Return Home
It is currently Thu Aug 06, 2020 6:31 am

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2018 2:20 pm 
Offline
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2018 1:38 pm
Posts: 1
Greetings everyone,

I've recently seen some videos by Tom Campbell and got to hear about the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment, which is talked about by Tom a lot, since understanding it is crucial to both understand the probabilistic nature of reality and the fundamental role of consciousness. However, there's a detail I'm still missing that Tom never mentioned (as far as the videos I've already watched) and I think this detail may be important.

The detail I'm struggling has to do with the diffraction pattern data that corresponds to the experiments whose slit data was destroyed: the idea is that, since you never observed the slit data for those experiments, then it follows that the wave does not collapse. However, that slit data is still recorded and is deleted only later and after all experiments are done (theoretically, any amount of time). So, my question is: what does it mean to observe/measure the slit data? I can think of 3 alternatives:

- have the data instances in memory: in this case, simply having the instances in memory is considered to be a measurement, which seems counter to the narrative portrayed about the experiment, since the data is always computed, which means it was in some form of RAM, even if for a single computing cycle;

- have the processed data in memory, i.e., the computed statistics that would allow us to evaluate the double slit experiment: in this case, the measurement is reduced to whatever statistic would infer a particular pattern result, that is, having the instances in memory is still not enough to collapse the wave;

- for someone conscious to observe it: this seems to be the only case where the observer effect is fundamental, for it means that there is no measurement without it. This is the one that I suspect is true because otherwise, I don't see any evidence for a fundamental role of consciousness...


Is any of these alternatives correct or am I missing something?

Thanks in advance,
- Francisco


Top
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2018 6:51 pm 
Offline
Normal User
Normal User

Joined: Tue May 22, 2018 3:14 am
Posts: 12
Hi Francisco,

First of all, I would like to thank you for your excellent question!

I myself am a big fan of MBT and feel that it is generally in the right direction.

Nevertheless, when I began watching Tom's lectures and reading more about MBT, some things did not add up.
I could not understand how Tom's experiments are going to be conducted, what it means to measure the "which way data" in the MBT sense, what it means to "record the data" or "observe the data".

Then, I did some digging, asking various MBT people (also in this forum as you can see), and conducted some correspondence with other MBT fans.

My latest conclusion is that MBT has a very nice model of conscience growth and real life implications. Tom is an expert on that.
But, the suggested experiments are missing crucial details.

If you do some studying about quantum mechanics and the experiments that where done in the past, you will see that the terminology of "detectors", "measurement", "observer", "recorder" and "which way data" got a little mixed up when it comes to MBT.
At first I thought that they were "metaphors" for explaining things to non-scientists. I am not sure that this is the case.

If you need more details or like to discuss this further in private, my email is avitalkawa@gmail.com.

Good luck!


Top
PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 10:12 pm 
Offline
Frequent Poster
Frequent Poster

Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2018 8:05 pm
Posts: 75
I’m curious about this too.
I constantly meditate on what the quantum eraser and bells theorem imply.
In my head it always comes back to a program. The choice component confuses me a bit though.
I’d like someone to really dumb down bells theorem and it’s relationship to mbt for me if there’s anyone out there who can. I know the math implies no local realism but it would be nice to see how the whole picture sits with mbt. I like Brian greens box analogy but I can’t seem to work out what it really means.


Top
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2018 6:45 am 
Offline
Normal User
Normal User

Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2017 11:41 am
Posts: 41
Location: Midwest USA
Quote:
I’d like someone to really dumb down bells theorem and it’s relationship to mbt for me if there’s anyone out there who can. I know the math implies no local realism but it would be nice to see how the whole picture sits with mbt.
The experiments that have been conducted with Bell's Theorem show that a choice made during measurement in one location influences the measurement at another location instantaneously. The fact that the influence happens instantaneously (faster than the speed at which light travels) draws into question our understanding of physics, since according to physics the speed of light is an absolute speed limit for the rate at which effects can travel. But such an effect would not be a problem in a virtual reality, so the material world being a virtual reality as Tom describes is (one) possible solution to the dilemma.

FunIUOC


Top
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 2:51 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2010 7:20 am
Posts: 269
Location: Near Boston
Quote:
But, the suggested experiments are missing crucial details.

