The Observer Effect

[Luc Turpin]

3 minutes ago, Genady said:

Viscosity is a concept that we have invented to deal with fluids. (And, not an easy one to grasp.)

 

Yes.

I have to wrap my head around the idea about it becoming a tool, not about viscosity, for which i just picked out of the blue for argument sake

my contention here is that the act of measurement or observing changes something in the world, or is this again too far fetched.

note again, you can disengage at anytime from this discussion

 

Changes and then says something about the world

[Luc Turpin]

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

 

my contention here is that the act of measurement or observing changes something in the world, or is this again too far fetched.

Thinking more thoroughly, my contention is a foolish one!

[studiot]

3 hours ago, Luc Turpin said:

Now I get it, yes what effects; I was a step back, wanting to know if there was an effect; what, then answers my previous question that there are
 

 

I'm glad you worked that out for yourself.

Well done.

 

Tell me, do pictures help you understand ?

 

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

my contention here is that the act of measurement or observing changes something in the world, or is this again too far fetched.

It may do and it may not.

@joigus already told you that.

An example of a measurement that makes no changes would be to count the apples on a tree.

Whilst I like genady's fishy example, I think it quickly sowed it was too complicated so I will stick with apples.

[Luc Turpin]

Pictures help

need to think why i always return to a cause and effect kind of world

do not want to overstay my stay

 

 

[Genady]

The @studiot's example of counting apples on a tree reminded me of something that I've read too long ago to mention, but thanks to the Internet I could find the quote. It relates to my earlier mention of inventing tools to deal with the world:

(from no less than THE EVOLUTION OF PHYSICS BY A. EINSTEIN AND L. INFELD)

[Luc Turpin]

Something very basic that i do not grasp, must think

[sethoflagos]

1 hour ago, Genady said:

The @studiot's example of counting apples on a tree reminded me of something that I've read too long ago to mention, but thanks to the Internet I could find the quote. It relates to my earlier mention of inventing tools to deal with the world:

(from no less than THE EVOLUTION OF PHYSICS BY A. EINSTEIN AND L. INFELD)

I was outside having a smoke recently and whiled away the time watching a cat cautiously cross the pavement a couple of metres ahead of me seemingly intent on crossing the road.

The view down the road was obstructed by a parked van but from my vantage point I could see a pedestrian approaching on the far side pavement.

The cat  froze in its tracks. At first I thought that this was due to seeing the pedestrian. However, a car suddenly came into view and the cat bolted to hide underneath another vehicle parked off the road beside me.

After it had passed, the cat emerged once more and approached the road only to see a vehicle coming from the opposite direction whereupon it bolted yet again to its place of safe refuge.

Its third attempt at crossing the road passed uneventfully.

The cat clearly was a little cautious of nearby humans. It seemed to have no fear at all of stationary vehicles, indeed seeing them as places of safety, Yet it fled in absolute terror at the sight of a moving vehicle. 

In my experience, cats tend not to survive any degree of impact with the latter, so I was left wondering what the learning process might be. 

[geordief]

6 hours ago, studiot said:

An example of a measurement that makes no changes would be to count the apples on a tree

Doesn't that change the structure of the brain of the observer?

[studiot]

1 hour ago, Luc Turpin said:

Something very basic that i do not grasp, must think

Perhaps I have been trying to go to fast.

Remember that we are working our way towards the formula the @KJW gave for linearity ?

 

I like apples because the great man, Newton, liked them and I have already introduced the counting idea using them.

 

Remember I said that one important idea is to draw a boundary between the subject of interest and the rest of the universe ?

Well the box in the first picture attached does just that.
The boundary is the dashed line.
The subject of interest, also called the system, is a collection of apples.

Note that my world is just 'The World of Fruit'.

This is meant to illustrate that the whole arrangement is just an imaginary way of organising real things and that I can limit the 'world' to something useful.

 

 

Working now just on my subject of interest   - the collection of all apples.

This collection allows me to create the imaginary 'average apple' that I can use to represent every apple.

Ley us say for convenience that this average apple weighs 0.1 kilogrammes

I have tabulated the weight of several different numbers of these apples.

And then plotted a schoolboy graph of the weight of apples against number of apples so I can read off the weight of any number of apples.

We say two things about this graph.

That the weight of apples is proportional to the number of apples and I have given a simple formula, which we can examine in more detail next time.

We also say that the the relationship between weight and numbers of apples is Linear.

