Reality is...

There is nothing about consciousness that "collapses" the waveform. So your basic premise is mistaken. An observer of the system can just as easily be an unconscious machine.
 
spidergoat said:
There is nothing about consciousness that "collapses" the waveform. So your basic premise is mistaken. An observer of the system can just as easily be an unconscious machine.
Click to expand...

I said that observation collapses the wavefunction (which is a process that evolves in time).

In quantum mechanics, wave function collapse is said to occur when a wave function—initially in a superposition of several eigenstates—appears to reduce to a single eigenstate (by "observation").

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function_collapse
 
Observation can be interaction with a machine, like a photon detector. It doesn't have anything to do with consciousness. So consciousness is not indemic to reality as your quotes imply.

I also do not accept that there is free will. I think consciousness can be the result of deterministic processes.
 
Last edited:
spidergoat said:
Observation can be interaction with a machine, like a photon detector. It doesn't have anything to do with consciousness. So consciousness is not indemic to reality as your quotes imply.
Click to expand...

So defensive. Again, I never used the word consciousness. But if as you say it is mentioned in the quotes, then I will choose its word over yours.
 
AlexG said:
No, it isn't.

This should be in the Reality Is thread, along with the rest of your drivel.
Click to expand...

Then you do not know a potentially good thread when you see one. My "reality" threads should not be clumped together because each of them offers something new.
 
Spellbound said:
It's not pseudo-science. It's Quantum Physics. And therefore perfectly valid.
Click to expand...
Merely quoting "quantum physics" doesn't stop the arguments from being pseudo-science. It is in how the facts are used.
To wit: "If simultaneity of coherent superposed states precedes linear expression, perhaps mediated by gravitation and time dilation as has been recently suggested: http://www.nature.com/…/j…/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys3366.html
do we not see a model for free will, here at the lowest level, a choice between probabilities? Perhaps wave function collapse itself is the outcome of quantum choice"

To quote Doris Day: "Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps!"

There is nothing in the quoted passages that are scientific. It is merely conjecture after conjecture wrapped around a scientific notion in order to arrive at a seemingly scientific conclusion without recognising that the conjectures offered are unscientific in their nature.

I may be wrong, but if so please show me where there is any actual science in what you have quoted - where is there anything that is testable, repeatable, falsifiable, for example?

So, as said, pseudo-science.
 
Sarkus said:
Merely quoting "quantum physics" doesn't stop the arguments from being pseudo-science. It is in how the facts are used.
To wit: "If simultaneity of coherent superposed states precedes linear expression, perhaps mediated by gravitation and time dilation as has been recently suggested: http://www.nature.com/…/j…/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys3366.html
do we not see a model for free will, here at the lowest level, a choice between probabilities? Perhaps wave function collapse itself is the outcome of quantum choice"

To quote Doris Day: "Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps!"

There is nothing in the quoted passages that are scientific. It is merely conjecture after conjecture wrapped around a scientific notion in order to arrive at a seemingly scientific conclusion without recognising that the conjectures offered are unscientific in their nature.

I may be wrong, but if so please show me where there is any actual science in what you have quoted - where is there anything that is testable, repeatable, falsifiable, for example?

So, as said, pseudo-science.
Click to expand...


The thread title was "Reality Precedes Itself". I am not conjecturing about anything in my explanation when I repeat the words "undifferentiated potential" and "Quantum collapse". The authors may be presenting something entirely different. But my explanation is discussing actual Quantum Physics. Particularly in the fact that time is all over the place in the Quantum world - future affecting past and present, etc. This is an actual fact.
 
Spellbound said:
The thread title was "Reality Precedes Itself". I am not conjecturing about anything in my explanation when I repeat the words "undifferentiated potential" and "Quantum collapse". The authors may be presenting something entirely different. But my explanation is discussing actual Quantum Physics. Particularly in the fact that time is all over the place in the Quantum world - future affecting past and present, etc. This is an actual fact.
Click to expand...
And what about it?
 
Spellbound said:
(Note To Moderators: Since other members of this board such as Magical Realist get to use the word "reality" in their titles so to will I. "Enough is enough" implies you don't see the importance of understanding what reality is. My threads are great too. So leave it be. If you limit my threads no one is going to respond to them.)
Click to expand...
Note to self: other members don't normally get to post mumbo juumbo in the upper threads.

Does quantum mechanics imply free will?
Click to expand...
No. But the tern "free will" insinuates religion into this, since the concept was hijacked in the Reformation and given as the agent working against Predestination, clearly a religious topic.

The correct term is "will". It is a fundamental biological aspect of vertebrates which "seize the opportunity" to act on something (such as to pounce on the prey) based on their brains' capacities to coordinated the action in a way that calculates as "best".

Unless you want to claim that a cat pounces on a rodent at a given moment "as a matter of choice" then . . . too bad for you.

Further, this has nothing whatsoever to do with physics or math unless you are trying to break down neurological functions to their most primitive elements. And I am sure you are not able to do that. So I agree, move this thread.

Perhaps… Quantum mechanics is based upon superposition. If simultaneity of coherent superposed states precedes linear expression, perhaps mediated by gravitation and time dilation as has been recently suggested: http://www.nature.com/…/j…/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys3366.html
do we not see a model for free will, here at the lowest level, a choice between probabilities?
Click to expand...
You used a mathematical word (superposition) but did not apply it in the context of your claim. So that invalidates this as an attempt to make it a topic of science and math.

