Collapse of the wave function.

[Oopsie]

I am an admirer of Dr Ron Pearson and Dr Tom Campbell and their work in the Theory Of Everything or TOE.
Einstein wrote the small TOE but Campbell wrote "My Big Toe". A theory in a book over 900 pages that I read some time ago and all the round pegs fell into round holes and visa versa. It explained everything and his paper has not been challenged to date but ignored.

His paper has been ignored due to the fact that it explains everything and that includes psi that scientists avoid due to the stigma attached to it.

Here is a YT video on his book. Watch from the beginning if you want to see a different approach to the 2 slit experiment or watch from 1,06 for his mind blowing explanation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_RwcGzGurc

 

[etienne_marais]

I am an admirer of Dr Ron Pearson and Dr Tom Campbell and their work in the Theory Of Everything or TOE.
Einstein wrote the small TOE but Campbell wrote "My Big Toe". A theory in a book over 900 pages that I read some time ago and all the round pegs fell into round holes and visa versa. It explained everything and his paper has not been challenged to date but ignored.

His paper has been ignored due to the fact that it explains everything and that includes psi that scientists avoid due to the stigma attached to it.

Here is a YT video on his book. Watch from the beginning if you want to see a different approach to the 2 slit experiment or watch from 1,06 for his mind blowing explanation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_RwcGzGurc

In short, what is your opinion on the following question:

So it is the act and not the consciousness behind it. If an experiment was set up where electronics repeatedly/continuously do measurements and the scientist go on a long holiday forgetting the experiment, do the electronics qualify as the act of observance/measurement and thus causing a collapse ?

 

[Oopsie]

So it is the act and not the consciousness behind it. If an experiment was set up where electronics repeatedly/continuously do measurements and the scientist go on a long holiday forgetting the experiment, do the electronics qualify as the act of observance/measurement and thus causing a collapse ?

No. Instruments do not have consciousness but if the waves "know" that they will be observed by our consciousness in the future, they will present themselves as particles to prescribe to our reality. They will present themselves as particles.
On the other hand, if we are not present, we will not know what the instruments detected as they are also made of particles/waves. We cannot know.

 

[etienne_marais]

No. Instruments do not have consciousness but if the waves "know" that they will be observed by our consciousness in the future, they will present themselves as particles to prescribe to our reality. They will present themselves as particles.
On the other hand, if we are not present, we will not know what the instruments detected as they are also made of particles/waves. We cannot know.

That brings me to my next question, if the scientists come back from a 2 year holiday and view the results, would that instant be the act of observation causing the wave collapse 2 years earlier or is the electronic measurement void because the scientists were not there to observe ?

 

[Oopsie]

That brings me to my next question, if the scientists come back from a 2 year holiday and view the results, would that instant be the act of observation causing the wave collapse 2 years earlier or is the electronic measurement void because the scientists were not there to observe ?

Time makes no difference. Let me start by explaining the next question you were going to ask as you are trying to paint me into a corner.

As I have said, if in the DS experiment the photons or whatever is shot one at a time through the slits and we had no idea of their position before or after passing the slit it would show up on the slide as waves. We had no conscience observation or had no instrument to observe where the particle was at any given time, it will show up as waves. This is because we did not observe them BEFORE they hit the slide.

However, if we place instruments to detect their movement and positions before hitting the slide and we are not there to observe it, they will present as duality until we do.

I am also confused at this behavior as we all are.

 

[scud]

What are the practice implications of this experiment , does it scale up to affect us in any way

I.e. Is it observable in astronomy or manufacturing

 

[Oopsie]

What are the practice implications of this experiment , does it scale up to affect us in any way

I.e. Is it observable in astronomy or manufacturing

I doubt it but I am in the Electrical Engineering field and this is my interest at this stage. I am merely posting MY thoughts and it would probably be wrong but it fits my imagination so far.

 

[Tw171]

Time makes no difference. Let me start by explaining the next question you were going to ask as you are trying to paint me into a corner.

As I have said, if in the DS experiment the photons or whatever is shot one at a time through the slits and we had no idea of their position before or after passing the slit it would show up on the slide as waves. We had no conscience observation or had no instrument to observe where the particle was at any given time, it will show up as waves. This is because we did not observe them BEFORE they hit the slide.

However, if we place instruments to detect their movement and positions before hitting the slide and we are not there to observe it, they will present as duality until we do.

I am also confused at this behavior as we all are.

The issue with the Copenhagen interpretation, as you point out, is the absurdity and unnecessary complication, of holding in limbo fundamental properties of nature until such a time as a consciousness can collapse it into a discrete reality. It would be far more rational to suspect that this feature is a consequence of consciousness. That is to say, that where there are major deviations or inconsistencies- they are as a result of a failure of our model, in this case quantum physics, to fully account for what is happening underneath. In which case we are dealing with limitations of our consciousness. It might very well be that we lack the conceptual properties necessary to describe the underlying phenomena. We can primarily conceive two conceptual frameworks; particle; discrete quanta, and wave; continuous function. It might very well be that whatever the properties of the underlying phenomena of matter is, it registers, (think Venn diagram), on both, but is largely different enough to avoid being properly described by either.

 

[animal531]

Also interesting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_analogs_in_quantum_mechanics

Read up more on pilot wave theory and walking droplets. It's a different interpretation of QM, but interesting in its own right.

 

[Oopsie]

Very interesting reads. I was reading a book on the history on science and was surprised that in the early 1900's prospective science students were discouraged from studying it as "we already know all there is to know". Then along came QM in the 1920's That baffled scientists and 100 years later they are still baffled but making slow progress.

China is to start building a particle accelerator in 2020 that will be twice as large as the LHC at CERN and 7 times more powerful. This will be very exiting as they said that they are not building it for China but for the people of all nations.
These accelerators are our only means of understanding QM.