Collapse of the wave function.

[Oopsie]

I have been intrigued with this problem for years and have been reading more up on it lately.
There have been studies that show that meditators can collapse the wave to particles by thought. (non meditators have a concentration span of 4 seconds)

The 2 slit apparatus was sealed in a box and the meditators had to imagine the slits and the particles shooting through them.
This collapsed it to particles.

One professor went further to do it online with a video camera aimed at the box 24/7 for 2 years and invited meditators across the globe to collapse the wave and it did.

His paper was well received and is now being replicated by other scientists.

This is proof that conciseness (Can't spell this) can extend over space and is not in the physical brain.

 

[grok]

No sauce?

 

[Arthur]

Conciseness is a verbal facility.

Or do you mean consciousness?

 

[HavocXphere]

I liked it better when you posted financial stuff...that was at least semi-coherent.

 

[Aquila ka Hecate]

I think you're referring to Dean Radin's work.

Personally, I find it interesting.

 

[TEXTILE GUY]

I must admit ... I didnt know WTF you were on about ..... till I watched this to get background ..... this is frikken interesting ,,,,,,

[video=youtube;ayvbKafw2g0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayvbKafw2g0[/video]

 

[grok]

Ah context, context, context! Context at last..

Would be interested had you post the sauce when I actually had time to read this.

 

[konfab]

I must admit ... I didnt know WTF you were on about ..... till I watched this to get background ..... this is frikken interesting ,,,,,,

Watch a video by someone who understands the work, not just the normie version narrated by god.

[LOGIC WARNING]
[video=youtube;2h1E3YJMKfA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2h1E3YJMKfA[/video]

 

[Oopsie]

I think you're referring to Dean Radin's work.

Personally, I find it interesting.

Yes. His paper was not challenged and no scientist Has disagreed on it. They were actually stunned with this research.
The only reason I did not post a link to the study is because it is so boring and long and nobody will watch it.
The research involves statistics that is too boring to watch and I'm sure we have no enthusiasts of statistics here.

 

[Oopsie]

Ah context, context, context! Context at last..

Would be interested had you post the sauce when I actually had time to read this.

I only put sauce on my meat so I don't know what you mean.

 

[konfab]

I'm sure we have no enthusiasts of statistics here.

Statistical bigotry

 

[Bobbin]

I am deeply irritated by the double slit theory. And having fkall clue about physics (Especially quantum mechanics) doesn't help But I'm sure smarter people have it covered.

To me it just presents inconsistent philosophical/logical problems beyond what is plainly discussed.

e.g. For a wave to collapse into a probabilistic outcome whereby a particle should appear somewhere at random within that function makes no sense...

1. Why is there no probability that no particle should appear on observation? Or perhaps more than one particle? Is it equivalent to the wave's energy or something? In which case there is at least one certainty. How then does accurate information travel between 2 points of probability? FAIL!
2. What type of observation is being used? What deems my naked eye to be any less of an observation medium than the sensitive instruments they are using? It should not matter whether I can detect it or not due to its speed and size. But if I look at the slits with my naked eye it seems it won't affect the interference pattern at all?
3. It is odd that they say it is random/unknown until detected. Well duh?!
4. How can I be sure their means of detection are not interfering somehow? Photons - being electromagnetic - could pass through the slits with results influenced by their detection method. A wave-like interference pattern is easy to imagine with particles ricocheting through the slits causing the same pattern - particularly as it interacts with subatomic forces that are in particular arrangements or states of charge (Thus resulting in specific interference patterns - isn't this similar to how spectroscopy works for distant planets? Else light at those distances wouldn't carry the information accurately as it does). What is to say that their "pre-result" detection method simply forces the photon to pick up some influence and give it more mass/charge/energy - thus creating the straight line 2-slit pattern behavior?

Anyway I'm probably naive and way off butchering everything here being very uneducated in the field. Is there a youtube clip that shows this experiment in detail together with the detection methods used? I only seem to be able to find amateur experiments or animated demonstrations/documentaries but will keep looking when I get a chance. (Will check the clip TEXTILE GUY posted earlier when I get a chance - YouTube blocked at work)

I need to know MOAR!

 

[Oopsie]

It is important to realize that the wave function collapses into particle behavior when observed. Not the other way round.

