Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi
Video presentation of the book by Massimiliano Sassoli de Bianchi, entitled “Observer Effect – The quantum mystery demystified,” which was published by Adea Edizioni (Italy).
The book is currently out of print. The author is taking care of a second edition of the text, slightly revised and expanded, which will also contain a brand new chapter on quantum entanglement. Stay tuned.
Author’s home page: www.massimilianosassolidebianchi.ch
Source
Why seek a scientific explanation for telekinesis without first having evidence of telekinesis?
If a unicorn shows up in the ediocaran fossil record, biologists will have a lot of head scratching to do. But until that happens there's no need for an explanation. A theory that explains undiscovered billion year old unicorns is a stupid theory. I will change my mind when I am shown a unicorn.
From what I understand about quantum mechanics Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principal was because of uncertainties when measuring an electron's momentum and spin. Schrödinger's cat is a thought experiment as a way to describe those uncertainties with the electron. Neither had anything to do with the observer effect.
The observer effect was deduced after many experiments using real mechanical devices that randomly output ones and zeros, which when observers focused on either a one or zero they discovered the observer effected the outcome of the experiment. The effect was greater with 3 or more observers.
And the idea in quantum mechanics that light particles and waves, see wave particle duality of light, are not like real matter, you know solid objects like the moon. So yes, the moon would always be there, even long after humans become extinct. The only thing that this uncertainty principal infers is that light does not exist until observed. When light is not observed it is a wave of potentiality. When it is observed it becomes a light particle.
Realize also, that a light particle is not the same as a particle of matter. No matter how many light particles you gather together you will never get a piece of matter. This is because when you measure a light particle or observe it you convert it into information. It is not destroyed but converted, thus it cannot be measured again. That is why I believe the electron cannot be measured more than once. As soon as an electron is measured, like the light particle it converts into information. There is no uncertainty at all if the electron can only be measured once.
What are your thoughts on the quantum zeno effect?
We can mesure without touching Heseinberg incertitude since 1998.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v395/n6697/abs/395033a0.html
get in the chopper!!!
humans taking a peek into the 4th dimension, the matrix
what came first? the chicken or the egg?
you took Einsteins quote out of context. the correct quote would be "I like to think the moon continues to exist, undisturbed, even when nobody is watching it"
Difficult to discuss these things here. Consider however that you need an active source of light to destroy the interference in the double slit experiment. Not just a passive receptor, which is not emitting any radiation.
My perspective is that in a measurement properties can be created, but the creation process is entirely due to the interaction between the measured system and the measuring apparatus (no consciousness involved). In other terms: it is a "machine effect". But of course, to know more you should read the book 🙂
Yes, what you say corresponds to the viewpoint of so-called decoherence theory, which describes the disappearance of superposition in a quantum system as a consequence of its unavoidable interaction with the environment. But this doesn’t solve the problem, as the superposition does not disappear: it only gets delocalized into the environment. Which is the reason why the nonsuperficial adherents to decoherence theory are compelled to resort to a many worlds picture.
But hey, having a conversation on a youtube level…. 🙂 🙂 🙂
my quote: 'That is, the moon is there, even if no-one is looking because the fundamental interaction of quanta (which make the wave state collapse).'
I know that this quote doesn't hold ground because if that was so, then there wouldn't be a quantum measurement problem due the constant collapse of 'everything', but I think that once the collapse is 'done', then the interaction becomes constant.
Of course I can't give myself an answer where the primal collapse starts though…
I know he's right though 🙂
But I'm acknowledging it because of the quantum measurement problem.
And no, not the 'observer' thing of course, but the fundamental interaction of quanta.
That is, the moon is there, even if no-one is looking because the fundamental interaction of quanta (which make the wave state collapse).
So in essence for me, the moon is constantly being 'regenerated' due to the constant collapse of the wave probability.
As I explain in the book, Einstein used a very clever reality criterion to affirm the existence of the moon. And this criterion is crucial also for the understanding of the nature of microscopic entities.
Well, you can check the presence of the moon in so many different ways, also indirect ways, like observing the effects it produces, for instance, on other celestial bodies. Of course, affirming the moon wouldn’t exist, if unobserved, is the typical (philosophical) viewpoint of solipsism, which unfortunately has no explanatory power: it creates more problems than it solves.
quote: 'The moon continues to exist, undisturbed, even when nobody is watching it!'
That is a presumption, and a presumptuous one!