originally posted in:Secular Sevens
"Observation"=/=requires conscious observer.
An "observation" should be called a measurement or interaction which is really what's happening.
Careful you don't get caught up in quantum flapdoodle.
English
-
[quote]"Observation"=/=requires conscious observer. [/quote]True, our minds eventually have to witness the data. Now it'd be pretty unlikely that our brains could actually change the numbers on a piece of paper, (and in fact the double slit experiment was just used because it's the most interesting example), but it's still a possibility that our minds could be manipulating how we're viewing the experiment somehow, I mean, I think that's a bit more likely than a connection between human consciousness and physics.
-
Edited by SexyPiranha: 4/4/2014 3:45:54 AMWell when you're talking about science you kind of have to make the reasonable assumption that what your senses tell you correspond at least adequately to an outside reality. If not, science is useless(seems to get the job done though) and you wind up with some kind of weird solipsistic nonexistance. Rather distasteful if you ask me.
-
Well I'm not saying that our brains are manipulating information so far to the extent that we can't accomplish science and engineering feats, but there are plenty of unexplored and misunderstood areas of science that gives the idea some wiggle room. Again, it's just a possibility, but it's definitely plausible looking at all the other ways our brains manipulate the information we take in.