Food & Drink0 min ago
One For The Scientists Here.
8 Answers
Answers
1 to 8 of 8
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I agree with its dismissal of the many-worlds interpretation, and of course it's worth looking at the science it cites, but I disagree profoundly with the end journey -- and, for that matter, several of the statements along the way.
I think the mistake here is to associate consciousness with the role of the "observer" in Quantum Mechanics. All the equations of QM say is that, at some point, a measurement is performed on the system. Nothing is ever said about how or why the measurement is performed, nor is there any need to add information about how performed it. All that's necessary is that the measurement happens. In various set-ups this may have surprisingly exotic effects, of course!
But the point is that there's no need for the measurement to "choose" to happen in a particular way. It just did (or didn't), and the quantum state behaves as appropriate.
If you want the fancy term for this, it's called "decoherence", and it's noticeably absent from the video. To be fair, decoherence is a very hard topic, but it's been part of mainstream science for about 50 years now, and is worth looking up as a serious and plausible alternative to any need for consciousness.
I think the mistake here is to associate consciousness with the role of the "observer" in Quantum Mechanics. All the equations of QM say is that, at some point, a measurement is performed on the system. Nothing is ever said about how or why the measurement is performed, nor is there any need to add information about how performed it. All that's necessary is that the measurement happens. In various set-ups this may have surprisingly exotic effects, of course!
But the point is that there's no need for the measurement to "choose" to happen in a particular way. It just did (or didn't), and the quantum state behaves as appropriate.
If you want the fancy term for this, it's called "decoherence", and it's noticeably absent from the video. To be fair, decoherence is a very hard topic, but it's been part of mainstream science for about 50 years now, and is worth looking up as a serious and plausible alternative to any need for consciousness.
It's a classic example of crowbarring science into a justification of religious belief. I'm not religious, but think that if you are, it's all about the strength of your faith. You shouldn't need badly-made videos with horrible non-stop music and gabbled explanations of Schrodinger to give your belief some sort of scientific validation. That's what faith is, you believe or you don't.
1 to 8 of 8
