If observation of a system changes the dynamics of the interactions of said system to where the effects are altered enough to be measured...how is this not proof of God? An intelligent consciousness is observing the Earth and every molecule of creation surrounding it, both living and inanimate. The Earth we live on is sustained by the observation of the persistent observation of God. The laws of physics have their origin in the watchful eye of an intelligent designer.>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)"A notable example of the observer effect occurs in quantum mechanics, as demonstrated by the double-slit experiment. Physicists have found that observation of quantum phenomena by a detector or an instrument can change the measured results of this experiment. Despite the "observer effect" in the double-slit experiment being caused by the presence of an electronic detector, the experiment's results have been interpreted by some to suggest that a conscious mind can directly affect reality."
theologists tongue my anus
If it were true that there's always something observing everything and that observation cases wave function collapse then we shouldn't expect photons nor electrons to ever behave like waves.But you get real weird and stupid when you try to derive theology from a flawed understanding of physics.
>>543780522The ALL is mind
>>543780522They lie and make that shit up anyway.You can't trust anything they publish ever.
>>543780522"observing" in physics has nothing to do with consciousness
>>543780522>Despite the "observer effect" in the double-slit experiment being caused by the presence of an electronic detectorYou are a dumb nigger
>>543780522>If observation of a system changes the dynamics of the interactions of said system to where the effects are altered enough to be measured...how is this not proof of God?Because our instruments and senses are not at the level the action is at. Like how a microscope and telescope let us know about things we would never have known without their invention. SO, when you hear about the observer, just know that natural or divine made things are not observable unless the tech is there PLUS the conditions for interaction and observation are present. It really isn't anything more than midwit slop being fed to you one way or the other. If you are looking for evidence for God, the door to that was already found, you just haven't used your ears to listen.
>>543780522"Observe" doesn't means "to look at with your eyes" in this context. It means that specialized equipment is needed to observe invisible stuff, but it cannot measure anything without also interfering with the experiment and changing the outcome. It doesn't matter if a person is looking at the machine or not when it happens. It doesn't prove anything about God, just that we have shitty equipment and no one has thought of any better way to measure some stuff yet.
>>543780522Just invent a tool that wont effect the measurement.
>>543780522The electronic detector is obviously not conscious, so observation does not require consciousness.
>>543781168>>543781205>>543781423>>543781466The point is, how many of our measurement tools are actually causing systems to appear to behave in a way which they may not naturally without the introduction of our measurements. The Large Hadron Collider as one example, is utterly beholden to electronic measurement instruments. That's just one example.
>>543781479>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iuv6hY6zsd0
>>543780522Isn't it a bit of a contradiction, as if an intelligent consciousness was observing everything, then there would be no collapsed wave forms, which doesn't reflect reality.
>>543781722What does that have to do with God?
>>543781722>some of the test equipment used to observe some very difficult to measure phenomenon sucks>therefor goduw0tm8
Potentiality collapse explains this.
>>543781479That is not how it works.There are things that we can't measure simultaneously, that is the problem. I can make a very good measurement tool for the momentum (directed velocity times mass) of a particle with small mass, or a very good measurement tool for the space occupied by a particle (position), but never both.It is like when you zoom out in a moving particle, what happens? You see more details to it, but you lose notion of its trajectory. Look up the uncertainty principle. There are plenty of examples. Heisenberg was the true genius of his generation.
>>543781986>>543782036By the very nature of our limitation to measure certain laws, reactions, etc at some given scale...we will always be getting tainted data which in turn produces searching for the truth of things down the wrong road.
>>543782236>but macro-objects are not subject to anything, and you can measure their properties without facing these annoying issuesThat is due to their greater mass.Once you have a system with small mass, you find that their behavior is better described by a wavefunction. A wavefunction in itself has absolutely no meaning, but you can do operations with it to determine properties of the particle that it describes, such as position for an specific state of energy, provided that, of course, both these properties have common eigenvectors among them (they commute).
>>543781722>how many of our measurement tools are actually causing systems to appear to behave in a way which they may not naturally without the introduction of our measurements.It doesn't matter because all that does is describe the behavior or function of that observed item. Like observing water in the freezer and seeing it turn into ice for example. The observation is meaningless to the factual properties of the item you are seeing. The notion that you look at something at it effects it is midwit slop. The light needed for you to look at it might be all that is, let alone the device you are using to examine the very small.
>>543781722>causing systems to appear to behave in a way which they may not naturally???
>>543780522Observation does not change the outcome.Look into how those photon detectors work. Saying that turning them on and the outcome becomes different is spooky is like saying its spooky that crushing the skull of a puppy makes it retarded.
>OP got schooled and lost the argument in his original thread>makes another shit threadjust fuck off already lol
>>543781479FUCKING THISMidwits cannot comprehend that this is that fucking simpleNo hippie mumbo-jumboMost of quant-gooning is just statistics (barely working model)And there is light shining on dark stripes
>>543780522>. Physicists have found that observation of quantum phenomena by a detector or an instrument can change the measured results of this experiment.You're conflating "observer" with "intelligent observer", not "physical interaction".
>>543780522>"A notable example of the observer effect occurs in quantum mechanics, as demonstrated by the double-slit experiment"The thought experiment was dreamed up by a bongo beating nimrod who even himself said it could not be replicated and that it was purely a thought experiment used to explain to the average layman the insane shit Quantum theory proposed. People who actually believe this "experiment" was performed let alone could be performed are the same retards who believe Einstein was responsible for GPS. No matter how much you disprove their trite they will still peddle it the same way their C average school teachers memed it to them in highschool. You believe it because you were told it and not because it's actually true.
