Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is there no such thing as objective reality?

Collapse
X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is there no such thing as objective reality?

    Looks like John Lennon might not have been too far from the truth when he sang "nothing is real..." - at least according to quantum physicists...

    Proietti and co’s result suggests that objective reality does not exist. In other words, the experiment suggests that one or more of the assumptions—the idea that there is a reality we can agree on, the idea that we have freedom of choice, or the idea of locality—must be wrong.


    This could have major implications for science, and the scientific method.

    Nevertheless, the work has important implications for the work of scientists. “The scientific method relies on facts, established through repeated measurements and agreed upon universally, independently of who observed them,” say Proietti and co. And yet in the same paper, they undermine this idea, perhaps fatally.


    https://www.technologyreview.com/s/6...ctive-reality/


    **********

    "Look at it this way: think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize half of 'em are stupider than that."
    - George Carlin

    "It shouldn't be expected that people are necessarily doing what they appear to be doing on records."
    - Sir George Martin, All You Need Is Ears

    "The music business will be revitalized by musicians, not the labels or Live Nation. When the musicians decide to put music first, instead of money, the public will flock to the fruits and the scene will be healthy again."
    - Bob Lefsetz, The Lefsetz Letter

  • #2
    Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe View Post
    Looks like John Lennon might not have been too far from the truth when he sang "nothing is real..." - at least according to quantum physicists...

    Proietti and co’s result suggests that objective reality does not exist. In other words, the experiment suggests that one or more of the assumptions—the idea that there is a reality we can agree on, the idea that we have freedom of choice, or the idea of locality—must be wrong.


    This could have major implications for science, and the scientific method.

    Nevertheless, the work has important implications for the work of scientists. “The scientific method relies on facts, established through repeated measurements and agreed upon universally, independently of who observed them,” say Proietti and co. And yet in the same paper, they undermine this idea, perhaps fatally.


    https://www.technologyreview.com/s/6...ctive-reality/

    On a quantum level, "observable reality" has been on shaky ground ever since Heisenberg introduced the idea of observer as agent.

    On a macro level, same as it ever was...
    Keep the company of those who seek the truth, and run from those who have found it.

    -- Vaclav Havel

    The Universe is unimaginably vast. For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love.

    -- Carl Sagan


    Life - the way it really is - is a battle not between Bad and Good but between Bad and Worse.

    -- Joseph Brodsky

    Comment


    • #3
      "It's all relative."


      ...A. Einstein


      He's the kind of guy that Donald doesn't want to pilot airliners.


      ​​​​​​"I love the uneducated."

      ...some doofus.
      "Truth is what stands the test of experience."

      ...Albert Einstein

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe View Post
        Is there no such thing as objective reality?
        Nobody knows for sure.

        Two people in a room
        Their present locations
        An indication
        Of previous decisions


        Ed phobes fathered my child, the child which is music within me, suckling on his talented teet. His new CD is the breast pump which collects his sweet, sweet boob milk for all the world. Bravo Ed, Bravo!
        - MXR

        https://soundcloud.com/ed-phobes

        Comment


        • #5
          Sounds like somebody just saw the matrix...

          Click image for larger version

Name:	011af389aa37e76ed7234f559c086b6136e2eb17f94ccad56f37487221b30bcf.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	47.9 KB
ID:	32489817
          "Plunk your Magic Twanger, Froggy". Andy Devine

          Comment


          • #6
            We are all just a piece of the universe trying to understand itself.
            Two people in a room
            Their present locations
            An indication
            Of previous decisions


            Ed phobes fathered my child, the child which is music within me, suckling on his talented teet. His new CD is the breast pump which collects his sweet, sweet boob milk for all the world. Bravo Ed, Bravo!
            - MXR

            https://soundcloud.com/ed-phobes

            Comment


            • #7
              Like Red, I think the uncertainty principle pretty much implied this.

              __________________________________________________

              Is This Thing On?

              https://soundcloud.com/tom-hicks888

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Tom Hicks View Post
                Like Red, I think the uncertainty principle pretty much implied this.
                Yes, but now there's experimental evidence that directly supports that conclusion.

