@ Neverfly,

Your link to Peer Reviewed version contains only the abstract. I am not purchasing this text for sake of this discussion.

One of the authors of the Copenhagen Interpretation was Bohrs. Bohrs claimed the moon does not exist unless it is observed. This was the co-authors view.

The experiment shows that collapsing a wave through observation turned it into 2 bands similar to marbles / particles being shot through the two slits, however until the measurement / observation is made the interference pattern remains.

Particles / Marbles / Nature / Reality / Matter / Spacetime Reality - are all the same things from which we are quoting.

While light is waves it is not matter, and the random particle could exist anywhere (like schrodingers cat) at this time.

Waves / Probabilities / unobserved / probability wave - are also the same in these quotes.

If it says "not based on realities" (like your quote above), then they are also saying "not based on nature", "not based on matter", "not based on particles". Matter only exists as a probability.

Remember that this was co-authored by Bohrs and took his view that the moon does not exist unless it is observed.

Now Einstein and Schrodinger knew Bohrs had lost it. I mean it is INSANE to think the moon does not collapse into matter when no conscious observer/measurement looks at it.

In Fact: Schrodinger invented a thought experiment to demonstrate how ridiculous this concept was.

The idea is that you put a cat in a box with a 50/50 odds of living through a random event inside this box.

THIS PART IS WHERE THIS TOPIC IS SUITED FOR THIS THREAD. I HAVE SAID THAT HISTORY MUST BE ALTERABLE FOR LOA TO EXIST AS IT DOES.

So now there is no cat inside the box according to Bohrs. Bohrs says that until the cat is measured / observed it exists ONLY as a probability wave. It will not be until the door is opened that the probability is decided (I would argue based on expectancy) and the cat is either alive or dead. Bohrs would argue that even if the cat was dead a week upon opening the cat would materialize as a rotting corpse.

Bohrs would argue that if your fridge door was closed nothing inside would exist except as probability waves until the door is opened.

I had originally thought Schrodinger also felt this way, but he created this experiment to show how absurd it was.

Einstein also thought this Interpretation was woo, and made a point of saying so often.

However this WAS a widely accepted version of events. The Copenhagen Interpretation.

@ neverfly this is your last quote in previous post,

It says that the interpretation is not based on realities at the submolecular level. It says it's a math used to describe what cannot be directly observed. This, too, is what the wikipedia article said and I quoted on.

notice it says Intepretation is

Realities is matter that can be seen and observed. If the Copenhagen is "NOT BASED ON MATTER THAT CAN BE SEEN AND OBSERVED" then it must be based on the probability wave where matter does not yet exist.

a math used to describe what cannot be directly observed.

This one I might take to mean The Copenhagen Interpretation uses math to describe what cannot be directly observed.

If matter has not been observed / measured then according to Bohrs it is only a mathematical probability of matter that cannot be directly observed.

I really thought the dang cartoon did a good job explaining this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc
We are now many years later and there are many ways of escaping the Copenhagen Interpretation conclusions, and there are Copenhagen Interpretation conclusions that are written by people who do not understand or grasp this as they feel it is too silly to ever have been considered.

People say the Copenhagen Interpretation is complete woo. This does not alter the premise of it which is iput simply "that matter does not exist unless it is observed."

Here is another description. In this description Actuality means real / matter / observed / measured.

The Copenhagen interpretation was the first, and for decades has remained the foremost, method of keeping peace along the quantum-classical borderline. It declares that the wave function describing a particle constitutes a complete description of that particle. Since **the uncertainties expressed by the wave function are not resolved until the particle is observed**, the particle cannot be said to have any definite state until it is observed. Its potential states (such as whether it is a particle or a wave, or has a certain position or momentum, or possesses, in our schematic illustration, the qualities of being hard or soft and sweet or sour) are said to be "superposed." The act of measurement turns potentiality into actuality, resolving the question of what the particle actually "is" through a combination of the particle's inherent potentials and the manner in which it is observed. So the Copenhagen interpretation implicates the observer in what he or she observes. Observers cannot arbitrarily alter reality-cannot violate the laws of nature, any more than a painter can paint a square that is both all white and all black -but they can make of a photon either particle or wave.

uncertainties not resolved until it is observed means that the particle can be anywhere in a known path and exists merely as a probabilty and is not real or real matter. It is merely invisible math.