>>543780522Wave functions just cause funny statistics.Everything is an observer.
>>543780814>he doesnt knowWheels of eyes bro, some angels be different
>>543780522Conscious life is a part of the universe, not separate from it.We just dont properly understand this yet.
>>543782869It's true, I was told this.
>>543782844>not "physical interaction"Casimir effect tongues my photons
>>543780522physicists tongue my anus
>>543782034Came here for this kek
Someone debunked this a few years ago. I forgot the details but the reason is measurement error essentially
>>543782520We'll invent better equipment and tests. Until then we'll operate as best we can given what we know. Like we always have. What does this have to do with God being proven?
>>543781479its not possible no matter what tool you use.
>>543780522>DOUBLE SLOT EXPERIMENT GUISERetard. God, just shut the fucking board down already.
>>543783094stfu gagdeep
>>543783094Correct
>>543781479Just discover a phenomena that isn't incommensurable then.
>>543780522that doesn't mean intelligent observer ya donkit means that on a small enough scale all of the possible ways we can think of to measure a thing changes the thing it has wrongly been interpreted a whole bunch of waysbasics of it is this: below a certain threshold of interaction photons can be accurately described by wave equationsabove a certain level of interaction such as putting a meter in the path of travel they can be accurately described by particle equations
that's like asking if something is defined/declared vs instanced
>>543783077We cannot utilize instruments to measure at the required scale without introducing some alteration upon the system. We'd need to observe from inside the various layers of some matter and we cannot do this without interfering with the subject of our measurement. This proves we are not in a simulation, but an intelligent composition.
>>543781722>how many of our measurement tools are actually causing systems to appear to behave in a way which they may not naturally without the introduction of our measurementsI mean that's what all of them do when talking about non-definite states. We know a particle "in superposition" behaves differently from one that has been observed.What being "in superposition" pre-observation is like experienced from the particle's point of view is impossible to gauge.If your question is whether a particle may have more degrees of freedom pre-measurement but those somehow get destroyed during measurement, then the answer is "yes that's possible". The problem is that this is experimentally indistinguishable from these degrees of freedom never having existed in the first place.
>>543780522>if observation...Oi. STOP TOUCHING THE SUBJECT.>but I can'tTHEN STOP DRAWING RETARDED CONCLUSIONS FROM YOUR INABILITY TO KEEP YOUR EYES TO YOURSELF.
>>543783312Correction: "Below a certain threshold, the wave function cannot be fully interpreted from electron interactions."Please stop blaming photons for the behaviour of electrons.
>>543780522I am not a physicist, so correct me if I'm wrong, but to observe a phenomenon, don't you have to interact with it in some way? Therefore, the unobserved phenomenon is not the same as the observed phenomenon. No Invisible Sky Wizard required.
>>543780814What they mean by "observe" is having something in each of the slits that interact with the lightThey either use a polarising filter on each slit that changes the light on each slit, or physically slow down the light via momentum transfer so they can detect itThis means that if they have a light atom get interacted with it stops acting like a wave at the point of interaction.It's the whole point of the experiment, light travelling through a vacuum or a transparent gas does not interact with anything except the walls of the experiment when they hit it.
>>543784741>Light atomI mean photon, it's 2am whatever.
>>543784741>It's the whole point of the experiment, light travelling through a vacuum or a transparent gas does not interact with anything except the walls of the experiment when they hit it.Except the photon can literally interact with itself even when when you send only one at a time. THAT is the point of the experiment.
>>543776378
>>543782869You can literally recreate this experiment at home you mongoloid.
>>543785423Yes well that is the other part of it. I wasn't explaining the experiment as a whole I was explaining the mechanisms used for observation.
>>543780522Shouldn't it been proof agaisnt god? If god is omnipresent he should have observed it so it should always collapse with or without a sensor.Sorry retard but God isn't physics, that makes no sense to say something you can point at is god himself.Anyways go be brown somewhere else.
>>543785604Observation in this context means interaction.An uncertain photon being able to interact with itself to form interference patterns does not prove or disprove anything about a god, not that the concept of god or no god is really all that useful on a fundamental level.
>>543784741>light>a vacuum>disqualifying it from being a "vacuum" in the first place Light doesn't exist unless the conditions for it to manifest are present. The fact the polarizing lenses do what they do should automatically disqualify it from being a phenomena that "travels" let alone "has a speed".
>>543783827>i don't know how right nowThat doesn't mean that it's impossible.>it would be impossible to simulate thisNo.
>>543785542You can literally quote me the actual thought experiment as described by Richard Feynman but you won't because then it turns your faith based argument on its ass. >inb4:"Nah bro you can take a needle and... I don't know how fucking light works or what it even is nor do I have empirical evidence of these magic bumping "photons" or explanation of what medium is doing this "waving"
>>543780522There is no such thing as photons
>>543784741You can also put something in the slits that detects the photons but then erase that information later and make the pattern appear.So the photon is allowed to interact, it just has to be impossible to tell which slit the photon passed through.This even works when the erasing happens after the pattern gets formed, like something travels back in time and tells the photon the information will be erased in the future - quantum physics is weird as fuck.
same with my investments
This thread was moved to >>>/bant/25120628