This relationship is the simplest form of linear and the plot or graph is a straight line.

A linear relationship is one of proportionality and has the equation or formula of a constant (1/10 in this case) times one of the two related variables.

 

How are we doing ?

11 minutes ago, geordief said:

Doesn't that change the structure of the brain of the observer?

Yes, but I think you will find that the original statement referred to changes in the observed system, not the observer.

[geordief]

46 minutes ago, sethoflagos said:

I was outside having a smoke recently and whiled away the time watching a cat cautiously cross the pavement a couple of metres ahead of me seemingly intent on crossing the road.

The view down the road was obstructed by a parked van but from my vantage point I could see a pedestrian approaching on the far side pavement.

The cat  froze in its tracks. At first I thought that this was due to seeing the pedestrian. However, a car suddenly came into view and the cat bolted to hide underneath another vehicle parked off the road beside me.

After it had passed, the cat emerged once more and approached the road only to see a vehicle coming from the opposite direction whereupon it bolted yet again to its place of safe refuge.

Its third attempt at crossing the road passed uneventfully.

The cat clearly was a little cautious of nearby humans. It seemed to have no fear at all of stationary vehicles, indeed seeing them as places of safety, Yet it fled in absolute terror at the sight of a moving vehicle. 

In my experience, cats tend not to survive any degree of impact with the latter, so I was left wondering what the learning process might be. 

Motion  itself is something that would occupy  the attention of a cat.

Does it see like a big dangerous  animal?

11 minutes ago, studiot said:

Yes, but I think you will find that the original statement referred to changes in the observed system, not the observer

.

This original statement?

6 hours ago, Luc Turpin said:

my contention here is that the act of measurement or observing changes something in the world, or is this again too far fetched

Perhaps you are right.

[sethoflagos]

3 minutes ago, geordief said:

Does it see like a big dangerous  animal?

The cat's clear overreaction could well suggest some flight response to a predator. Perhaps the sound of the engine stirs some ancient memory of a leopard's roar. I'll have to investigate their response to a car being started.

[geordief]

9 minutes ago, sethoflagos said:

The cat's clear overreaction could well suggest some flight response to a predator. Perhaps the sound of the engine stirs some ancient memory of a leopard's roar. I'll have to investigate their response to a car being started.

Maybe put on Stray Cat Blues on the car stereo as well

[Genady]

21 minutes ago, sethoflagos said:

The cat's clear overreaction

So many possibilities... Maybe the cat was bitten in the past by a person who arrived in a car...

[StringJunky]

If it's bigger than me; run. If it's smaller than me; eat it or chill.

[Luc Turpin]

45 minutes ago, studiot said:

Perhaps I have been trying to go to fast.

Remember that we are working our way towards the formula the @KJW gave for linearity ?

 

I like apples because the great man, Newton, liked them and I have already introduced the counting idea using them.

 

Remember I said that one important idea is to draw a boundary between the subject of interest and the rest of the universe ?

Well the box in the first picture attached does just that.
The boundary is the dashed line.
The subject of interest, also called the system, is a collection of apples.

Note that my world is just 'The World of Fruit'.

This is meant to illustrate that the whole arrangement is just an imaginary way of organising real things and that I can limit the 'world' to something useful.

 

 

Working now just on my subject of interest   - the collection of all apples.

This collection allows me to create the imaginary 'average apple' that I can use to represent every apple.

Ley us say for convenience that this average apple weighs 0.1 kilogrammes

I have tabulated the weight of several different numbers of these apples.

And then plotted a schoolboy graph of the weight of apples against number of apples so I can read off the weight of any number of apples.

We say two things about this graph.

That the weight of apples is proportional to the number of apples and I have given a simple formula, which we can examine in more detail next time.

We also say that the the relationship between weight and numbers of apples is Linear.

This relationship is the simplest form of linear and the plot or graph is a straight line.

A linear relationship is one of proportionality and has the equation or formula of a constant (1/10 in this case) times one of the two related variables.

 

How are we doing ?

 

Doing very well! Its the exact interpretation that I have of linear. 

3 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

If it's bigger than me; run. If it's smaller than me; eat it or chill.

The cat associated moving to danger; not moving to safety!

There is also the open (as in open area) and closed context

Cat's hide in brush, run in open areas.

But its more complicated than that, because of an interplay of those and other variables

[sethoflagos]

34 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

The cat associated moving to danger; not moving to safety!

