Consciousness and Quantum Mechanics

[blike]

This is kind of paraphrased from the current issue of scientific american.

 

Quantum indeterminsm implies that for a particular quantum state there are many alternative futures or potential realities. Quantum mechanics supplies the relative probabilities for each observable outcome, although it won't say which potential future is destined for reality.

 

Take for example an electron hitting an atom and bouncing off. The electron will bounce in one direction of many possiblities, and it is impossible to predict in advance what outcome in any given case will be.

 

But when a human observer makes a measurement, one and only one result is obtained; for example, the electron will be found moving in a certain direction. In the act of measurement, a single, specific reality gets projected out from a vast array of possibilities. Within the observer's mind, the possible makes a transition to the actual, the open future to the fixed past.

 

There is no agreement among physicists on how this transition from many potential realities in to single actuality takes place.

 

--

 

Does consciousness play a key role in our universe?

[Radical Edward]

I doubt it. It is similar to the 'if a tree falls in a forest and there is no-one around to hear it, does it still make a sound' question.

[aman]

Consciousness does have a great impact because we have choice. Mass will naturally do what natural laws say and can be calculated and predicted if we have enough information. It is our freedom of choice that let's us interfere. A universe empty of us will start and end according to strict rules. We mess up the equation. Hopefully for the better.

Just aman

[Radical Edward]

I don;t think we do mess up the equation really, since chaos is thrown into the measure. we are just highly organised structures that's all, the universe still follows the same rules, as do we.

[aman]

Where is chaos in a universe without life? Stars will shrink at predictable levels and explode. Debris will fly through the universe with the predictablility of very complicated billiards but calculatable. Elements will decay or combine or fuse or fall into black holes but there is no chaos. We cause the chaos

We lift rocks up and pile them because we decide or we take the day off and go fishing. We can't have the restrictions of A + B always equaling the same C

Just aman

[Ragnarak]

Are you saying that it is possible for example to predict the weather on mars forever to an infinite degree of accuracy?

 

There's no life involved so by your reasoning it should be possible.

 

 

"Stars will shrink at predictable levels and explode. Debris will fly through the universe with the predictablility of very complicated billiards but calculatable. Elements will decay or combine or fuse or fall into black holes but there is no chaos. "

 

No, they won't.

 

Chaos is not just a human-caused 'thing'

[fafalone]

Chaos is entropy, entropy is time. On the macroscopic level, there is a limit to which we can predict accuracy; but this limit is where uncertainty on the quantum scale takes effect; so we could predict the weather if somehow we managed to know the position, direction, and momentum of every molecule at the same instant.

[Ragnarak]

Originally posted by fafalone

Chaos is entropy, entropy is time. On the macroscopic level, there is a limit to which we can predict accuracy; but this limit is where uncertainty on the quantum scale takes effect; so we could predict the weather if somehow we managed to know the position, direction, and momentum of every molecule at the same instant.

 

I don't know enough about Chaos Theory to argue with this properly but i'm almost certain that is incorrect.

 

Even with a simple system with well-defined laws, chaos theory means long-term predictabliity is impossible.

[aman]

I imagine a universe without life that begins,exists, then ends.

If I start it over again under the exact circumstances we should have a duplicate beginning, existance, and end. Over and over the cosmic billiards is set up and identicaly played out.

With life though, the universe may take different directions each time due to our choices. I feel we add the chaos.

Just aman

[Ragnarak]

Originally posted by aman

I imagine a universe without life that begins,exists, then ends.

If I start it over again under the exact circumstances we should have a duplicate beginning, existance, and end. Over and over the cosmic billiards is set up and identicaly played out.

 

I don't think that would be the case.

 

There is chaos involved in everything from turbulence to heat dissipation.

 

No two universes would be exactly the same.

 

Again i am arguing from a very very small amount of knowledge on the subject so could very well be incorrect.

[Ragnarak]

Originally posted by Ragnarak

 

I don't think that would be the case.

 

There is chaos involved in everything from turbulence to heat dissipation.

 

No two universes would be exactly the same.

 

Again i am arguing from a very very small amount of knowledge on the subject so could very well be incorrect.

 

"sensitive dependance on initial conditions" is the phrase i meant to add to that.

 

it would require an infinite (ie. impossible) amount of information to be able to predict exactly what would happen.

[fafalone]

I don't believe chaos theory rules out long term prediction of classic mechanical system. If we know what every force is doing, we'd know if it would interact with the object, or interact with something what would then interact...

Chaos theory is correct, but only because of quantum uncertainty.

[contradiction]

first of all, the fact that a human is observing the event is no different than if a robot were. im with Albert on this, at least not agreeing that determinism is violated AT ALL. chaos theory is bull.

at least in that it makes it seem as though chaos accually exists: real chaos.... and it never does. all it states is that a chaotic system is one that shows "sensitivity to initial conditions" -conditions of measurement that is. In "unchaotic" systems, usually a more precise measurment of the initial conditions will lead to a more precise prediction of the outcome.

in a chaotic system, the smallest imprecision in the measurement of the initial conditions leads to drastically wrong prediction of what will happen...

