manoo Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 i am pretty new in this but qunatum P. it is facinates me.one idea i had is about how sub atomic substances can exist in multiple places at the same time. untill we start to obeserve it. which all others except one to cease to exist.by looking at a subatomic particle we are enforcing the existence of our universe. because of that the others cease to exist. subatomic particles can coexist in multiple universes/paralell... but once we look at it we enforce our universe into it and other parallek universes can not exist here and because of that they cease to exist.like to hear your thoughts on this.i have some more mad theories about light, our origin and so on/.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapatos Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 by looking at a subatomic particle we are enforcing the existence of our universe. because of that the others cease to exist. subatomic particles can coexist in multiple universes/paralell... but once we look at it we enforce our universe into it and other parallek universes can not exist here and because of that they cease to exist. What is the basis for this belief of yours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manoo Posted March 13, 2017 Author Share Posted March 13, 2017 (edited) the power of the observer we do have severeal dimensions that we dont see, as well as paralell universes. some may be at where we are but we cant see their existent. look at subatomic particles as building block of universe with all dimensions and para...using those same building blocks. now a subatomic could be used in different dimensions at the same time. and therfer exist both here and there but since we dont see the other dimension than.....but since its the subatomic pat. being used than there are more than one of them existing... the power of the observer is if i look at it from our world than rules and regulation of our universe will make sure here is only one of them is there and not two. as the others dont belong here but since they exist in other dimension/parallell universes than they are also existing there. so we enforce for it to exist only one while its observed. as for the maths well i be far off anything to prrove this but the more you think of it the more sense it makes. Edited March 13, 2017 by manoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Welcome to the forum. This sounds similar to Wheeler's Many Worlds interpretation of quantum theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bender Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Isn't it more like the opposite of the Many Worlds interpretation? In MW, "observing" a particle splits off another universe and the particle continues to exist in all parallel universes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 Isn't it more like the opposite of the Many Worlds interpretation? In MW, "observing" a particle splits off another universe and the particle continues to exist in all parallel universes. True. But opposites attract. Or something ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manoo Posted March 13, 2017 Author Share Posted March 13, 2017 well its different since it is giving observer a force to enforce the absolutes of this universe where there is only one of me or a certain sub particle. that is why the other examples/copies of the same particle stop existing while observed. wheeler theory were more about all electrons being the same one. now think of a nail going throgh a thin board. now you can see it on both sides. but the other side can exist here while not observed as itsthe same nail(maybe not the best example). but when observed only the one that really exits here will stay and others disapear as we are bound by our dimensions rules and regulation and our own understanding of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bender Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 How do you define an observer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manoo Posted March 13, 2017 Author Share Posted March 13, 2017 observer could be you or me.... an observer would register the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bender Posted March 13, 2017 Share Posted March 13, 2017 What's so special about you or me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Velocity_Boy Posted March 14, 2017 Share Posted March 14, 2017 i am pretty new in this but qunatum P. it is facinates me.[/size]one idea i had is about how sub atomic substances can exist in multiple places at the same time. untill we start to obeserve it. which all others except one to cease to exist.[/size]by looking at a subatomic particle we are enforcing the existence of our universe. because of that the others cease to exist. subatomic particles can coexist in multiple universes/paralell... but once we look at it we enforce our universe into it and other parallek universes can not exist here and because of that they cease to exist.[/size]like to hear your thoughts on this.[/size]i have some more mad theories about light, our origin and so on/..[/size] But wouldn't the effects and the paradigms and the properties be forced upon the quantum particles whether we looked at them or not? I'll give you a hint.....The answer is yes! LOL No additional force or circumstance or causal dynamic is imbued upon said particles just because we are observing them. The particles, to use layman's terms....Don't Care if we are spying them or not. Not unless through our acts of observing we are, intentionally or not, imparting some sort of energy or force on them. Like even light,perhaps. You need to read Erwin Schrodinger's famous Cat Thought Metaphor. This will help you understand a bit more clearly what particles physicists mean by a particle bring in dual states simultaneously, and not nailed down to just one state when we observe them. It's actually probability states, not actual ones that the particle can begin before observation. I apologise if you're already familiar with the Cat analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bender Posted March 15, 2017 Share Posted March 15, 2017 It's actually probability states, not actual ones that the particle can begin before observation. If these are not actual states, how can you explain particles interfering with themselves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sensei Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 (edited) observer could be you or me.... an observer would register the process. 4+ millions years ago there was no human on the Earth.. So, who was observer instead.. ? Edited March 17, 2017 by Sensei 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistermack Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 It reminds me of the problem of finding out if someone is realy asleep, or just resting. You can't find out, without giving them a nudge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now