If you do some studying about quantum mechanics and the experiments that where done in the past, you will see that the terminology of "detectors", "measurement", "observer", "recorder" and "which way data" got a little mixed up when it comes to MBT.
At first I thought that they were "metaphors" for explaining things to non-scientists. I am not sure that this is the case.
This is not true. The experiments are sound, and are in "physics form" in the published paper outlining them. Tom must speak in lay-mans for the interviews and videos but the experiments are most certainly not missing any crucial details.
Quote:
So, my question is: what does it mean to observe/measure the slit data?
These experiments are pretty simple once you understand the fundamental concepts of how a virtual reality works. Think of the MMO video games we play, like World of Warcraft for instance. They all exist inside a server somewhere, and each person is given their own individual data stream. Nothing really exists in that game, it's all just 0s and 1s which color pixels on your computer screen, and you've learned to interpret those changes colors on your screen as an elf moving, a lake, a mountain etc. But fundamentally, the game is just changing colors on a screen in such a way to make it seem like there is an elf etc. If you are not in a certain zone, or looking at a mountain, it is not rendered. It doesn't exist. The game isn't sending that data to anyone. It's not there. It only exists as a probability. When someone looks at that location in the game, poof! there it is! When they turn around, it's gone! Get into the fundamentals of how games are rendered. Especially have a look at NO MAN'S SKY, which works very similarly to this reality. The answers to your questions about the experiments can all be found there.

So now to try and help you:
A "measurement" is anytime a CONSCIOUSNESS observes something. Unless an actual consciousness observes something, it is not rendered into the reality. In the case of the "delayed erasure." Firstly you must understand there are two different sets of data being collected in every type of double slit experiment. The data of (1) which slit did the particles go through. and (2) what does it look like after the particles went through the slit. Understand this. Read it over again. Two different types of data being collected in each experiment. If we don't collect (1) and just collect (2), diffraction pattern. If we collect (1) and we look at it, when we look at (2) there will be two lines.

The paradox is: Scientists KNOW that when the detectors are on and measuring at the slits, that we see two straight lines behind the slits, NO diffraction pattern. Detectors on = no diffraction pattern. But, if we leave the detectors on, collecting the "which-way" data (the particle went in this slit or that slit), and then we DELETE the data without ever looking at it and BEFORE we look at (2), we get a diffraction pattern. But wait! The detectors were on, it was supposed to be two slits, why would it matter if we deleted the which way data. Because the (1)data was deleted before we looked at 2, it works as though the detectors were never on in the first place. No consciousness had a chance to see it = it doesn't exist in the reality. Just like, if we don't look at the mountain in world of warcraft, it doesn't exist, it is just a potential waiting to be rendered / actualized.

Let me try and explain it again:

Collect data at the slits (1) , look at the slit data(1) , look at the screen(2), the screen (2) shows two lines. [(1) data collect and observed]
Don't collect data at the slits (1), look at the screen (2) , diffraction pattern. [No (1) data collected, never observed]
Collect data at the slits (1), don't look at the slit data but don't delete it , look at the screen (2) it will show two lines. [(1)data collected, not observed yet, but implied, it exists and is waiting to be observed, thus we see two lines as if we look at (2)]
Collect data at the slits (1), don't look at the slit data and delete it THEN look at the screen (2) , diffraction pattern. [The which-way data(1) no longer exists and no consciousness had a chance to observe and actualize it, so even though it was collected, a diffraction pattern will appear on (2)]
Collect data at the slits (1), don't look at the slit data, look at screen (2), two lines, THEN delete the (1) data, look back at the screen (2), STILL two lines!! [This reality must maintain historical consistency, as soon as we look at (2) and see two slits, it will always stay that way, even though we deleted the which way data (1). The order of the operations is important. Historical consistency MUST be maintained.]


There are all the possibilities of the delay erasure experiment that I can think of. Hopefully these explanations will make sense to you. The only logical way to explain these experiments is that we live in a probability based virtual reality, not a deterministic material reality. Because science shows hard evidence we live in a probability based virtual reality, virtual realities cannot render themselves so by logic we exist within a more fundamental parent reality that exists completely outside of this entire universe. This reality is doing the computing. This reality exists within consciousness. We are all consciousness. Thus --> Everything is connected. One large intertwined connected conciousness system. The most profitable way of existing within an intertwined completely connected netted system is cooperation and caring for everything else. Love is the answer. That's how it's all going to fall out eventually. But, will it take 10 years or another 1000, that's up to us collectively!

_________________
Are you sure it was Adam really typing this? If it helps you out, does that even matter?


Top
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:33 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:32 pm
Posts: 1536
Location: Lincoln, NE
Quote:
This is not true. The experiments are sound, and are in "physics form" in the published paper outlining them. Tom must speak in lay-mans for the interviews and videos but the experiments are most certainly not missing any crucial details.
Thanks for that Adam -- and for your looooooong explanation.

* Avi Tal. Help yourself out here. Try this out:

Take one instance of your point and write a post on it, with the copied text of the base material and highlighting the terms that are confusing you, within that text. By doing this we will ensure that everyone is not only on the same page but on the same instance of the same term under question. From this exercise, clarity should arrive to you.

**To other readers who are confused >> Jump in and join in the instructions I laid out, and clarity will be yours !


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited