Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Sporeworks
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
Newtonian physics - observer affects observed?
    #6934870 -

Quantum physics is so well known for the observer affects observed phenomenon.

Isn't the same thing shown from Newtonian physics? I can't think of a single type of measurement where the measurement itself does not affect the thing measured.
- If you measure pressure you must release some pressure into the gauge.
- When measuring electrical resistance, a very small resistance is added in parallel by the device
- When weighing something, the weight will depend slightly on your elevation (due to changes in buoyant forces of the air as one moves higher into the atmosphere).
- And for length, the object measured will deform ever so slightly due to pressure applied to it with the scale (or from heat absorbed by the person measuring).

Is the phenomenon somehow different with quantum physics? I have heard you can't measure spin and charge at the same time (or something of the sort), but how is that different? Why is there such widespread interest?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: Epigallo]
    #6934900 -

bradleycny said:
Why is there such widespread interest?


Because it's possibly the link between science, and "spirit" that has, up to now, left science lacking a fundamental element.

M


--------------------
Wave upon wave of demented avengers marched cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: Mycomyth]
    #6934902 -

Mycomyth said:
bradleycny said:
Why is there such widespread interest?


Because it's possibly the link between science, and "spirit" that has, up to now, left science lacking a fundamental element.

M


:yesnod:

With other words, to make it short, the purpose of quantum psychics is to find the order in an apparently chaotic system.


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs
:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Edited by MushroomTrip (05/18/07 04:59 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: Epigallo]
    #6935138 -

bradleycny said:
Is the phenomenon somehow different with quantum physics? I have heard you can't measure spin and charge at the same time (or something of the sort), but how is that different? Why is there such widespread interest?


It's position and velocity :wink:

If you try to measure position to a very high degree, you will lose any info you wanted about velocity. Likewise with velocity.

To be honest I don't think this conclusion is anything special. It seems obvious that this would be the case. I think a lot of people get hung up on it for the wrong reasons...they assume that it is "the observer who determines reality". This isn't the case, and a true understanding of QM theory will remedy the conclusion.

It also ties in closely with something called the "Copenhagen interpretation" that was put forth by Neils Bohr. It states that because we can't know the position and velocity (among other things) of a particle...it doesn't have an exact position or velocity until it is measured. Before measurement it exists as a probability only, with nothing definite about it.

I think that is dead wrong...but that's just my opinion.


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: Mycomyth]
    #6935145 -

Mycomyth said:
bradleycny said:
Why is there such widespread interest?


Because it's possibly the link between science, and "spirit" that has, up to now, left science lacking a fundamental element.

M


I was under the impression that the link to spirit was due to the fact that you can't take the observer out of the observed. As I pointed out, this is true in Newtonian phys. as well. That's why I was wondering if Quantum phys. is demonstrating something entirely different than what I pointed out is true for Netwonian.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: Epigallo]
    #6935189 -

With other words, to make it short, the purpose of quantum psychics is to find the order in an apparently chaotic system.

The purpose of every scientific pursuit is to put in order the facts of experience. :shrug:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: Epigallo]
    #6935208 -

Yes and? The purpose of medicine is to put order in a disturbed system or to explain a certain mechanism which seems ambiguous. What's your point?


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs
:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6935314 -

I asked what made quantum physics different with respect to the observer affects observed phenomenon and you replied that it attempts to find order. First, this does not make it different. Second, it doesn't come close to answering the question.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: Epigallo]
    #6935368 -

I was referring to different approaches.
While one is observing discernible/distinguishable chains of cause-effect, the other (quantum) is linked to more subtle forms of cause effect. It's all about different frames of reference.


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs
:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6935437 -

Come again?


--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free.
But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: trendal]
    #6935480 -

Quantum physics studies the interaction between matters that can reach a microscopic level and the behavior of energy… by these I was referring to as subtle forms.


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs
:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: trendal]
    #6935777 -

trendal said:
It's position and velocity :wink:



Actually it's position and momentum.  Also, energy and time.  And angular position and momentum, and total angular momentum and any chosen component of angular momentum.

