OMG, I've Got It!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-04-2013, 07:15 PM
RE: OMG, I've Got It!
(28-04-2013 06:21 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 05:46 PM)Chas Wrote:  The idea that the observer causes anything is the single stupidest idea in the history of physics.

Crazyass? yes, stupid, no, we keep acquiring more and more evidence of it. Spooky action at a distance, indeed.

But no one says the observation "causes" the dual particles. Just determines their spin.

The bullshit about "existence is dependent on an observer" is the very SAME shit he posted in his very first thread.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 07:42 PM (This post was last modified: 28-04-2013 07:52 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: OMG, I've Got It!
(28-04-2013 07:15 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 06:21 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Crazyass? yes, stupid, no, we keep acquiring more and more evidence of it. Spooky action at a distance, indeed.

But no one says the observation "causes" the dual particles. Just determines their spin.

The bullshit about "existence is dependent on an observer" is the very SAME shit he posted in his very first thread.

My first post too. Tongue

Any promise of a postmortem preservation of personal identity is preposterous. (read in Daffy Duck voice)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 07:52 PM
RE: OMG, I've Got It!
(28-04-2013 07:42 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 07:15 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  But no one says the observation "causes" the dual particles. Just determines their spin.

The bullshit about "existence is dependent on an observer" is the very SAME shit he posted in his very first thread.

My first post too.

There is no evidence that consciouness preceded anything. It's totally dependent on the current state of matter, and it's present properities.
The article sounds like I and I's time crap. Time is independent of consciousness, and it's been proven , and is proven millions of times a day.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2013, 07:54 PM
RE: OMG, I've Got It!
(28-04-2013 07:15 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 06:21 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Crazyass? yes, stupid, no, we keep acquiring more and more evidence of it. Spooky action at a distance, indeed.

But no one says the observation "causes" the dual particles. Just determines their spin.

The bullshit about "existence is dependent on an observer" is the very SAME shit he posted in his very first thread.

You could have saved us all a lot of trouble if you had just proven him wrong the first time. Weeping

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Erxomai's post
28-04-2013, 08:25 PM
RE: OMG, I've Got It!
(28-04-2013 06:19 PM)nach_in Wrote:  Egor walking into a room can reduce the average IQ of the entire room.

Before including that number in the data table, your average is roughly representative of most people +/- 10 points. Adding Egor drops the average so low that it distorts people's interpretation of the data. It just wouldn't be fair to the rest of us unless you include a scatter-graph.

If something can be destroyed by the truth, it might be worth destroying.

[Image: ZcC2kGl.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-04-2013, 04:05 PM
RE: OMG, I've Got It!
(28-04-2013 07:52 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 07:42 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  My first post too.

There is no evidence that consciouness preceded anything. It's totally dependent on the current state of matter, and it's present properities.
The article sounds like I and I's time crap. Time is independent of consciousness, and it's been proven , and is proven millions of times a day.

The very late, very great, John Archibald Wheeler seems not so quick to judgment: "Does the Universe Exist if We're Not Looking?"

Any promise of a postmortem preservation of personal identity is preposterous. (read in Daffy Duck voice)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
29-04-2013, 04:37 PM
RE: OMG, I've Got It!
(29-04-2013 04:05 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(28-04-2013 07:52 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There is no evidence that consciouness preceded anything. It's totally dependent on the current state of matter, and it's present properities.
The article sounds like I and I's time crap. Time is independent of consciousness, and it's been proven , and is proven millions of times a day.

The very late, very great, John Archibald Wheeler seems not so quick to judgment: "Does the Universe Exist if We're Not Looking?"

It is an incoherent and contradictory argument.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
29-04-2013, 05:33 PM
RE: OMG, I've Got It!
(29-04-2013 04:37 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(29-04-2013 04:05 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  The very late, very great, John Archibald Wheeler seems not so quick to judgment: "Does the Universe Exist if We're Not Looking?"

It is an incoherent and contradictory argument.

I know, crazy huh? But backed by empirical evidence. ... Like I said, crazy huh? Big Grin

Any promise of a postmortem preservation of personal identity is preposterous. (read in Daffy Duck voice)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
29-04-2013, 06:09 PM
RE: OMG, I've Got It!
(29-04-2013 05:33 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(29-04-2013 04:37 PM)Chas Wrote:  It is an incoherent and contradictory argument.

I know, crazy huh? But backed by empirical evidence. ... Like I said, crazy huh? Big Grin

No, backed by interpretation of evidence. The interpretation is nuts.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
29-04-2013, 06:48 PM (This post was last modified: 29-04-2013 07:00 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: OMG, I've Got It!
(29-04-2013 06:09 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(29-04-2013 05:33 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I know, crazy huh? But backed by empirical evidence. ... Like I said, crazy huh? Big Grin

No, backed by interpretation of evidence. The interpretation is nuts.

Uh huh, yes, yes it is. Can I pour you some tea while we discuss all the problems with the Copenhagen Interpretation and more? Like Everett's nutty Manyworlds interpretation. Big Grin ...

Any promise of a postmortem preservation of personal identity is preposterous. (read in Daffy Duck voice)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: