What is real?

[Denode]

Oh, it's not just what I'm saying, it's what quantum physics is saying.

No, you misinterpreted quantum physics, though I can't blame you. Essentially, the measurement problem is rooted in wave-collapse.

In the early 1900's, the scientists that first proposed the idea of quantum physics did so based off of expirements that showed this: everything in the universe is not just a wave, or just a particle, they are both. Wave-collapse states that, as soon as you attempt to measure something, it collapses from its wave form into a particle. You seem to think that the particle forms from nothing when we measure it.

This is a very rough response, I just woke up 3 hours earlier than I usually do (ugghhhh). My friend was a professor of physics and mathematics at UCLA (University of California Los Angeles) and has a very good understanding of quantum physics (taught it at a graduate level). I know that you misinterpreted the measurement problem, but I'll let him provide a better explanation of what it truly means and its implications.

I will edit his response into this later, but for now don't go basing all your arguments on something you looked up on youtube.

 

[dam prayer noobs]

No, sound is vibrations. The tree will still cause vibrations in the air and ground if noone is there to interpret them.

That's like saying that a lamp stops making light if you leave the room.

If there is a vibration above the human hearing range, say 30,000 Hz, would we be able to hear it? No, so there is no sound. Sound is merely the interpretation of vibrations in the air by the brain. There would still be vibrations in the air but that's all they would be.

 

[Denode]

If there is a vibration above the human hearing range, say 30,000 Hz, would we be able to hear it? No, so there is no sound. Sound is merely the interpretation of vibrations in the air by the brain. There would still be vibrations in the air but that's all they would be.

You do realise that the original question was designed as a theological question, right? George Berkley was just saying that the tree might not even had existed, but the sound is NOT a stimulation of organs, but rather a feeling streamed to us by God. Stop using that question in this sense, because its original intentions were far different from what you think it to be, and even if your intentions are of a different nature, the answer doesn't matter because it's merely semantics. It all depends on your definition, and an attempt to define sound is effort spent frivolously in respect to this question.

 

[dam prayer noobs]

You do realise that the original question was designed as a theological question, right? George Berkley was just saying that the tree might not even had existed, but the sound is NOT a stimulation of organs, but rather a feeling streamed to us by God. Stop using that question in this sense, because its original intentions were far different from what you think it to be, and even if your intentions are of a different nature, the answer doesn't matter because it's merely semantics. It all depends on your definition, and an attempt to define sound is effort spent frivolously in respect to this question.

I wasn't the one that originally posted that question.

You seem to think that the particle forms from nothing when we measure it.

What the fuck? When did I say that? Quote me saying that or take your lengthy arrogant response and shove it up your ass. Kids these days...

 

[Schnell]

If there is a vibration above the human hearing range, say 30,000 Hz, would we be able to hear it? No, so there is no sound. Sound is merely the interpretation of vibrations in the air by the brain. There would still be vibrations in the air but that's all they would be.

Semantics. Stop it.

 

[Denode]

What the fuck? When did I say that? Quote me saying that or take your lengthy arrogant response and shove it up your ass. Kids these days...

Actually, the correct answer to that one would be no it doesn't make a sound. Our realities are constructed in our heads. The universe is what we perceive it to be. The only reason there are sounds and colors in the world is because that's what we name them, we have the image of them in our heads. If a star explodes in a distant galaxy, and no one knows about it, then things go on regularly, and no one has that picture of the exploding star in their head, and no one can add it to their perception of the world. And since the universe is simply our perception to what we see sound and hear, etc. then that exploding start simply doesn't exist.

You seemed to be to be saying that when we perceive something, it begins to exist. This appeared to be a misinterpretation of the measurement problem, which you cited immediately following.

Please specify your intentions in citing that video (considering quantum physics in no way backs up your paragraph) before becoming so obscene.

 

[dam prayer noobs]

You seemed to be to be saying that when we perceive something, it begins to exist. This appeared to be a misinterpretation of the measurement problem, which you cited immediately following.

Please specify your intentions in citing that video (considering quantum physics in no way backs up your paragraph) before becoming so obscene.

I said when we perceive something it exists in OUR MIND, not physically. I don't get why this is so hard for you to understand, it's clearly written in that paragraph you quoted of me.

And that video wasn't specifically about the measuring problem. The video is titled "quantum physics" for christ's sake, not "measurement problem". You have to watch the whole video before making huge retarted replies.

You try to sound so smart but you aren't, which is why it's so funny.