Horizon - What is Reality?

[naomi24]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/...2011_What_Is_Reality/

If those who claim the so called 'paranormal' doesn't exist want food for thought, do please watch it - that is if you can bear to think outside your comfort zone.

[jake-the-peg]

I've got this recorded, not seen this yet but I've a pretty good idea what's going to be in it.

Electrons being in two positions at the same time, the various "interpretations" of quantum mechanics like the Copenhagen and the many worlds - all that good stuff.

Generally physicists don't get bogged down in this stuff - QM gives us probability numbers that allows you to predict the probability of certain results - they don't tend to get bogged down in what is going on inside the box because we now know that you can't observe what's in the box without it changing.

That puts it outside the realm of science and int the realm of philosophy. Much of the problem is that we have a large scale view of what reality is and try to impose that on the microscopic world - and that doesn't work. All our intuition is built from experiences in the day to day world of mm->Km scales and that simply doesn't map to the nm.

To get philosophical it a bit like two elephants wondering how a flea could possibly jump so high.

[woofgang]

J T P yes you can observe without changing and change can happen without observing.
http://en.wikipedia.o...ki/Schrödinger's_cat

[jake-the-peg]

How do you make that out woofgang?

Shrodingers cat argues exactly the opposite.

That two quantum states can simultaneously exist only until they are observed at which point one particular state falls out of the system.

You can see this with the twin slit electron experiment where by individual electrons sent through a pair of slits slowly build up an interference pattern - they seem to simultaneously go though both slits at the same time (quantum declocaisation) When you try to measure which slit the electron actually goes through you no longer get the interference pattern.

[Huderon]

Right, so that's faster-than-light travel sorted. I just have to figure out a way to persuade all the bits of me that are elsewhere to get together in the right sequence somewhere else in the universe and I'll be there ... but just to be on the safe side, I'd better figure out how to walk through "solid" matter first.

Nothing in the programme actually excludes the existence of what we see as paranormal (ghosts could be a visual and aural leakage from another universe for example). Nor does it exclude the existence of a god or gods; if we are just part of a holograph (and it would need to be one heck of a holograph as it will be constantly changing) what made the holograph in the first place ?

[woofgang]

read the whole article JTP.

[jake-the-peg]

Yes - I don't think it seems to have changed in the 20 years since I studied it at university Woofgang

[ludwig]

// That puts it outside the realm of science and int the realm of philosophy //

I reckon the boundary between science and philosophy is fluid one Jake.
At some point some ancient bod may well have have mused philosophically to his friend that perhaps it's us that's moving around the sun and not vice versa.

His friend may have replied that it's something we can never know because what happens in the heavens is beyond the scale of our understanding. What the sun does when it disappears can only be treated as a black box. We can predict the probability of when it's going to appear again and where it's going to appear at certain times of the year, but we will never be able to observe where it goes at night.

[jake-the-peg]

I disagree Ludwig although it is philosophy that drew the line - very much Karl Popper.

If it's something that is "falsifyable" it's science. It must be possible to disprove to be science.

That's why I don't really count these interpretations as proper science until someone can come up with an experiment that could be carried out to distinguish one from another.

Even if the technology was currently beyond us as is the case with a lot of string theory ideas, the point is it should be possible to disprove.

If there's no way to distinguish between the Many worlds interpretation and the Copenhagen interpretation for example then it belongs in philosophy and not in science.

I am biased of course as my background in in experimental rather than theoretical science and some theoreticians and mathematicans might hold a different view on that

[ludwig]

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you there Jake. My point is that at the time when my fictious two ancients had that conversation there was no way for them to distinguish what was revolving around what, so for them it was philosophy, because neither option was 'falsifyable' or 'verifiable'.
That was their schroedinger's cat if you like - 'We'll never know where the sun goes at night because at night it's always too dark to see it'.

Now it's science because we have the understanding and technology to know what's going on.

[jezter]

I agree with you guys that unless you can disprove something then it remains a theory, I guess most eastern religions are theories too - I'm with the Taoists myself.
.
All matter is energy condensed to a slow vibration. We are all one consciousness experiencing ourselves subjectively. There is no such thing as death, life is just a dream and we are all imaginations of ourselves. BH

[jezter]

Oh forgot ot ask about the imcro / macro distinction in quantum theory. I thought that superpositions only can occur when probability waves interact on a micro scale. On a macro scale the particles get involved with others that the probability equates differently so that superposition is not allowed. So basically when the sun is out of one view it is not interdeterminable since it would be involved with other obervers (including atoms etc...).

Back to the holographic theory tho, I dont get then how it explains the expanding spacetime thing, or black holes - are they holograms within a holagram?

