I'm turning into Descarte....

[Papewaio]

I suppose I am going to have to be this guy........ let us discuss the true problem here.

You believe you are approaching a level of understanding akin to one of the great philosophical minds of our time Does anyone else here see any delusions of grandeur?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

i used alot of clown faces to make the point I was kidding.

I'm standing on the shoulders of giants.

I was referring to a common understanding in physics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observe..._%28physics%29

Uncertainty Principle being a lower limit of the delta introduced at a quantum level. IE momentum or position can be determined but not both precisley at the same time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heisenb...inty_principle

More importantly that they way we go about measuring reality has an effect on what we measure and the type of outcome we will find. Our minds choose our methods, and our methods determine our outcomes. For instance the double slit experiment vs the photoelectric effect. Measure one way and we find a particle, measure the other way and we have a wave.

So as observers we can find reality is subjective. To take to the objective level, requires measurement again and again. Something that science does, and stamp collecting does not.

[Fisherking]

I'm standing on the shoulders of giants.

I was referring to a common understanding in physics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observe..._%28physics%29

Uncertainty Principle being a lower limit of the delta introduced at a quantum level. IE momentum or position can be determined but not both precisley at the same time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heisenb...inty_principle

More importantly that they way we go about measuring reality has an effect on what we measure and the type of outcome we will find. Our minds choose our methods, and our methods determine our outcomes. For instance the double slit experiment vs the photoelectric effect. Measure one way and we find a particle, measure the other way and we have a wave.

So as observers we can find reality is subjective. To take to the objective level, requires measurement again and again. Something that science does, and stamp collecting does not.

Right!

I saw all this just before leaving home and wanted to point it out.

I am glad you got the little daisies before I did.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I'm standing on the shoulders of giants.

I was referring to a common understanding in physics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)

Uncertainty Principle being a lower limit of the delta introduced at a quantum level. IE momentum or position can be determined but not both precisley at the same time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heisenb...inty_principle

More importantly that they way we go about measuring reality has an effect on what we measure and the type of outcome we will find. Our minds choose our methods, and our methods determine our outcomes. For instance the double slit experiment vs the photoelectric effect. Measure one way and we find a particle, measure the other way and we have a wave.

So as observers we can find reality is subjective. To take to the objective level, requires measurement again and again. Something that science does, and stamp collecting does not.

Correct me if I am wrong, but being unable to accurately measure reality does not equal "reality is subjective". Subjective means that what you are observing only exists in your mind, this is different from being unable to see clearly.

Your application of quantum physics doesn't really seem apt here. In fact, you seem to be misunderstanding what the double slit/ photoelectric effects mean. It means that light itself can act and behave with properties of both waves and particles. It does not mean we are deciding in our own minds through experiments what light "will be".

I think that there is an objective reality, which you must work to understand and which you can understand. People have different interpretations of it because everyone has a personal degree of self separation of their own mind from reality. Wack jobs that go about shooting people up are not "victims" of a subjective reality but simply men that have slowly replaced reality with their own imagination and delusions separating their own minds from what is real.

[Fisherking]

Correct me if I am wrong, but being unable to accurately measure reality does not equal "reality is subjective". Subjective means that what you are observing only exists in your mind, this is different from being unable to see clearly.

Your application of quantum physics doesn't really seem apt here. In fact, you seem to be misunderstanding what the double slit/ photoelectric effects mean. It means that light itself can act and behave with properties of both waves and particles. It does not mean we are deciding in our own minds through experiments what light "will be".

I think that there is an objective reality, which you must work to understand and which you can understand. People have different interpretations of it because everyone has a personal degree of self separation of their own mind from reality. Wack jobs that go about shooting people up are not "victims" of a subjective reality but simply men that have slowly replaced reality with their own imagination and delusions separating their own minds from what is real.

Actually, what they are showing is that the observer has an effect on a subject being observed.

Further, the observers intent has some effect on the overall outcome.

It doesn’t mean that you can get things to fall up or that you can change lead into gold just because you want it but it dose mean that there is a measurable effect.

Therefore, you have an effect on the universe. Things often may turn out the way you expect them to, simply because that is what you expected.

You can’t reorder the world but you can change some outcomes, even if it is just a little.

[Papewaio]

Correct me if I am wrong, but being unable to accurately measure reality does not equal "reality is subjective". Subjective means that what you are observing only exists in your mind, this is different from being unable to see clearly.

Your application of quantum physics doesn't really seem apt here. In fact, you seem to be misunderstanding what the double slit/ photoelectric effects mean. It means that light itself can act and behave with properties of both waves and particles. It does not mean we are deciding in our own minds through experiments what light "will be".

Acutally Young's vs Einsteins experiments show that light in the first experiment is a wave. In the second it is a wave. The choice of experiments does have an impact on the outcome. If I continously repeat Einsteins photoelectric effect experiment, all I measure is light acting as a particle, it won't turn into a wave. No matter how often I repeat the experiment if I expected it to change I would be insane. Well more so.

I think that there is an objective reality, which you must work to understand and which you can understand. People have different interpretations of it because everyone has a personal degree of self separation of their own mind from reality. Wack jobs that go about shooting people up are not "victims" of a subjective reality but simply men that have slowly replaced reality with their own imagination and delusions separating their own minds from what is real.

I agree that there is an objective reality. The subjective part is how we approach it and we have to understand our approach can effect the outcome. Take a cup of water, use a cold thermometer you get one reading, use a hot thermometer you get a higher reading. Just because there is an objective reality in the background does not mean that all of us are going to get the same outcomes. It also means that "I think therefore it is" will only get you to a subjective reality as it is missing a vital step.

To understand the objective reality you have to actually move from a system of thought in isolation, to include a system of measurement. Even then you have to understand the impact/feedback/change that they system of measuring has on that reality.

[Adrian II]

Take a cup of water, use a cold thermometer you get one reading, use a hot thermometer you get a higher reading.

On, I am going to use this example in future. It is the best explanation of Heisenberg I have ever come across.

AII

[Papewaio]

Well it is the one you can use with school children... the other version involves a nurse , a patient and a rectal thermometer

[a completely inoffensive name]

Acutally Young's vs Einsteins experiments show that light in the first experiment is a wave. In the second it is a wave. The choice of experiments does have an impact on the outcome. If I continously repeat Einsteins photoelectric effect experiment, all I measure is light acting as a particle, it won't turn into a wave. No matter how often I repeat the experiment if I expected it to change I would be insane. Well more so.

Light does not "turn into" waves or particles though, they have properties of both and the experiments merely show one or the other. You are only "choosing" what it will be through your experiment in the sense that the light will act in a certain way for a given situation and the situation you are creating in your experiment will have the light demonstrate properties of one or the other.

I agree that there is an objective reality. The subjective part is how we approach it and we have to understand our approach can effect the outcome. Take a cup of water, use a cold thermometer you get one reading, use a hot thermometer you get a higher reading. Just because there is an objective reality in the background does not mean that all of us are going to get the same outcomes. It also means that "I think therefore it is" will only get you to a subjective reality as it is missing a vital step.

To understand the objective reality you have to actually move from a system of thought in isolation, to include a system of measurement. Even then you have to understand the impact/feedback/change that they system of measuring has on that reality.

Hmmm, I will think about this.