There is also the open (as in open area) and closed context

Cat's hide in brush, run in open areas.

But its more complicated than that, because of an interplay of those and other variables

Indifferent to a stationary human though comforted by a stationary car.

Cautious of a nearby moving human yet terrified of a distant moving car (in a 20 mph zone)

Non-linear responses.

Have we got around to tipping points yet?

37 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

If it's bigger than me; run. If it's smaller than me; eat it or chill.

I've spent quite a lot of time on my birdwatching treks watching the reactions of various wild beasts to my presence and your summary is a good generalisation.

Except when an elephant waves its ears and its me who has to do the running. On second thoughts, it's the same deal.

Edited December 12, 2023 by sethoflagos

[Luc Turpin]

1 hour ago, sethoflagos said:

 

Non-linear responses.

Have we got around to tipping points yet?

 

Tipping points I know, but not now as i have so much to figure out before that

[studiot]

11 hours ago, Luc Turpin said:

Doing very well! Its the exact interpretation that I have of linear. 

Good that you have this sorted, is the pace better now ?

 

So onto the next bit, here we see how non linearity arises quite naturally in a simple way.
 

Keeping to my idea of worlds, we change from the world of material objects (fruit) to the world of abstract or theoretical objects, shapes. Out selection this time are simple squares and we consider the area of these squares, not as the number of squares increases but as the size as measured by length of side increases.

When we plot the relationship between area and length  of side the graph is found to be a curved line.

This is defined as non linear since it is not a straight line.

Comparing our linear apple equation with the formula for area we then find a new way of denoting linear and non linear.

This new way involves looking at the powers of the variables involved, and new terminology is introduced ready for future use.

So linear equationsa are of the first degree

non linear equations are of the second, third, fourth or whatever degree, so long as it is greater than first.

 

 

[Luc Turpin]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

Good that you have this sorted, is the pace better now ?

 

So onto the next bit, here we see how non linearity arises quite naturally in a simple way.
 

Keeping to my idea of worlds, we change from the world of material objects (fruit) to the world of abstract or theoretical objects, shapes. Out selection this time are simple squares and we consider the area of these squares, not as the number of squares increases but as the size as measured by length of side increases.

When we plot the relationship between area and length  of side the graph is found to be a curved line.

This is defined as non linear since it is not a straight line.

Comparing our linear apple equation with the formula for area we then find a new way of denoting linear and non linear.

This new way involves looking at the powers of the variables involved, and new terminology is introduced ready for future use.

So linear equationsa are of the first degree

non linear equations are of the second, third, fourth or whatever degree, so long as it is greater than first.

 

 

Both posts on linear and non-linear reassured me that I at least understood them in mathematical terms. So, its definition lies on the strict sense of linear (line) and non-linear (curved) for mathematics. I read throught the thread again (impressive posts from Seth, KJW and others) and rereading some old complexity/chaos material to try and determine what i am not grasping here. At this point, the only thing that I can put a finger on is that that one (complexity/chaos) appears to infuse more meaning (more effect?) to the terms (linear, non-linear) than the other (QM-math). For example, one seems to restrict more the interelationship of things while the other is more liberal at it. 

For want of a nail, the shoe was lost; For want of a shoe, the horse was lost; For want of a horse, the rider was lost; For want of a rider, the battle was lost; For want of a battle, the kingdom was lost.

Maybe I am mixing up non-linearity with chaos. Confusion still reins in my head. Need to think!

Note: I understand quite well the concept of two worlds: one outside and one inside our heads. I would also venture to say that QM is a third version of the world and that other science have also their own view of the world.

Comming back to the curved line on the diagram: what happens to the trajectory of the line after many-many iterations? And what kind of non-linear equations are required to be able to see the effects of some properties (sensitive to initial condition, figure such as the Lorenz attractor, etc.) of complexity/chaos?

6 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

Both posts on linear and non-linear reassured me that I at least understood them in mathematical terms. So, its definition lies on the strict sense of linear (line) and non-linear (curved) for mathematics. I read throught the thread again (impressive posts from Seth, KJW and others) and rereading some old complexity/chaos material to try and determine what i am not grasping here. At this point, the only thing that I can put a finger on is that one (complexity/chaos) appears to infuse more meaning (more effect?) to the terms (linear, non-linear) than the other (QM-math). For example, one seems to restrict more the interelationship of things while the other is more liberal at it. 