[jake-the-peg]

The micro/macro distinction In QM is quite an interesting one. Last time I checked I think Benzene rings were about the largest things that QM effects had been directly demonstrated on.

This is in effect what the whole Schroedinger's cat argument is about.

Erwin Schroed inger hated this whole state juxtaposition argument and came up with the cat in the box that was dependant on a micro quantum state, whether or not the radioactive source had decayed.

The implication was that a macro object ( a cat ) could be dependant on a quantum state and hence could be in two states (alive and dead ) at the same time - claimed as a logical absurdity and therefore the theory must be wrong.

Many worlds seeks to nullify this argument by suggesting that there are mutiple Universes with distinct outcomes.

However just because something sounds to be a logical absurdity is no reason to reject in in QM

It is logically absurd that electrons can go through two slits at the same time

The EPR paradox and quantum entanglement are logically absurd

They still happen

It is however to my mind essentially a pointless argument. Until someone comes up with an experiment to destinguish between the ideas your selection of which one you back is essentially an emotional one.

[Count-A-Strong]

So were back to belief, rather than unquestionable facts JTP?

[Duncer]

But what if nothing at all exists and we are all just figments of each other's imagination?

[TTG]

I believe there in actual fact two levels of reality. Conciousness and unconciousness (sleep). When you are asleep and begin to dream, you accept that the dream is your reality. You don't suddenly think "Hang on...I am in bed asleep and should not be doing this/saying this" although I admit this has happened very, very rarely.

The other night I had a dream about been a teenage youth playing football with my mates from years ago and I accepted it as my reality.

At no point did I recall any (decades) of memories that had occurred since then and realised it should not be happening. As far as I was concerned, I was at my old home and on the local playing fields having a game of football with my mates.

[Count-A-Strong]

I quite often have dreams where I question whether it's real and, as the reality seems so complete, I always convince myself that it is. I have very vivid dreams and I've said to the Countess on a number of occassions that It's like living in two realities.

[naomi24]

LG, if you're going to criticize someone it's a really good idea to get it right, otherwise it can be a bit embarrassing. I actually said //if you can bear to think outside your comfort zone//, which indicates reluctance rather than incapability as you would have it. They are two very different things. In actual fact I believe the people I was addressing there are reluctant to think outside their comfort zone, since the best they can do is ridicule my point of view, intimate that I suffer from delusions, and tell me I am 'losing something up there'. And I'm rude and insulting? How does that work then?

[naomi24]

Fascinating subject isn't it. The thing is though, one of the scientists in that programme said that no one - absolutely no one - understands quantum mechanics - and he actually said 'if they claim to, then they don't' - or words to that effect. My point in posting the question was really to ask whether anyone else thinks it possible that the so-called 'paranormal' experiences that people claim to have could be attributable to some of the theories described in that programme? For example it not only spoke of possible parallel universes, but of multiple universes, and of other worlds existing within inches of our own, as well as demonstrating particles of light behaving in a completely unexpected way, and in a manner that currently defies our understanding. You see, I do believe that people see 'ghosts' (for want of a better word), and I do believe people experienced things that they cannot explain, but I don't believe any of it is 'supernatural', so maybe this is where the answers lie. As the man said 'reality is very elusive'.

[ludwig]

Naomi, you're probably aware that I share similar views -
ie that there's no such thing as the paranormal or the supernatural - there's only the normal and the natural. Something's either real or it isn't - if it's real then it's not para or super anything - it just is what it is.

I think it's beyond doubt that there are large sections of the normal and natural that our science can't currently explain or even detect properly - it's always been that way throughout the history of science so it would be pretty crazy to assume that's not currently the case in January 2011 - in fact a casual glance at any cosmology documentary including the Horizon one confirms that it isn't.

My view is that reality is far weirder than anything currently labelled paranormal - or even anything that anyone could imagine. If something can be in two places at one time, then pretty much anything's possible isn't it? You don't even have to go to the quantum level of weirdness - even a pretty 'mundane' effect like magnetic or gravitational attraction is pretty strange when you think about it.

I think it's perfectly possible that a number of the things currently dismissed as supernatural could well come to be explained properly as science continues to advance, but of course none of us can know for sure one way or the other.

[Count-A-Strong]

Just watched it. Mind blowing / mind numbing in equal measure. The fact that reality behaves differently when we look at it to how it does when we don't ( at least at a quantum level) would certainly seem to support a multiverse theory. Personally, find the theory that were all just holographic projections quite disturbing and the fact that we might be about to go some way to proving it even more disturbing. The implications for religion, as well as science, if it were to be proven, would be.......interesting.