New Study Demonstrates That There Is No Such Thing As Objective Reality

Valentine

Kingfisher
Catholic
Gold Member
This study (see here for an explanation or read on for my interpretation) builds on a thought experiment by Eugene Wigner that because of the weirdness of quantum physics it should allow two beings to experience different realities. This is because matter and light exists in a superposition of all possible outcomes up until the point that we try to observe/measure it (e.g. the double-slit experiment), where it then changes to being a single objective reality.

His thought experiment raises the question of whether objective facts can exist, which challenges the foundations of science (at least on a quantum scale).

entropy-20-00350-g001-550.jpg


In a study published this week a group of scientists sought to test that assumption by creating two conflicting realities. First they started off by creating a number of quantum entangled photons (light), so the state of them should always be exactly the same.

Next they had an experimenter ("Wigner's friend") in a room measuring the state of these photons, which can exist either in a horizontal or a vertical polarisation. By measuring them they changed from their superposition of both possible polarisations to a single objective reality. An experimenter outside the room ("Wigner") however instead only tested the photons to prove that they maintain their superposition.

This proves that two conflicting physical realities can co-exist simultaneously. The double-slit experiment proved that observation causes the creation of a single reality which we presumed affected everyone, but in fact this experiment proves that parts of the observed reality will only exist for the local observer.

This means not only whenever you observe parts of the world you are affecting it's existence, but also that that change will simply not exist for others if they were not also observing it. You might watch someone standing under the sun and in your reality they're getting hit by particles, but they might be asleep or otherwise unaware and they'll instead experience it as waves, and it's mind-boggling that subjective reality is really that literal.

This is a far less nihilistic perspective of reality than Schrödinger's cat, where reality stops properly existing when people stop looking, with it being sort of shared hallucination of humanity. Instead people everywhere are shaping the world in lots of small ways merely by being there to experience it.

There is an alternative explanation for their findings however, which instead proposes there is an objective reality but it can't be experienced, and there is still a subjective reality which is: quantum nonlocality.

It basically means that matter and light aren't principally stored at their observed location, instead the data about each piece of them is stored somewhere we haven't observed (i.e. a different dimension) and where we observe them is secondary to that.

Think of it like a universe-scale database about the state of each piece of matter and light, and it exists like a website domain lookup (DNS) - you're asking this universal database for some data about what you should be seeing and it pops out some matter and light infront of your eyes just like loading a website. This is how we're able to have quantum entangled particles that can affect each other faster than the speed of light.

This latter explanation is more aligned with the "we're in a computer simulation" hypothesis as well. It is also aligned with the Many Worlds hypothesis which proposes a multi-verse all with different configurations of what each piece of matter and light could be, which is also mind-boggling in it's scale.

What a fascinating time to be alive.
 

Handsome Creepy Eel

Owl
Catholic
Gold Member
What you envision will happen: a world of people sitting down and pondering the unfathomable mysteries of the universe.
What will actually happen: a world of sluts screaming "just because I slept with 100 guys doesn't mean it's reality"!

:discussionclosed:
 

Mage

 
Banned
Yogis and true mystics have known this for a long time - your reality is shaped by your thoughts and intentions and you build your heaven or hell yourself.

But like Handsome Creepy Eel said - give public this knowledge and they will use it to excuse their worst behaviors by acting in just the opposite way they should for their own good.
 

Roosh

Cardinal
Orthodox
I'm starting to notice a rise in people wanting to believe that reality is a "simulation". When you don't understand reality, and are disconnected from it, the simulation theory is what you grasp towards in order to match how you feel about your existence (i.e. that your life is just a series of pixels like the entertainment you consume).
 

Ryre

Woodpecker
I read a sci-fi novel in which the double-split experiment was used as a test for consciousness. If observation causes light to behave like either a wave or a particle*, what counts as 'observation'? What if a chimp observes it, or a person in a vegetative state?

Eventually the researcher discovers that there is some fraction of human beings who do not cause the change, who don't count as observers and thus must not be conscious beings despite appearing to be just like the rest of us. Hilarity ensues.
 

Mage

 
Banned
Ryre said:
I read a sci-fi novel in which the double-split experiment was used as a test for consciousness. If observation causes light to behave like either a wave or a particle*, what counts as 'observation'? What if a chimp observes it, or a person in a vegetative state?

Eventually the researcher discovers that there is some fraction of human beings who do not cause the change, who don't count as observers and thus must not be conscious beings despite appearing to be just like the rest of us. Hilarity ensues.

According to current science trough even a lifeless instrument can be an observer.
 

Samseau

Eagle
Orthodox
Gold Member
This is just science testing Kant's hypothesis of noumena and phenomena... and Kant's theory is still holding strong! Always thought it would, excellent find Valentine!!
 

VNvet

Kingfisher
Roosh said:
I'm starting to notice a rise in people wanting to believe that reality is a "simulation". When you don't understand reality, and are disconnected from it, the simulation theory is what you grasp towards in order to match how you feel about your existence (i.e. that your life is just a series of pixels like the entertainment you consume).