For want of a nail, the shoe was lost; For want of a shoe, the horse was lost; For want of a horse, the rider was lost; For want of a rider, the battle was lost; For want of a battle, the kingdom was lost.

Maybe I am mixing up non-linearity with chaos. Confusion still reins in my head. Need to think!

Note: I understand quite well the concept of two worlds: one outside and one inside our heads. I would also venture to say that QM is a third version of the world and that other sciences have also their own view of the world.

Comming back to the curved line on the diagram: what happens to the trajectory of the line after many-many iterations? And what kind of non-linear equations are required to be able to see the effects of some properties (sensitive to initial condition, figure such as the Lorenz attractor, etc.) of complexity/chaos?

Made slight corrections to it

[studiot]

15 minutes ago, Luc Turpin said:

Both posts on linear and non-linear reassured me that I at least understood them in mathematical terms.

Great so we can carry on with the program in this fashion.

Rather than worry about Chaos theory, which has little or nothing to do with Quantum theory, can I point out that there is something else basic in the post from KJW that I keep referring back to, that I have yet to mention.

I will leave you for the moment to try to figure out what this or you can wait for the next sheet where I will introduce it.

 

It's also good that you are beginning to tie together statements from others within this framework I am building for you.

There is a huge area of Mathematics called Linear Mathematics; it is even more important in Applied Mathematics.

[Luc Turpin]

8 minutes ago, studiot said:

Great so we can carry on with the program in this fashion.

Rather than worry about Chaos theory, which has little or nothing to do with Quantum theory, can I point out that there is something else basic in the post from KJW that I keep referring back to, that I have yet to mention.

I will leave you for the moment to try to figure out what this or you can wait for the next sheet where I will introduce it.

 

It's also good that you are beginning to tie together statements from others within this framework I am building for you.

There is a huge area of Mathematics called Linear Mathematics; it is even more important in Applied Mathematics.

You lead and I will follow.

will leave for now Chaos, unless someone mentions it.

You know that I will give myself a headache trying to figure out the KJW basic?

Linear versus applied maths is not familiar to me.

Can wait for the next post.

Cant wait that is

To me, that chaos should have little or nothing to do with QM, is incompatible with my view that QM or physics shoulld be the basis for all else. But I will leave it at that for the time being, so I can stick to the program. I feel that this the program is going to be very usefull to me.

[Alysdexic]

17 hours ago, studiot said:

fast

fast -> swift

[sethoflagos]

3 hours ago, Luc Turpin said:

Maybe I am mixing up non-linearity with chaos. Confusion still reins in my head. Need to think!

Chaos is imho an unhelpful word.

As mentioned above I find that replacing it with 'diversity' a great help. We then see complex systems featuring diverse inhomogenies of structure, energy and mass density, chemistry etc., each of which are quantifiable in terms of entropy.

And a little mathematical experimenting with the 2nd Law inequality shows that entropy scales with the logarithm of each of its system state variables (volume, temperature etc)

Boltzmann's (actually Planck's) famous formula for entropy S= k ln W where W is the number of microstates (possible permutations of location, momentum, particle type etc) encapsulate this non-linear logarithmic characteristic to all measures of diversity in a complex system. It's really rather fundamental and built in to macroscopic systems.

Of course a single isolated particle (a normal helium atom to keep things simple) taken in its own frame of reference is completely and uniquely identified. There is only one permutation. W = 1, ln W = 0 therefore S = 0. Entropy does not exist at the level of an isolated particle. It is purely a property of a multiplicity of particles. It is an emergent property that does not exist at the level of its constituent parts.

This is really the basis of most non-linear behaviour in complex physical systems such as weather.

Another time we can extend the discussion to information content and see that this reasoning governs much of our lives. 

Edited December 12, 2023 by sethoflagos
sp

[Luc Turpin]

4 hours ago, Luc Turpin said:

 

Maybe I am mixing up non-linearity with chaos. Confusion still reins in my head. Need to think!

 

I had some sort of an epiphany while skiing today. Training was demanding, but worthwhile. I think that I now know what is going wrong for me. While you are talking about QM, I am trying to pick-out things from these conversations that fit my mental picture of reality, which is heavily based on countess research findings that I read from various science fields. I also realized that I cannot do this without a sound basis of QM. Obviouos to studiot, but not for the one lost in the forest.

From now on, I will try and stick with learning about QM, but old habits die hard.

[joigus]

I think we're losing the patient.