Posted on 06/02/2018 5:57:58 AM PDT by BenLurkin
Hugh Everett took his Many Worlds interpretation of QM seriously and smoke, drank and ate his way to an early death.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Everett_III
Only in recent years has the technology necessary for answering this question become accessible, enabling a string of experimental results—including startling ones reported in 2007 and 2010, and culminating now with a remarkable test reported in May—that show that key predictions of QM are indeed correct. Taken together, these experiments indicate that the everyday world we perceive does not exist until observed, which in turn suggests—as we shall argue in this essay—a primary role for mind in nature.
...
If John Wheeler were alive he would be thrilled.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler
Esse est percipi.
Yes yes. Mind is senior to matter. Known for millenia. Finally the entropists begin to get a clue.
I think what the article is saying is that your thoughts and imagination are inseparable from what we intuitively call physical reality.
But once reality does exist in a certain form,it is independent of consciousness and cannot be changed by consciousness, The law of identity is still true. A is still A. The nature of entities does not change just because it is observed over and over again.
If there is a designer outside of space and time setting it up, then these questions can be resolved. Like computer game designers programming a simulation, or like God.
Sorry, I changed the outcome of this article by clicking on it.
I have a HS classmate who is a physics professor at Brown, I believe. He wrote a paper along those lines a few years back.
Look up Brad Marston.
Only in recent years has the technology necessary for answering this question become accessible, enabling a string of experimental results—including startling ones reported in 2007 and 2010, and culminating now with a remarkable test reported in May.
...
While I believe in free will, that test in May assumes that humans have free will.
I have to wonder if this might not be evidence of the hidden not material world and our connection to it through our soul that is leaking through to our reality.
Think of it as static in the reality projector of God.
What happens when two observing entities, one male and one female show love, appreciation and respect for one another and confirm it publicly? Very often a healthy child is born. What else is there to know about this? Just kidding.
“Explore how our group is using theoretical and computational physics to better understand the planet, and address environmental challenges.
“
http://www.brown.edu/Research/Environmental_Physics/Environmental_Physics/Welcome.html
If it doesn’t lead to more powerful orgasms, who cares.
Sounds more like philosophy than science.
>> Sounds like solipsism to me <<
Beat me to it!
(And thanks, because I didn’t need to look up the correct spelling!)
” On the flip side, there can only be one truth. “
The point of the article is that there isn’t just one truth. There is one truth per person, so there are many truths.
Neither QM nor any other scientific theory is literally “true” in the metaphyscial sense.
Rather, each theory is basically an abstract model that uses simplifying assumptions to explain and predict events observed in the real world.
The assumptions themselves need not correspond to strict standards of “reality” as long as the predictions of the theory or model are accurate enough for whatever standards of utility we might impose.
That's so gay.
Next thing, they will claim that,
Linear
Gluon
Beams
Temper
Quarks?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.