These observables (time, position, momentum etc.) which describe a state of a quantum system are said to be non-compatible with each other.  Any pair of non-compatible observables have a fundamental uncertainty relation which is actually due to mathematical properties in the models used to describe them, not just a mechanistic idea of "observer effect".  Specifically, any pair of observables whose commutator is not zero are non-compatible.

Check out this wikipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_Principle

The main reason that the uncertainty principle plays such a major role in quantum mechanics is because of the scale.  Since we are dealing with very small systems (atomic scale and smaller) in quantum mechanics we end up having quite a different model from the mechanical ones we use to describe the everyday world.  So it's true that in the everyday world there is a fundamental uncertainty in all our observations, it's just that this uncertainty is usually so small that it can be neglected.  The uncertainties in measurement due to normal "observer effect" that you're talking about have been known about for a long time, of course.  That's why scienctists spend so much time designing experiments where the influence of the act of observation has as little impact on the phenomena being observed as possible.

Quantum effects DO play a role in the world you see around you, however.  From a halogen lightbulb to the operation of a transistor radio to the optical and thermodynamic properties of all matter, if you look close enough you pretty much have to start taking quantum mechanics into account.

Edited by Karmatron (05/18/07 08:23 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: Epigallo]
    #6935848 -

Newtonian physics is wrong (well, it's approximately true). Ever heard of a guy named Albert Einstein? :wink:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: Epigallo]
    #6940525 -

bradleycny said:
- If you measure pressure you must release some pressure into the gauge.


There is more than one way to measure pressure....


Quote:
- When measuring electrical resistance, a very small resistance is added in parallel by the device


I don't know much about electronics, but is there another way to measure electrical resistance....?


Quote:
- When weighing something, the weight will depend slightly on your elevation (due to changes in buoyant forces of the air as one moves higher into the atmosphere).


Optics and light....


Quote:
- And for length, the object measured will deform ever so slightly due to pressure applied to it with the scale (or from heat absorbed by the person measuring).


Again, optics and light....
And the person does not have to "handle" the object, so there is no heat to transfer....


But then again, by doing any of the above, you are doing more than just observing the observed....
You are measuring the measured....
It is like the fundamental difference between "being" and "doing"....


>^;;^<


--------------------
I'll be your midnight French Fry....  :naughty:

"The most important things in life that are often ignored, are the things that one cannot see...."
>^;;^<

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6940533 -

MushroomTrip said:
Quantum physics studies the interaction between matters that can reach a microscopic level and the behavior of energy… by these I was referring to as subtle forms.


That makes absolutely no sense - both in terms of syntax and content.

Care to elaborate?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: spud]
    #6940541 -

Quote:
Care to elaborate?


Not really


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs
:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #6940566 -

MushroomTrip said:
Quote:
Care to elaborate?


Not really


You offer a compelling argument. :smirk:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: spud]
    #6941340 -

spirit

earth wind

water fire

dont worry about science, its just a bunch of mumbo to me

yea its impossible to trust ourselves because we cant measure something except by the memory of it and the countless other reasons we are fallible

enjoy your aids


--------------------
"It is easier to teach a computer to play chess than to build a mudpie."Sherry Turkle Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet
"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts"-Einstein
:mrt: I pity the fool who break traffic laws with $870,000 of drugs in the car.      -mo0nlite_sonata
Psythos

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: spud]
    #6942731 -

WE are artificial symbiotic experiments so I looked at reciprocal relations and at the maximum power principle. Said Onsager.


--------------------
Wave.
'And for this reason repentance (metanoia) is an elevating means. For he who feels impatience with the circunstances in which he finds himself, devises means of escape.
  Now the chief thing in purification is the will. For then both deeds and words lend a helping hand. But, when the will is absent, the whole purificatory discipline of initiation is...'

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Newtonian physics - observer affects observed? [Re: Epigallo]
    #6943863 -

To a certain extent, no experiment can be completely unhinged from the effects of the experimental apparatus. It's only that in the classical regime the effects imparted by the apparatus are so small as to be negligible, so they're ignored.