                Again, to quote from the linked article:

                the experiment suggests that one or more of the assumptions—the idea that there is a reality we can agree on, the idea that we have freedom of choice, or the idea of locality—must be wrong.

                To me, the really interesting question that arises from this research is - which of those three is wrong? Or are two or more of those assumptions incorrect?

                **********

                "Look at it this way: think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize half of 'em are stupider than that."
                - George Carlin

                "It shouldn't be expected that people are necessarily doing what they appear to be doing on records."
                - Sir George Martin, All You Need Is Ears

                "The music business will be revitalized by musicians, not the labels or Live Nation. When the musicians decide to put music first, instead of money, the public will flock to the fruits and the scene will be healthy again."
                - Bob Lefsetz, The Lefsetz Letter

                Comment


                • #9
                  Where's One Life when you need him?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe View Post

                    Yes, but now there's experimental evidence that directly supports that conclusion.

                    Again, to quote from the linked article:

                    the experiment suggests that one or more of the assumptions—the idea that there is a reality we can agree on, the idea that we have freedom of choice, or the idea of locality—must be wrong.

                    To me, the really interesting question that arises from this research is - which of those three is wrong? Or are two or more of those assumptions incorrect?
                    On a practical level, the notion of reality itself is a construct that arises from consciousness.

                    and since consciousness is inherently individualistic and singular according to the biases and the filters of the perceptor, it's really almost a moot question.
                    __________________________________________________

                    Is This Thing On?

                    https://soundcloud.com/tom-hicks888

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Everything is based on some assumption; even science. You can't prove that reality exists. The fact that every person lives their own lives and, hence, experiences a different reality from everyone else, indicates that it is quite subjective. Sort of a no-brainer for me. And I'm sort of no-brainer, but I can't prove that.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        If "Wigler" merely assumes there is superposition, and "Wigler's friend" has actually made a measurement to determine polarity...

                        Wigner has no information about his friend’s measurement and so is forced to assume that the photon and the measurement of it are in a superposition of all possible outcomes of the experiment.
                        What's the conflict?

                        "Wigler" just doesn't know yet...but his ignorance of the facts doesn't make both possibilities true.

                        Is this the same as Shroedinger's Cat? Again, the cat is dead or alive, but not both. My not knowing doesn't make both true.
                        Two people in a room
                        Their present locations
                        An indication
                        Of previous decisions


                        Ed phobes fathered my child, the child which is music within me, suckling on his talented teet. His new CD is the breast pump which collects his sweet, sweet boob milk for all the world. Bravo Ed, Bravo!
                        - MXR

                        https://soundcloud.com/ed-phobes

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe View Post

                          Yes, but now there's experimental evidence that directly supports that conclusion.

                          Again, to quote from the linked article:

                          the experiment suggests that one or more of the assumptions—the idea that there is a reality we can agree on, the idea that we have freedom of choice, or the idea of locality—must be wrong.

                          To me, the really interesting question that arises from this research is - which of those three is wrong? Or are two or more of those assumptions incorrect?
                          You can choose two, then you can't have the third. As stated above, it's quite derivative of Heisenberg, and seems to be the point where physics and philosophy begin to rub together.
                          Lease this space!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by -Ed Phobes- View Post

                            "Wigler" just doesn't know yet...but his ignorance of the facts doesn't make both possibilities true.

                            Is this the same as Shroedinger's Cat? Again, the cat is dead or alive, but not both. My not knowing doesn't make both true.
                            I saw an internet video of Schroedinger's cat. It was playing around in some box.
                            Lease this space!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Red Ant View Post

                              On a quantum level, "observable reality" has been on shaky ground ever since Heisenberg introduced the idea of observer as agent.

                              On a macro level, same as it ever was...
                              Even on a macro level, General relativity put paid to the idea of a universal 'now' in time. Surely that causes problems for objective reality.
                              Strangers on this road we are on,
                              and we are not two, we are one.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X