Return Home
It is currently Wed Aug 12, 2020 8:26 am

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2019 2:08 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:18 am
Posts: 124
I have seen lots of critique targeted at Tom's work and I have often felt there's something logically or semantically wrong about the criticism and that it's on the very surface, right in front of my eyes but I couldn't quite grasp what it is.

And then it came to me.

It's because people are using words "measurement" and "observation" as synonyms in the context of physics experiments. I have seen both these words being used interchangeably in many scientific studies, papers, student books. Even Wikipedia says so:
Quote:
In science, observation can also involve the perception and recording of data via the use of scientific instruments.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observation

English is not my first language, so I might be wrong here, but this sentence screams at me: It's wrong!

Yes, observation is (conscious) perception of data, but observation is not the same as recording of data (i.e. measurement)!

People who use these words as exact synonyms are imposing their attitude on others and strengthening the idea that the "observer effect" shouldn't be studied separately from the measurement process because they are both the same thing. In my opinion, this misuse and mixing of both terms is one of the main causes of misunderstandings and arguments about the nature of Tom's experiments.

In my opinion, measurement is only the process of gathering of information using tools - voltmeters, scales etc. etc. and also our eyes and nerves. Data goes in, data goes out. It just transforms data.

Observation is becoming aware of the data gathered by measurement. Observation is what extracts information out of the data, e.g. voltage value out of pixels on a digital voltmeter. It's entirely separate process and it is a feature of a conscious entity who has enough mental power and intelligence to be aware of the information.

A cat watching a voltmeter might be aware of some animation going on on the display, but a cat cannot be aware of the information and know the meaning of it. Only the person with enough knowledge can obtain the results of measurement and become informed about it.

What do you think? Am I right or am I missing some even simpler than this?

_________________
In order to understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.


Top
PostPosted: Sat Jun 01, 2019 4:58 am 
Offline
Normal User
Normal User

Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 11:19 am
Posts: 37
Quote:

Yes, observation is (conscious) perception of data, but observation is not the same as recording of data (i.e. measurement)!
Hello :)
that may well be possible, you're right.

It also takes me quite a long time to get the basics of Uncle Tom's Theory, it took months for me to understand the basic principle.

If you don't like Tom Theory, you won't take the time to work your way into it and spend hours and hours watching his videos.
What's also hard to imagine is, how a probabilitiy based computer simulation works. Some critics I had read had not considered this point. This is certainly difficult without a computer science background.
Best regards
ingo

_________________
"Courage carries genius, power and magick"
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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