The act of measurement turns potentiality into actuality

Bohr would argue that the cat was neither dead or alive inside schrodingers box until the moment it was viewed by an outside source when the box i opened, and then

The act of measurement turns potentiality into actuality

Quote from

http://www.drchinese.com/David/Bell_Theorem_Easy_Math.htm
This is easily explained in QM because QM says that particle attributes only exist within the context of an actual measurement. Therefore, we must conclude that the moon is NOT there when we are not looking at it (so to speak). This is the end result of Bell's Theorem.

Bells Theorem arguably proved Bohr was correct, however I am not arguing for either principle at the moment other to say I am describing them correctly.

Here is a good video i just found for you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOYyCHGWJq4
The part where the cats are in "quantum flux" or the undecided state in the video is when "matter does not exist until it is observed" thing I'm trying to explain.

maybe videos will do better explaining this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Um0AvHrPp_w
is a silly trailer for movie about this interpretation. It was a very important Interpretation at the time.

This thread is good

http://theamericanscholar.org/a-new-theory-of-the-universe/
“I think it is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics,” said Nobel physicist Richard Feynman. “Do not keep saying to yourself, if you can possibly avoid it, ‘But how can it be like that?’ because you will go ‘down the drain’ into a blind alley from which nobody has yet escaped.” The reason scientists go down the drain is that they refuse to accept the immediate and obvious implications of the experimental findings of quantum theory. Biocentrism is the only humanly comprehensible explanation for how the world can be the way it is. But, as the Nobel laureate physicist Steven Weinberg admits, “It’s an unpleasant thing to bring people into the basic laws of physics.”

Imagine you are all by yourself in your house.

You may read a book, play a game, take a nap and then your sister arrives at 7 pm for a visit.

Well ALL of the time you spent alone (according to Copenhagen interprettion) you did not really do anything. You were in a state of quantum flux. there was the possibility you " read a book, play a game, take a nap", but maybe you "ate lunch, played playstation, and did some aerobics". You recall living every second, but what you actually did did not become actuality / matter/ real /real spacetime / collapsed until you were observed by your sister. This is like the cat in the box alive or dead. It is the same idea.

But who collapses your sister who has collapsed you. It seems everyone needs collapsing in this copenhagen view world.

LIKE WIGNERS FRIEND

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner's_friend
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpretations_of_quantum_mechanics
The Copenhagen interpretation

Main article: Copenhagen interpretation

The Copenhagen interpretation is the "standard" interpretation of quantum mechanics formulated by Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg while collaborating in Copenhagen around 1927. Bohr and Heisenberg extended the probabilistic interpretation of the wavefunction proposed originally by Max Born. The Copenhagen interpretation rejects questions like "where was the particle before I measured its position?" as meaningless. The measurement process randomly picks out exactly one of the many possibilities allowed for by the state's wave function in a manner consistent with the well-defined probabilities that are assigned to each possible state. **According to the interpretation, the interaction of an observer or apparatus that is external to the quantum system is the cause of wave function collapse**, thus according to Heisenberg __"reality is in the observations, not in the electron__".[8]

NOTE: Wave function collapse is a fancy way of saying "becomes reality".

thus according to Heisenberg

__"reality is in the observations, not in the electron__
I have been repeating "

__reality does not exist unless observed__", but "

__Reality is in the observation__" is the same thing

This is deep. I really want you to get this neverfly, and I am not speaking sarcastically. This double-slit experiment has brought out religion in people. Seriously. (please dont ask for links)

Now wrap your minds around the Many worlds theory. Every choice you make is lived out to its conclusion on another identical world that is also splitting constantly? Seems a bit much imho.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/02/980227055013.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mind–body_problem
Observation in quantum mechanics

In the Copenhagen interpretation, quantum mechanics can only be used to predict the probabilities for different outcomes of pre-specified observations. What constitutes an "observer" or an "observation" is not directly specified by the theory, and the behavior of a system after observation is completely different than the usual behavior. During observation, the wavefunction describing the system collapses to one of several options. If there is no observation, this collapse does not occur, and none of the options ever become less likely.

This post may or not be real yet as I am typing here. Once I go to bed and my wife sees me then my history to that point has been collapsed.

THIS IS NOT MY VIEW. I AM EXPLAINING COPENHAGEN INTERPRETATION.

Maybe my wife does nor need to be an observer. Maybe my dog qualifies. Maybe an insect.

What qualifies as a conscious observer to effect collapse of light into reality?

watch this one as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6l5Zh7w9yQ
good luck.