It's a replacement for religion. The powers that be are really pushing simulation theory for a reason.
 

Disco_Volante

 
Banned
Valentine said:
you're asking this universal database for some data about what you should be seeing and it pops out some matter and light infront of your eyes just like loading a website.

I think thats why time slows when you move (relativity). Its the system loading the new area youre in like a video game. Like buffering.
 

Mage

 
Banned
VNvet said:
Roosh said:
I'm starting to notice a rise in people wanting to believe that reality is a "simulation". When you don't understand reality, and are disconnected from it, the simulation theory is what you grasp towards in order to match how you feel about your existence (i.e. that your life is just a series of pixels like the entertainment you consume).

It's a replacement for religion. The powers that be are really pushing simulation theory for a reason.

No, religion is explaining simulation theory to people who have no language even for words like "simulation" much less "virtual reality", "NPC", "rendering", "pixel", "information unit" and similar.

In ancient times when East was smarter then West they had names like Maya and Sansara to describe these things. West got religion instead. Under religion you could not muse about the nature of reality because you had to observe muh Bible and nothing else until age of enlightenment.

The idea is as old as humanity.

I must both agree and disagree with the great Roosh on this one.
I must disagree for this theory is not for losers who don't understand life. The smarter a man becomes, the more he realizes that there are many things he does not know and only a fool thinks he knows everything.
But I must agree - Roosh see your subliminal word choice "disconnected". Yes exactly - you begin to doubt the matrix as you disconnect from it. Be comfortable, well fed and well adjusted in the Matrix and you will never want to doubt it. You cannot disconnect from reality which is the only one. So You see You believe in simulation theory in some subconscious level yourself.

After all the whole Red pill thing we are all in is taken from Simulation theory of the matrix movie and we all have uncovered that layer of the Matrix. There are more layers.

One more thing - in my experience there is one thing where I have observed individuals shaping their realities the most. It is in the ability to attract a good woman. Some guys say such can be found, others do not believe there are good women anymore. All red pill guys, that can sleep with common women easily. It is directly because these guys put themselves in different universes. I know red pill men who find a good woman and will have a happy family and I know red pill men who will only ever meet sluts and become all cynical. It is the result of their mindset that changes their reality and it is observable from aside. One might argue how much it is just psychology and how much it is mind altering reality, but it happens all the time.
 

Hammerhead

Sparrow
Gold Member
Mage said:
According to current science trough even a lifeless instrument can be an observer.

It's weirder than that though. The instrument can make the observation, but the wave doesn't actually collapse until you have the "information" about the observation. The wave then collapses in the past. Or so it seems...

H6HLjpj4Nt4

There are now a bunch of physicists doing "Backwards Flips" (As AMS would say) to come up with a way to explain this away without including consciousness, but I haven't seen a model as convincing as Tom Campbell's "information based" reality model.
 

Mage

 
Banned
Hammerhead said:
Mage said:
According to current science trough even a lifeless instrument can be an observer.

It's weirder than that though. The instrument can make the observation, but the wave doesn't actually collapse until you have the "information" about the observation. The wave then collapses in the past. Or so it seems...

H6HLjpj4Nt4

There are now a bunch of physicists doing "Backwards Flips" (As AMS would say) to come up with a way to explain this away without including consciousness, but I haven't seen a model as convincing as Tom Campbell's "information based" reality model.

I hope you are right, but It is all very questionable.
 

Hammerhead

Sparrow
Gold Member
Mage said:
No, religion is explaining simulation theory to people who have no language even for words like "simulation" much less "virtual reality", "NPC", "rendering", "pixel", "information unit" and similar.

In ancient times when East was smarter then West they had names like Maya and Sansara to describe these things. West got religion instead.

This is spot on. In order to describe any complex system that we can't directly observe we have to use a metaphor of some sort. That could be religion, computer simulation, etc. What metaphor is the closest to the actual underlying reality? We have to build that metaphor based on all the available data we have at this point in time and refine it when new data becomes available.
 

Hammerhead

Sparrow
Gold Member
Mage said:
I hope you are right.

All mainstream scientists are part of the new religion of "materialism". They dare not suggest that consciousness is anything more than a byproduct of the atoms in the brain, else they will be laughed out of their profession never to work again. The mainstream explanation is that an entire new universe spawns off at every microsecond there is a "choice" available aka the many worlds theory. Where is all the extra mass and energy coming from to create these new universes? This is what I mean by doing "Backwards Flips" to avoid the problem of consciousness. I suspect many physicists realize consciousness having a special quality is a much simpler explanation, but can't admit that in public or face ostracism.
 

911

Peacock
Catholic
Gold Member
This is kind of a scientific establishment equivalent of postwar deconstructive postmodernist philosophers like Foucault and Derrida who have paved the way to anti-traditionalist degeneracy, declaring that up is down and morality is relative. What follows then is that immorality is OK. This of course is not only bullshit, but also evil.
 
Top