It is essential to realize that staring at the double slit experiment will not cause the pattern to change.
---QED
The source is an Internet person named "QED."Is that your own quote Paul or did you forget to cite the source?
The source is an Internet person named "QED."
~~ Paul
Hey, I can't help it if people like to assign themselves funky forum names, Hurmanetar. :)Quantum Electro-Dynamics?
Hey, I can't help it if people like to assign themselves funky forum names, Hurmanetar. :)
~~ Paul
The source is an Internet person named "QED."
~~ Paul
The quote was posted on another forum by someone whose member name is QED. Actually, it's lowercase qed. I'll fix my post.The Abbreviations QED are what people use at the end of a statement or argument to maintain their point is proven.
It is not a name of somebody. So without the proper citation of the source, it becomes more difficult to verify and basically just becomes an assertion.
The quote was posted on another forum by someone whose member name is QED. Actually, it's lowercase qed. I'll fix my post.
~~ Paul
You mean you have a reference to an experiment where just staring at a double slit causes a change?I think you're yanking my chain Paul, but in any case, I don't think the source carries much weight to the verification of the quote and it becomes a struggle to become convinced of any truth to it.
But the Bhagavad Gita and Unknown are?It may be true but a forum members post is not really a viable source. But you know that right! right! You're just playing around.
You mean you have a reference to an experiment where just staring at a double slit causes a change?
You mean you have a reference to an experiment where just staring at a double slit causes a change?
But the Bhagavad Gita and Unknown are?
https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-interaction-causes-wave-collapse-in-quantum-mechanics.t4479/
~~ Paul
Oh yeah, those experiments. Perhaps qed spoke too soon. Though I doubt it.
There are quotes from "Unknown." I didn't realize that the quotes were undergoing some test of veracity.The Bhagavad Gita is at least an authoritative source and if you dispute it's content you can at least question the source.
But just posting any old junk from random people who post on forums, is a lot more difficult to question.
What is your problem Paul, I am sure you are not that inept and can at least provide a valid source for the content you wish to post.
Scientists don't perform observation literally by staring at the apparatus. Except for Radin, of course.Consider the double-slit experiment: if one “watches” a subatomic particle or a bit of light pass through slits on a barrier, it behaves like a particle and creates solid-looking hits behind the individual slits on the final barrier that measures the impacts. Like a tiny bullet, it logically passes through one or the other hole. But if the scientists do not observe the trajectory of the particle, then it exhibits the behavior of waves that allow it pass through both holes at the same time. Why does our observation change what happens?
Answer: Because reality is a process that requires our consciousness.