I read Brian Greene's FABRIC OF THE COSMOS and he explains variants of the double slit experiment in which detectors are placed over the slits. He describes the detectors as adding some specific spin to the electron that passes through either slit. Obviously, we know that if detected, the electrons simply pile up in rectangles behind each slit, and without detectors, form the interference pattern.

Now, the variant he mentions is one where the detectors indeed place a spin on the electrons passing through the slit, but then before the electrons have a chance to plop down on the screen behind the slits, some machine strips the electrons of the spin which identifies which slit they went through. According to some post above, it doesn't matter if the information is destroyed after, the interference pattern won't be recovered, but Greene's example is in direct contradiction to that. He says that destroying the information before the electron hits the screen will restore the interference pattern. This is really spooky to me. If the explanation is that photons required to observe and measure the electrons are interfering, then logically we can look at the experiment causally:

1) electrons are fired through the slits
2) detectors give us the which-path information
3) before the electrons can hit the screen and take a definite position, we strip them of the which-path information via a machine we can call an anti-detector
4) interference pattern re-emerges as the electrons finally hit the screen after being stripped of the which-path information

This seems to imply that consciousness has more to do with the equation than previously thought. If someone disagrees, I can find the book tomorrow and get an exact reproduction of his words, but I'm fairly certain this is what he reports. I'm troubled by this implication, I don't like the idea of consciousness being directly associated with the perceived reality of the physical world. I know the quantum world is very strange indeed, but how can something like conscious human mind affect quantum states is really beyond me. Probably because I know next to nothing about physics, and am only interested in quantum mechanics because for whatever reason, space, time and reality are extremely interesting to me.

Our realization ofWheeler’s delayedchoice
GedankenExperiment demonstrates
beyond any doubt that the behavior
of the photon in the interferometer
depends on the choice of the observable
which is measured, even when that
choice is made at a position and a time
such that it is separated from the entrance
of the photon in the interferometer by a
space-like interval. In Wheeler’s words,
since no signal traveling at a velocity less
than that of light can connect these two
events, “we have a strange inversion of
the normal order of time. We, now, by
moving the mirror in or out have an unavoidable
effect on what we have a right
to say about the already past history of
that photon” (7).

For those who have not read the paper above, here is a plain-English summary:
The delayed-choice experiment looks paradoxical if you think that the photon passes either through both slits or through one slit only. The paradox removes if you assume that something (the wave) passes through both slits, while something different (the particle) passes through one slit only. But then you need to assume that the photon consists of two separate things, which contradicts the standard interpretation of QM. Fortunately, there is an interpretation - the Bohmian interpretation - that provides such a wave-and-particle picture consistently.

Claudio and others,

This sort of research would have been completely unnecessary if assumptions were not made along the way. You realize that, right?
This is like trying to prove if God exists at the moment. It's like trying to prove if Flying Spaghetti Monsters exist. We're not there yet.

Now, in my opinion, I am going to assume that the particles involved with collapsing are aware of one another in their interactions, and are coherently involved within a conscious field, which includes awareness of the mammal doing the experiment, too.

The universe, and us, do not exist independently. Existence is not intrinsic, and you can find this in Buddhism, Tao, Physics, what have you. So in my assumption (not the assumption of physicists), the particles themselves are conscious, they know and are aware of one another, and so a collapse occurs.

This isn't based off of evidence, this is just a gut feeling of mine. And this has absolutely no effect on MBT from my perspective.
In my opinion, and another gut feeling of mine, is that most of you think physics is disturbing and a joke, so you don't care to fully understand it, but expand on it so you can keep an "I"-centric version of reality. This is dark age thinking, it's very close to religion, and it aches when uneducated assumptions on physics are made along the way.

The first highlit word is limiting to mammals (ethnocentric), and wrong.
The second highlit words are obnoxious, and wrong.
Love
Bette

So in my assumption (not the assumption of physicists), the particles themselves are conscious, they know and are aware of one another, and so a collapse occurs.

Brandon wrote:

If we assume MBT is fundamentally correct in that this is a VR, the particles would be virtual particles. Does your view imply that the particles, at least in some sense, are also "players" in the PMR VR game? Do they possess any level of free will (or decision space) in your view? I understand the notion that this is a VR and we are the "players", but I'm not at all certain about who (or what) is a player and who (or what) isn't.

I know we've discussed this topic regarding plants, with some feeling that plants could possibly be conscious with others, including Tom, I think, arguing against the conciousness of plants - saying essentially they were devoid of decision space, therefore not concious.

Jeanne

Bette,

By Mammal I meant any living creature, including bacteria, and even rocks. Yes, rocks. I don't care if that isn't your interpretation or your opinion, and seeing it this way doesn't affect MBT. Second, I've seen more junk of QM come from here than anywhere else since I was of the age of 16, 8 years ago. I've never seen so many assumptions made. I made these assumptions way back 8 years ago, then I came to realize that it's way more subtle. It's more obnoxious and narrow minded to make uneducated assumptions.

Edit:
That is one of the saddest arguments I've heard to date, since I said "Mammals" and not "Everything", you say I am wrong. I gave an example and you clearly misinterpreted it, then before even realizing what I actually meant, you posted.

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. You cannot go specific "mammal", and then go to the old, "that is not what I meant to say" script, and still think you are open-minded and skeptical. QM, again, is not main to MBT. The only reason it gets mentioned so much is because they don't understand it, and MBT makes it understandable from the open side of thinking about Reality. Your assumption that this is "uneducated" is just silly. One man's junk is another man's treasure, as they say. I didn't clearly misinterpret your word mammal, therefore you must have specifically misrepresented what you meant to say, hey? Just give it up Brandon, you are wasting your time with your lack of open-minded skepticism, are you reading the references, or just assuming you already know? It doesn't matter, it isn't matter, and you now know even though you don't think anything got in. Come back with reasonable question not based in telling anyone how uneducated you think they are, okay?
Love
Bette