Perhaps wave function collapse itself is the outcome of quantum choice,...
Click to expand...
I think you misunderstand. Wave function collapse, and superposition, are concepts that live outside of the conventional treatment of events in the macro world (as being causally connected, having a nexus). You can get a sense of this by taking the Fourier transform of a time domain signal (here representing something causally connected - something happens at t1 and something happens at t2 which was triggered by the event at t1). In the spectrum of this signal, there is no such thing as causality. It may be possible to set up such an experiment (sampling the signal at t1 and then t2, producing two spectra) but that is a different concept entirely. What I am saying is that causality is generally not relevant to spectra. Further, there is some basis in treating the wave function in this regard: for example, in the inner product form, there is a multiplication of the wave function by its conjugate; an operation analogous to operating on transforms (change of domain).

In a nutshell: causality only makes sense in the time domain. The wave function lives elsewhere.

an observational result and demonstration of the mechanics of a fundamental sort of free will.
Click to expand...
This conclusion does not follow from the premise. If you want to talk about random decisions made in the brain, maybe you can get here from there. But that requires a very deep foray into neuroscience, something not even likely to happen among all but the best medical experts on Earth.

Gravitation and informational exchange alongside of observation and measurement seem akin, as my proposed temporal mass. We can see a self-observing system results, of which we are a part. If, informational exchange and gravitation select, de-cohere, choose between superposed coherence, here we see linear form being created by a process, a selective definitional informational process which yields reality: consciousness. The smallest dynamic quanta then, would be evidence of bits of proto-consciousness, and we may conclude, consciousness is endemic to reality, and also, that free will, is a property of physics endemic to consciousness, at all levels. ––Rich Norman
Click to expand...
That may be great for pot smokers but adds nothing to math or science whatsoever.

Reality precedes itself, being contained as one of many possibilities.
Click to expand...
You seem to be invoking predestination. That's a non-starter here.

In the Classical world, reality appears deterministic in time.
Click to expand...
You seem to be referring to Aristotle's use of causality in trying to explain all natural phenomena (the Prime Mover later hijacked by Christianity and used to reinforce the idea that nothing would exist if God had not created it).

Since it has nothing but itself of which to consist of, its not actually transforming, meaning past, present and future time is really the same at every point linearly.
Click to expand...
That prose makes no sense. It you want to be understood you should strive to be clear.

At the Quantum level, time is all over the place the future can determine the past and vice versa making it non-linear.
Click to expand...
Nonsensical.

At the Quantum level, there is no distinction between past and future.
Click to expand...
Sure there is. First there is a quantum then there is no quantum then there is . . .

In relativity, there is no distinction between variation in clocks, other than through the Lorentz transformation. So?

In the Quantum world reality is undifferentiated potential.
Click to expand...
What do your speculations about the quantum world have to do with this forum? Go get some science and post it here or relegate yourself to the lower threads.

It exists as many possibilities until it becomes collapsed by observation in time (which may or may not exist in the sense that we know it in the Classical level). We can use this as the basis of free will (choice between probabilities.)
Click to expand...

Yikes. "I said so, QED".
 
Spellbound said:
I would think so. It discusses Quantum Mechanics. I realize that it also mentions free will. It's pure Physics with a touch of Philosophy, so I would think so.
Click to expand...
I agree.
Aqueous Id,
In the Quantum world reality is undifferentiated potential.
Click to expand...
All possible realities exist in potential form (mathematical probability) before expressed as reality. Bohm calls it the "Implicate"

As to FW. IMO, what appears as free will choice is in fact always a "decision in the direction of greatest satisfaction". Thus we do make choices, but they are always determined by our understanding of what will give us greatest satisfaction. Even in the case of coercion, an individual will choose that which seems the "best" solution under the circumstances.

But these choices may be different in different individuals, which gives the impression we are free to choose. Reality is ultimately determined by the mathematical (deterministic) function.
 
Last edited:
Spellbound said:
(Note To Moderators: Since other members of this board such as Magical Realist get to use the word "reality" in their titles so to will I. "Enough is enough" implies you don't see the importance of understanding what reality is. My threads are great too. So leave it be. If you limit my threads no one is going to respond to them.
Click to expand...

IOW, would any deemed species of monomania eventually be quarantined by the board? Let's hope so. For instance, if a somewhat younger E O Wilson miraculously came here and started posting about nothing but ants -- in every subforum he could figure out a way to legally introduce the topic under -- then even tolerance due to his celebrity status might finally grind thin. Mod: "Ed, please intermittently switch to sociobiology or consilience or scientific humanism, etc. Anything but more ant discussions!"

If unrelenting, Wilson would hopefully be requested to confine the subject of ants to B&G, and once that category got flooded with ant titles for weeks on end, he might be exiled to a single thread anytime it concerned ants. Because viewers have seen the glitter and awe wear off many times before, upon mixing contestants of fame with everyday contestants on reality game shows. Gabe: "Just look at that. Not only are Matt and Holly inept and confused half the time when it comes to the simplest tasks, but they don't really piss Chateau Lafite-Rothschild, and have to use leaves as a substitute just like the rest."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top