Comment on double slit
ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net 3 months agoA consciousness-based interpretation of quantum mechanics would need any conscious observer
If you’re going to claim that consciousness is the influencing factor in quantum mechanics you need to define consciousness. You need to define the point at which consciousness starts. You saying “yes a dolphin is conscious” only tells me you think humans and dolphins are conscious, and nothing about what you think consciousness is, what things you think are conscious, or why consciousness would influence particles. So either you give a real answer to their question of what you think consciousness is or you start listing the things you think are conscious until smarter minds can work out what connects the dots.
space_comrade@hexbear.net 3 months ago
You haven’t given a real answer either though and neither has anybody else in the history of science, which is what I’m trying to say, nobody has a coherent answer but you’re pretending as if they do.
ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net 3 months ago
No, you dumb fuck, I don’t need to define consciousness for my explanation of observability in physics to make sense - my interpretation of quantum mechanics doesn’t mention consciousness at all. You have to define it because your interpretation of quantum superpositioning claims that it only collapses when a conscious mind observes it, so you have to define what conscioussness is.
space_comrade@hexbear.net 3 months ago
Thanks comrade, very nice of you.
No, everybody has to define it actually since it clearly exists and nobody really knows what it is. If you believe it doesn’t have anything to do with quantum collapse then you also must have a good idea what it actually is, and you just plain don’t.
ProfessorOwl_PhD@hexbear.net 3 months ago
No, I don’t have to define it, because I’m talking about observability in quantum mechanics, not some philosophical metaphysical bollocks about what consciousness is. My definition of observation does not in any way include consciousness, so defining consciousness adds nothing to my definition. Your definition of observation is being seen by something with consciousness, so you have to define what consciousness is. I have to define things like interactions and particles, I do not have to provide you with definitions so that your stupid ideas make sense.