When consciousness of an observer becomes involved it will reduce the waves function to particles. This cannot be debunked.
As far as I know all the experiments done over many years only instruments were used and I am sure the scientists used instruments that did not interfere with the electro magnetic energy or fields of the photons.
They even used buckyballs, a form of carbon that is made up of 60 atoms and shaped like a hollow soccer ball and it also worked.

This is why Radin's 2 year long experiment is so important. It shows that meditators (schooled in concentration) can collapse the wave function by thought over space.
Some meditators were from South Africa and just by looking at their computer screen live video of the apparatus in the USA that was sealed in a black box collapsed the wave. All they had to do was to imagine in their minds eye the double slit and the single photons passing through it within the box. So it does not need physical instruments after all.

This leads me to conclude that if consciousness were not to exist then all that there would be in the universe would be a total hazy mess of waves.
Our consciousness makes our reality.

 

[NoLogic001]

Wow guys,

Why make is so complicated? Thought over space? Come on....

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)

 

[NoLogic001]

"quantum mechanics, there is a common misconception (which has acquired a life of its own, giving rise to endless speculations) that it is the mind of a conscious observer that causes the observer effect in quantum processes. It is rooted in a basic misunderstanding of the meaning of the quantum wave function ψ and the quantum measurement process'

"When discussing the wave function ψ which describes the state of a system in quantum mechanics, one should be cautious of a common misconception that assumes that the wave function ψ amounts to the same thing as the physical object it describes. This flawed concept must then require existence of an external mechanism, such as the mind of a conscious observer, that lies outside the principles governing the time evolution of the wave function ψ, in order to account for the so-called "collapse of the wave function" after a measurement has been performed. But the wave function ψ is not a physical object like, for example, an atom, which has an observable mass, charge and spin, as well as internal degrees of freedom. Instead, ψ is an abstract mathematical function that contains all the statistical information that an observer can obtain from measurements of a given system. In this case, there is no real mystery that mathematical form of the wave function ψ must change abruptly after a measurement has been performed"

 

[Oopsie]

Wow guys,

Why make is so complicated? Thought over space? Come on....

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)

Oh noooo. You have peed on my battery. I have spent hundreds of hours reading up about this and now with one Wiki link you have destroyed all my research. All the tests and science papers have been proved wrong by Wiki.
I am devastated.

 

[NoLogic001]

...and yet still you understand very little about quantum mechanics....

 

[scudsucker]

Oh noooo. You have peed on my battery. I have spent hundreds of hours reading up about this and now with one Wiki link you have destroyed all my research. All the tests and science papers have been proved wrong by Wiki.
I am devastated.

You just as much as sense when you claimed that "This is proof that conciseness can extend over space and is not in the physical brain."

ie. none, at all.

 

[Bryn]

Oh noooo. You have peed on my battery. I have spent hundreds of hours reading up about this and now with one Wiki link you have destroyed all my research. All the tests and science papers have been proved wrong by Wiki.
I am devastated.

Can you provide links to the scientific research you're basing your statements on?

 

[Bobbin]

"quantum mechanics, there is a common misconception (which has acquired a life of its own, giving rise to endless speculations) that it is the mind of a conscious observer that causes the observer effect in quantum processes. It is rooted in a basic misunderstanding of the meaning of the quantum wave function ψ and the quantum measurement process'

"When discussing the wave function ψ which describes the state of a system in quantum mechanics, one should be cautious of a common misconception that assumes that the wave function ψ amounts to the same thing as the physical object it describes. This flawed concept must then require existence of an external mechanism, such as the mind of a conscious observer, that lies outside the principles governing the time evolution of the wave function ψ, in order to account for the so-called "collapse of the wave function" after a measurement has been performed. But the wave function ψ is not a physical object like, for example, an atom, which has an observable mass, charge and spin, as well as internal degrees of freedom. Instead, ψ is an abstract mathematical function that contains all the statistical information that an observer can obtain from measurements of a given system. In this case, there is no real mystery that mathematical form of the wave function ψ must change abruptly after a measurement has been performed"

And I still have great difficulty understanding what a wave actually is (In this context of it not being a chain reaction of particles transferring energy like water)

In any event there's something about this whole double slit theory and the mass hysteria of a simulated universe that just doesn't sit comfortably with me and I don't know why. Intuitively it feels like bull manure. Meh... I don't have 1000 hours to spend figuring it out and convincing myself either way