Uncertainty relations are, as someone has already pointed out, quite general in quantum mechanics and not limited to position and momentum. In fact, they aren't even limited to quantum mechanics, but rather they appear in quantum mechanics because uncertainty is part and parcel of any wave mechanics. Consider a rope, fixed at one end and held in your hand at the other. If you move your end up and down once and abruptly, you'll send a well-defined pulse through the rope. You have a good idea of where the pulse is at every time, but since there's only one, you can't talk about wavelength. With only a single pulse, there isn't any wavelength to talk about. Now if you move your hand up and down several times, you won't be able to talk about the position of the pulse, but you can talk about wavelength. That's a position momentum uncertainty relation that can be demonstrated in the classical regime.

Sound waves are another example. Flutes have a very high pitch that comes from a very short wavelength, while bass notes have a larger wavelength. Now consider those wavelengths with respect to the duration of the notes. Several cycles will be present in a note played by a flute, so your brain has a large sample set with which to determine which note you're hearing. This is exactly why it's so hard to get two flutes to play in tune.

On the other hand, the wavelength of a bass note is so large with respect to the duration of a note that your brain can't determine the wavelength. That's why it's so hard to determine where a bass note is coming from.

From a staunchly empiricist view, we might even say in the latter case that the inability to measure a well-defined wavelength should be expected -- without a long sample, it doesn't even make sense to speak of the wavelength. Thus, it isn't well-defined.

That's exactly what happens in quantum mechanics. It's something akin to phenomenalism, there is nothing mystical or spooky about a particle losing its well-defined properties from one operator when we measure an incompatible one, and there's nothing spooky or mystical about it not having well-defined properties when it isn't being "observed".

I put "observed" in quotes because it is a very poor choice of a word. Heisenberg himself suggested that the word should be "interaction" rather than "observation". If I tried to describe my position to you right now, I'd have to tell you that I'm at a desk, behind a computer, two feet from a bookshelf and so on. Position is a relative thing, and coordinates are defined by our surroundings. So, if a particle isn't interacting with anything, its position must become less well-defined.

The interaction with something doesn't need to be a conscious observation. It could be anything. A vast majority of the position-defining interactions that a particle will experience are likely jitters in the vacuum. That, for example, is what triggers spontaneous emission. Here's how I can say that: in quantum mechanics there's something known as the Quantum Zeno Effect, or also The Watched Pot Paradox. Under the Generalized Statistical Interpretation, it should happen that successive observations of a particle should retard its evolution because the evolution occurs according to its wavefunction, which itself is a description of the probabilities that the particle will obey when not being continuously observed.

The surprising thing is that this is exactly what happens. When successive measurements on particles are made, they become trapped in the first state to be measured in the experiment.

However, this doesn't translate to the macroscopic world. When you watch a pot boil in your kitchen, it does it at exactly the same rate as when you aren't watching it boil. So what gives? The answer must be that there are effects other than your conscious observation which are more significant in the rate at which the ensemble evolves.

It only looks magical if you don't understand phenomenology. And I'm not sure that Bohr did, and that's too bad. The Copanhagen Interpretation not only the one that conforms to experiment, but in light of phenomenology it also makes perfect sense. No spooky shit required.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Consciousness, Physics, and Spirituality. Reggaejunkiejew 2,390 6 01/16/17 09:38 PM
by Middleman
* Autobiography of a Yogi: Paramahansa Yogananda medicinebag 1,323 14 11/29/03 10:25 PM
by medicinebag
* the infinite wheel revisited Zekebomb 1,221 6 02/23/05 09:12 PM
by TheShroomHermit
* Has anyone noticed that they affect electrical devices???
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 dmtrypr 6,253 62 08/24/04 12:25 AM
by Philanthropist
* Is the physical world independent of consciousness?
( 1 2 all )		 Divided_Sky 3,979 27 08/25/04 01:11 PM
by Zahid
* Big Bang
( 1 2 all )		 spudamore 1,882 26 12/11/04 12:58 AM
by shroomydan
* The post that never dies
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Dogomush 8,221 62 08/29/03 01:23 PM
by fireworks_god
* Stone Circles, crop cicles, pendant circles- the circle of life
( 1 2 all )		 Aqua 3,215 28 02/05/05 06:03 PM
by soulmotion

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
2,051 topic views. 2 members, 44 guests and 32 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.