How matter only has form when observed

Post Reply New Topic

My physics lecturer started talking off-topic about the double-slit experiment the other day and showed us this video. It's pretty fascinating really. It's hard to wrap your head around. How can observation be classed as physics if it preforms no physical change on the subject?

Yes Ive seen videos about this conundrum before.

Those atoms are tricky bastards, arent they?

They know to look busy when the camera is on, but go back to taking unauthorized smoking breaks when the camera is off.

Our observation of the atoms seems to change the very behavior we are trying to observe. And the atoms seem to even somehow "know" when we are looking at them!

There are more commonplace examples. You cant check the air pressure of tires without changing the air pressure of tires slightly when you apply a device to that nozzle thing on the tire. But you dont change the Moon's behavior just by looking at the Moon.

I want to know more about what the definition of observation is. See what level of observation would make them react like wavelengths. Like could you leave the sensor on and not look at the results? If not why does the surface that collects the diffraction results not count as an observer? They need to try it with as much variation as possible, try to narrow down what could possibly change something from reacting like a solid to reacting like a wavelength.

A surface cant be an "observer". An observer has to be a human person who ...observes the phenom in question. A surface can only be a tool for observation. Like a telescope, microscope, microphone, camera, etc.. Something that extends the senses of a human... who does the observation.

The issue is: how the heck can a brainless atom "know" that humans are observing it? Or seem to "know", and modify its behavior?

The only explanations are that the universe was created in some way to serve conscious beings. That literally goes against everything I believe in as an atheist. But logic says every action has a reaction, so the question is, why does the universe only present itself to conscious beings? Why cant matter be present all of the time in physical form? Are we in some kind of "simulation" where matter only presents itself for a purpose such as reducing information for the purposes of the simulation? Or have we got this all wrong and somehow wavelengths and matter are interchangeable and its relation to observation can be explained by measurable processes.

God just likes to f**k with our heads. Thats the only explanation I can think of.

For thousands of years we thought that we were the center of Universe. In fact it was obvious.

You look up into the daytime sky and you see the Sun rise and set. And you look up into the night sky and you see the moon rise and set on us, and you see all of the stars and planets rotating around our flat earth.

Then in the last few centuries we learned that the earth is round and not flat, that it rotates (so the stars arent actually going around us- it is we who are spinning), and that we are not the center of the planet system (the sun is), and that our sun centered system itself is in the boondocks of the galaxy, and the galaxy is no place special in the universe, and so on.

So we know that we are not in the center of creation.

But now folks claim that there is evidence that we live in a simulation. So maybe we ARE at the center of a computer game of Farmville being played by....God...or by some giant geeky kid in another reality...who is himself a character in a game of Sims...being played by an even bigger geeky kid in another reality, who is....

That is pretty obvious. The detector somehow interferes with the flow of the atoms when it is turned on, so the detector itself must have some sort of magnetic field or some other quality that alters the flow of the atoms.
How does the detector actually work? Does it beam some sort of light or wavelength at the atoms so the beam bounces back to detect them? If so, then there is your answer.

If you could convert matter into a wavelength, you would win a Nobel prize and discover a breakthrough bigger than general relativity.

You are right. It is pretty fascinating that in a millennias time they will look back on us and see what we understand now, as how we see the dark ages.

Yes. Thats probably it. The detector is like your tire pressure gauge- which effects your tire pressure slightly in order to measure your tire pressure. Except that atoms (being so tiny) are far more effected by the detector than the air pressure in your tire is effected by the gauge. So it must be doing something that influences the atoms-effects their behavior as much, and at the same time as, it detects their behavior. So its not as spooky as it looks.

I remember observing an interesting effect when I happened to have a pulley wheel on a shaft from an old cassette player. When I put it on the plughole with water in the sink it would vibrate at quite a speed and whilw vibrating it hardly let any water out. I was thinking how that effect can be harnessed to create an electric current or to be used for another useful purpose.

No, no, no. Hate to be a dick natural plastic. But you are getting way ahead of yourself. We dont know of anything that could turn matter into wavelengths. Converting matter into wavelengths would be the most advanced technological breakthrough we have ever made. To say something that simply counts atoms could do that would be a major oversight.

To clarify. Are particles matter? They must have substance or they can't be measured? Therefore I don't see why matter can't be formed into wavelengths? Am I missing something here?

Miles Mathis has a solution. It won't make much sense unless you imbibe more of his related work regarding his charge/photon field model of the universe though.

http://milesmathis.com/double.html

Some say he is a lunatic. Personally, I suspect he might be on to something.

Atoms have mass because they have sub atomic exchange particles called Higgs bosons that interact with the Higgs field. Technically matter can be in the form of wavelengths. But noone knows why atoms could be classed as wavelengths since there is nothing we know of that could make a single atom react like a wave.

But the atoms are not exactly acting like a wave because when he fired them one at a time, they were not sticking behind the first shield like the sand like material was. They were only doing that when fired lots at a time. Therefore they gave both a wave and a matter type of result.