7th April 2009, 1:33 AM
It's a twofer here! Fatal misunderstanding of both evolution and quantum mechanics in one thread? What more could I ask for?
The writer of "The Secret" was an uneducated moron. There is no aspect of quantum mechanics that says "what you think becomes real". Indeed, how could you test that? Further, just think about that for a second, "actualize" it. There's living contradictions in the fact that people can, and do, disagree with each other all the time. If thought dictated reality, the massive universe would be a trainwreck of destroyed histories every time humanity revised it's understanding of the cosmos. In fact, how could anything we ever observe contradict what we thought we'd see? Ever been surprised? That alone should be proof that thought doesn't dictate reality.
Heck, here's a thought experiment for ya. Let's say a driver, let's call him Mr. Hope, is driving to work totally convinced every light is going to be green on his way there. As he crosses one intersection, we insert another driver, let's call her Ms. Dream, who has the exact same thought. If their thoughts dictate reality and they hit that intersection at the same time, well it'll be rather unfortunate for all involved, unless they just pass right through each other. But hey, maybe they just split into other realities or something right? Well there's a fantastic scenario, you constantly flying from reality to reality, losing contact with the people you actually made connections with as they, back in reality prime or wherever, get to know their idealized version of you for the rest of their lives.
Oh and isn't it rather pessimistic to say thoughts dictate reality considering the number of people who are suffering? Not only are you saying "you must have a really bad outlook", you're also saying "your situation is your own fault", blaming them for something that as far as we can tell they didn't deserve. Plus, considering the number of people who have tried to convince themselves that something is totally going to happen, such as people convinced "this time I'll win the lottery, this time", doesn't that sort of fly against the idea? What, are you saying that they "weren't REALLY believing"? Perhaps a lingering doubt did it? Well what sort of random nonsense is that? A really strong conviction can be overridden by a slight doubt in the back of someone's head? Negative thoughts are stronger than positive ones? When one has such a mixed up mental state, which one are you saying comes out on top? Heck why isn't it a combination of them? Of course some thoughts about reality are internally inconsistant, would these be realized too? 1 plus 1 equals chicken? What effect is that time cube guy's thoughts having on reality?
But hey, maybe you think that it's all internalized. That it's real, to YOU but no one else.
Um, then that begs the question (well all of it does really), why try to convince anyone else? It's dangerously close to solipsism at this point. Is there any point even talking to us? Share the secret? Why? We're all part of your internal reality too. Why not just convince us by convincing yourself we all know the secret?
However, I should address this fundamental misunderstanding. Quantum physics is basically about things like electrons and quarks and the interactions of all manner of subatomic particles. While it's a key to developing a theory to describe the interactions of all of everything, it's not really some metaphysical meaning of life thing. No part of it's description of photons says that human perception modifies reality. Now part of this comes from a few experiments about observing something locking a particle's wave function into place. There's a number of things to be explained there. First, "observe" means something different than in everyday usage. It basically means an interaction between a particle and another. Meaning, once light bounces off a particle, it's been observed. It doesn't need to reach the eye, in fact no eyes need be present. A camera makes these observations too, but even that's not what is considered the observation in terms of the quantum state. That's what happens when a particle interacts with another.
A wave function is really just a probability distribution of what state a given thing is likely to be in when "observed" (again, that being when anything interacts with it). So, for example you take an electron. In most grade school test book models the position is locked, but it seems the reality is that it's existance is a probability cloud. Instead of A = A, A = a rough estimate of A. However, while this describes it when in the absence of something else (this is what is meant by it acting like a wave), the moment it interacts with something like a photon, it suddenly behaves as though instead of a cloud of probabilities, it's in a specific location. That position is random in the truest sense of the word, but it's heavily weighted, again that's what the "cloud" is. So a photon hits the cloud, to "determine" the state of the cloud, that cloud "collapses" into one fixed state, usually the most likely one given it's wave form, and this "collapsed" state determines the reaction afterwards. Once the interaction is over, the electron will take on a new wave form/cloud.
There is a LOT of math involved, and I don't understand most of it, but that's the rought synopsis of what quantum physics is dealing with.
Oh, and the quantum physicists who CAME UP with this stuff and actually DID experiments are who we should be listening to, not half wit writers with no background in it just tossing out their own interpretations of poorly understood quotes. Example, the iPod hard drive operates because of discoveries made in quantum mechanices.