 

all a chaotic system is , is where there are too many variables and its too complex.

nothing is random, and causality is working just fine

 

one of the first ways chaos theory was discovered was in a computer program to predict weather. causality is working fine inside the computer, we are just too dumb.

 

consciousness is an illusion. mind is a quality of the brain.

 

brain is to mind as flame is to hot. thoughts are physical.

 

no such thing as free will. straight determinism.

[fafalone]

straight determinism does not exist because of quantum uncertainty, which is NOT chaos theory.

[Radical Edward]

Originally posted by contradiction

consciousness is an illusion. mind is a quality of the brain.

 

brain is to mind as flame is to hot. thoughts are physical.

 

no such thing as free will. straight determinism.

 

this implies total knowledge of physical laws, and the assumption that all of physics is computable, which is arrogant, and most likely incorrect.

[aman]

Since we live in a sensory existence sort of like a holographic existance bounded by the microcosom there is no reason the microcosom can't be fluid until it is measured or experienced. It seems to behave as though it is fluid and on hold until it is effected. The light interference experiments seem to verify this.

Our conscious effect on the microcosom is only to take the determinism out of the universe but that's just my opinion.

Just aman

[blike]

Originally posted by contradiction

no such thing as free will. straight determinism.

 

That statement is the result of some random physical process whose nature is beyond your comprehension (which is an illusion produced by the physical processes in your brain). The decision making process that led you to that conclusion was a mere illusion, and you really had no choice to believe otherwise.

 

True? Maybe.

[fafalone]

In some models, when two events have an equal probability of happening, they both do. This applies at the quantum level of course, and results in an infinite number of parallel realities, therefore everything thats happening in your reality is only one of the ways it could have happened.

[Deslaar]

Originally posted by fafalone

I don't believe chaos theory rules out long term prediction of classic mechanical system. If we know what every force is doing, we'd know if it would interact with the object, or interact with something what would then interact...

Chaos theory is correct, but only because of quantum uncertainty.

 

Chaotic systems such as the weather and plate tectonics are chaotic at a classical level not at quantum level. QM has nought to do with chaos theory.

[fafalone]

There is no chaos. Everything in classical mechanics is predictable. Any error arises from quantum effects.

[Deslaar]

Originally posted by fafalone

There is no chaos. Everything in classical mechanics is predictable. Any error arises from quantum effects.

 

Incorrect. Classical Chaotic Systems are NOT Quantum Chaotic Systems. The distinction between them is that the former is deterministic and the latter is not, however, both are chaotic.

[Radical Edward]

Originally posted by fafalone

Everything in classical mechanics is predictable. .

 

do you have a solution to the three body problem to hand then?

[T_FLeX]

Originally posted by blike

[bBut when a human observer makes a measurement, one and only one result is obtained; for example, the electron will be found moving in a certain direction. In the act of measurement, a single, specific reality gets projected out from a vast array of possibilities. Within the observer's mind, the possible makes a transition to the actual, the open future to the fixed past.

 

There is no agreement among physicists on how this transition from many potential realities in to single actuality takes place.

 

--

 

Does consciousness play a key role in our universe? [/b]

 

 

Like contradiction said it would be no different then if a robot were observing the electron, consciousness is not what determines the the ultimate path. From what I understand the act of observing the election, for example seeing it, you would have to hit it with photons. When it is hit by the photon it knocks it in a different direction. The more accurate you try to observe the position, by using a higher frequency (because the position can only be measured within the margin of the wavelength) the more energy you hit it with, thus altering it's velocity. The lower the frequency the larger the margin of error possible. So it's not really our consciousness that determines the outcome, more like us trying to measure it, is what gives it that illusion.

[fafalone]

Couldn't you compensate for that by applying an equal amount of energy in the exact opposite direction? That would be a feat of engineering decades down the road, but I don't see why it wouldn't be possible.

[contradiction]

T-flex.. exactly! people are so starved for anything magical! haha. oooh.... consciousness.... whatever. this quantum uncertainty is exactly what you said. physical inability to measure.

nothing magical. ill give another example in large terms of your electron one. if we measure the temp of a lake with a small thermometer, all is well, the act of measuring does not disturb this so called "objective" measurement. if however, you were to measure the temp of a thimble full of water with a fat thermometer, the act of measuring would change the tempereture, and lead to uncertainty. same thing. THE KEY POINT PEOPLE NEED TO REMEMBER IS THAT THAT THIMBLEFULL OF WATER WAS AT A REAL TEMPERATURE. it is only the INABILITY TO PERCEIVE that accounts for the uncertainty. there not accually uncertain.. things are still going on perfectly deterministicly.

 

its all in the size of what is being measured. electrons etc. are small (hahaha), and the tools for measuring them are the same size, and therefore influence alot, leading to the inability to perceive what it was before the measurement. THE VERY FACT THAT THE MEASUREMENT INFLUENCES,(WHAT CAUSES UNCERTAINTY) IS PURE DETERMINISM AT WORK!