Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
The latest version was done with atoms by Andrew Truscott et al.

http://www.sciencenutshell.com/clever-experiment-proves-quantum-physics-weirdness/

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tec...603-ghfw59.html

So here they aren't moving the observer they are delaying the choice which is actually what the movement of the observer does in the alternative form.

However you create the delay, by observer moving or delaying the choice on a moving object, you get the same problem. It ends up cause A and effect B are not in correct time sequence, effect precedes cause. So either cause is retro-causal and can move backwards in time OR cause and effect are based on observer reality. So people may not even agree on cause and effect along with everything else in relativity. Classic physics has a hard time with that one, everyone is supposed to see the same cause and same effect.

From QM we are left with an awkward choice from a classic physics stand point and while neither has been falsified we tend to go with the observer reality option. Retro-causality is a bitter pill to swallow.

All the big effort is in doing the experiment with Bacteria something that most of us would view as macro molecular and alive. Literally have the cat AKA bacteria alive to one observer and dead to another.

Last edited by Orac; 11/20/15 06:03 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
.
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Bill S. Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
http://www.sciencenutshell.com/clever-experiment-proves-quantum-physics-weirdness/

Quote:
What’s ‘weird’ is that the random number determining whether the grating was added or not was only generated after the atom had already passed through



"...after the atom had already passed through".

After it has passed through what; the first grating, or both gratings?


There never was nothing.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Dropped in to sees what's up!


G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Bill S. Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Originally Posted By: Rev
Dropped in to sees what's up!


This thread has drifted a bit and may be struggling. I would have thought that Bohm's explicate and implicate orders would have been right in your line of country.


There never was nothing.
Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5