[ExI] contra Kahneman
William Flynn Wallace
foozler83 at gmail.com
Sun Dec 30 20:19:57 UTC 2018
stuart wrote Delayed-choice quantum eraser versions of the double-slit
to indicate that an experimenter's ability to observe which-way
information after the fact can change data already recorded in the past.
Is it any wonder that many people think physicists are mentally living in
LaLa Land? Reminds me of Feynman asking how many dimensions his colleagues
were positing today.
PLEASE do not respond to this email. I have made several failed attempts
to understand quantum theory and I will not try again. It's as if totally
obvious things are completely untrue, and way out, fantastic, impossible
things are true. I just can't get my head around that.
I am glad we agree. I think.
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 1:16 PM Stuart LaForge <avant at sollegro.com> wrote:
> Bill Wallace wrote:
> > I totally agree with the hierarchy idea. There is always a list of
> > things that our minds are set to attend to, which varies by situation,
> > such as prompting. Of course we can prompt ourselves. No two people
> > see the same thing. They will filter out, or in, what is important to
> > them. You go looking for something and find it, disregarding something
> > right next to it that you also have been looking for. It may be obvious
> > to someone else. An old saying occurs to me here: "If it had been a
> > snake it would have bitten you."
> Yes. But to really fry your noodle, consider that physics at the
> fundamental quantum level caters to that same phenomenon! In the
> double-slit experiment, when you look for a particle (i.e. which-way
> information), you observe a particle. On the other hand, when you look for
> a wave, lo and behold, you see an interference pattern indicative of a
> wave having gone through both slits at once.
> Delayed-choice quantum eraser versions of the double-slit experiment seem
> to indicate that an experimenter's ability to observe which-way
> information after the fact can change data already recorded in the past.
> The implication is that one does to a large degree create ones one own
> subjective reality in full, and ones objective reality in part, through
> desire and expectation. One shapes and perceives ones experience of the
> universe filtered through ones own expectations whether fulfilled or
> foiled in the process.
> It is our minds that forge reality from chaos by assigning meaning to mere
> information. And information is a physical quantity. So it is possible
> that optimists create a better world simply by seeing it as already such.
> > Not seeing the gorilla is successful processing - basketball passes
> > important- the rest not. Not seeing the gorilla is an asset, not a
> > liability.
> Yes. Exactly.
> Stuart LaForge
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat