Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Vault
Time Travel Schematics
T.E.C. Time Archive
The Why Files
Have You Seen...?
Chronovisor
TimeTravelForum.tk
TimeTravelForum.net
ParanormalNetwork.net
Paranormalis.com
ConspiracyCafe.net
Streams
Live streams
Featured streams
Multi-Viewer
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Travel Discussion
Questions for any body? Changing timelines
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Apri1" data-source="post: 188333" data-attributes="member: 10340"><p>Again you are taking "observer" to mean the english keyword rather than what it actually means. An "observer" is anything other than the quantum superposition that attempts to interact with it. It doesn't need to be a human observer. Quantum superpositions happen without humans, and the wave functions collapse without humans. We can extrapolate this to show possibilities in different decisions/choices, which is usually how the theory is portrayed in fiction/media. Since most timelines are going to be almost identical except a particular atom in a slightly different position. So it's only worth talking about timelines that are noticeably different.</p><p></p><p></p><p>In such a world nothing would happen, or move, or exist. So sure, in such a world there wouldn't be any action nor any future. That has nothing to do with humans in particular. "observer" doesn't mean "human". It means "interaction with the quantum superposition".</p><p></p><p></p><p>And you'd be incorrect. At least if you are meaning "observer" in reference to the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. Though there is an argument to be had for personal observation moving through before/after the wave function collapse and ending up on one side despite physically identical brains in each; at which point we get into theology and the nature of the soul and spirit, along with temporal migration of them.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes. When something interacts with the quantum state the wave function collapses and we arrive at a single result. IE a particular timeline out of the many. There are other models for why wavefunction collapse happens, but the MWI posits that it doesn't collapse, and instead both outcomes legitimately occur. Rather than one being "arbitrarily" chosen. Of course, we know the MWI is correct, even if scientists haven't gotten that far yet.</p><p></p><p></p><p>It's because you're thinking about it wrong. Using an abstraction to decisions helps clarify this a bit. Imagine you had to decide whether you were going to have vanilla icecream or chocolate. As it stands, it is prior to the event of you getting icecream. Both are technically possible outcomes. They both exist as possible futures. When you eventually end up going and getting icecream, you make a decision, perhaps vanilla, and the wave function collapses. There is now no chance that you will get chocolate, because you have gotten vanilla. Similarly, the photon can go through either slit, and we don't know which one it will be until it goes through one and we observe it. Both are possible futures for the photon. What's interesting is that if we close the slit <em>after</em> the photon goes through but <em>before</em> we measure, the photon acts differently. Retrocausality. Interesting stuff, I'm not a physicist so I might have botched that explanation. Basically, the probability wave function collapse upon the event (clear measurement) taking place.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Apri1, post: 188333, member: 10340"] Again you are taking "observer" to mean the english keyword rather than what it actually means. An "observer" is anything other than the quantum superposition that attempts to interact with it. It doesn't need to be a human observer. Quantum superpositions happen without humans, and the wave functions collapse without humans. We can extrapolate this to show possibilities in different decisions/choices, which is usually how the theory is portrayed in fiction/media. Since most timelines are going to be almost identical except a particular atom in a slightly different position. So it's only worth talking about timelines that are noticeably different. In such a world nothing would happen, or move, or exist. So sure, in such a world there wouldn't be any action nor any future. That has nothing to do with humans in particular. "observer" doesn't mean "human". It means "interaction with the quantum superposition". And you'd be incorrect. At least if you are meaning "observer" in reference to the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. Though there is an argument to be had for personal observation moving through before/after the wave function collapse and ending up on one side despite physically identical brains in each; at which point we get into theology and the nature of the soul and spirit, along with temporal migration of them. Yes. When something interacts with the quantum state the wave function collapses and we arrive at a single result. IE a particular timeline out of the many. There are other models for why wavefunction collapse happens, but the MWI posits that it doesn't collapse, and instead both outcomes legitimately occur. Rather than one being "arbitrarily" chosen. Of course, we know the MWI is correct, even if scientists haven't gotten that far yet. It's because you're thinking about it wrong. Using an abstraction to decisions helps clarify this a bit. Imagine you had to decide whether you were going to have vanilla icecream or chocolate. As it stands, it is prior to the event of you getting icecream. Both are technically possible outcomes. They both exist as possible futures. When you eventually end up going and getting icecream, you make a decision, perhaps vanilla, and the wave function collapses. There is now no chance that you will get chocolate, because you have gotten vanilla. Similarly, the photon can go through either slit, and we don't know which one it will be until it goes through one and we observe it. Both are possible futures for the photon. What's interesting is that if we close the slit [I]after[/I] the photon goes through but [I]before[/I] we measure, the photon acts differently. Retrocausality. Interesting stuff, I'm not a physicist so I might have botched that explanation. Basically, the probability wave function collapse upon the event (clear measurement) taking place. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Time Travel Forum
Time Travel Discussion
Questions for any body? Changing timelines
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top