinetics?

 

[Thief]

and of course.....as we stand side by side watching an event unfold

I might nod my head with understanding
and you would say....nay

note my signature

 

[George-ananda]

telekinetics?

Impossible they say.

 

[Thief]

Impossible they say.

that would blow off many things religious people believe in

walking on water
feeding thousands with no apparent resources
the lame walk
the blind see
storms vanish with a wave of the hand
wine into water

and I believe in Spirit
First
substance as creation

must have taken some thought to get all of this....stuff.....in motion

 

[ratiocinator]

I think you are the one misrepresenting science in this case.

As I said some will not accept consciousness affecting reality.

It's simply a fact that quantum theory says nothing at all about consciousness. Only interpretations of quantum mechanics do that - and, as it has already been pointed out, the "observers" in this experiment were photons.

 

[George-ananda]

It's simply a fact that quantum theory says nothing at all about consciousness. Only interpretations of quantum mechanics do that - and, as it has already been pointed out, the "observers" in this experiment were photons.

I find it quite a challenge to explain-away the double-slit experiments without suggesting the importance of an observer. That is exactly what the experiment was designed to determine! Passive observation should be irrelevant in the materialist model of reality. But it's not in this experiment.

 

[ChristineM]

I find it quite a challenge to explain-away the double-slit experiments without suggesting the importance of an observer. That is exactly what the experiment was designed to determine! Passive observation should be irrelevant in the materialist model of reality. But it's not in this experiment.

I thought the double slit experiment was designed to show the wave nature of particles