The writer of "The Secret" was an uneducated moron. There is no aspect of quantum mechanics that says "what you think becomes real". Indeed, how could you test that? Further, just think about that for a second, "actualize" it. There's living contradictions in the fact that people can, and do, disagree with each other all the time. If thought dictated reality, the massive universe would be a trainwreck of destroyed histories every time humanity revised it's understanding of the cosmos. In fact, how could anything we ever observe contradict what we thought we'd see? Ever been surprised? That alone should be proof that thought doesn't dictate reality.
Heck, here's a thought experiment for ya. Let's say a driver, let's call him Mr. Hope, is driving to work totally convinced every light is going to be green on his way there. As he crosses one intersection, we insert another driver, let's call her Ms. Dream, who has the exact same thought. If their thoughts dictate reality and they hit that intersection at the same time, well it'll be rather unfortunate for all involved, unless they just pass right through each other. But hey, maybe they just split into other realities or something right? Well there's a fantastic scenario, you constantly flying from reality to reality, losing contact with the people you actually made connections with as they, back in reality prime or wherever, get to know their idealized version of you for the rest of their lives.
Oh and isn't it rather pessimistic to say thoughts dictate reality considering the number of people who are suffering? Not only are you saying "you must have a really bad outlook", you're also saying "your situation is your own fault", blaming them for something that as far as we can tell they didn't deserve. Plus, considering the number of people who have tried to convince themselves that something is totally going to happen, such as people convinced "this time I'll win the lottery, this time", doesn't that sort of fly against the idea? What, are you saying that they "weren't REALLY believing"? Perhaps a lingering doubt did it? Well what sort of random nonsense is that? A really strong conviction can be overridden by a slight doubt in the back of someone's head? Negative thoughts are stronger than positive ones? When one has such a mixed up mental state, which one are you saying comes out on top? Heck why isn't it a combination of them? Of course some thoughts about reality are internally inconsistant, would these be realized too? 1 plus 1 equals chicken? What effect is that time cube guy's thoughts having on reality?
But hey, maybe you think that it's all internalized. That it's real, to YOU but no one else.
Um, then that begs the question (well all of it does really), why try to convince anyone else? It's dangerously close to solipsism at this point. Is there any point even talking to us? Share the secret? Why? We're all part of your internal reality too. Why not just convince us by convincing yourself we all know the secret?
However, I should address this fundamental misunderstanding. Quantum physics is basically about things like electrons and quarks and the interactions of all manner of subatomic particles. While it's a key to developing a theory to describe the interactions of all of everything, it's not really some metaphysical meaning of life thing. No part of it's description of photons says that human perception modifies reality. Now part of this comes from a few experiments about observing something locking a particle's wave function into place. There's a number of things to be explained there. First, "observe" means something different than in everyday usage. It basically means an interaction between a particle and another. Meaning, once light bounces off a particle, it's been observed. It doesn't need to reach the eye, in fact no eyes need be present. A camera makes these observations too, but even that's not what is considered the observation in terms of the quantum state. That's what happens when a particle interacts with another.
A wave function is really just a probability distribution of what state a given thing is likely to be in when "observed" (again, that being when anything interacts with it). So, for example you take an electron. In most grade school test book models the position is locked, but it seems the reality is that it's existance is a probability cloud. Instead of A = A, A = a rough estimate of A. However, while this describes it when in the absence of something else (this is what is meant by it acting like a wave), the moment it interacts with something like a photon, it suddenly behaves as though instead of a cloud of probabilities, it's in a specific location. That position is random in the truest sense of the word, but it's heavily weighted, again that's what the "cloud" is. So a photon hits the cloud, to "determine" the state of the cloud, that cloud "collapses" into one fixed state, usually the most likely one given it's wave form, and this "collapsed" state determines the reaction afterwards. Once the interaction is over, the electron will take on a new wave form/cloud.
There is a LOT of math involved, and I don't understand most of it, but that's the rought synopsis of what quantum physics is dealing with.
Oh, and the quantum physicists who CAME UP with this stuff and actually DID experiments are who we should be listening to, not half wit writers with no background in it just tossing out their own interpretations of poorly understood quotes. Example, the iPod hard drive operates because of discoveries made in quantum mechanices.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)