Re: [Sadhu Sanga] RE: Physics and qualia People Serge Patlavskiy Today at 2:54 PM To Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com Message body - Siegfried Bleher on June 5, 2017 wrote: >Einstein's theory of Special Relativity, for example, admits that > the particular point of view taken by an observer does affect  >the results of measurements. [S.P.] The case is that consciousness comes into "battle" only AFTER the act of measurement is accomplished. Therefore, there can be no "collapse of wave function" by looking how an electron passes through the slits. This all is a bunch of nonsense. The act of measurement means that some physical system called a measuring device is able to change its state due to interacting with other physical system called the object of measurement. Here, "to be able to change its state" means, for example, to be enough sensitive and to correspond to the nature of the object of measurement. For example, despite of being very sensitive, a dosimeter cannot be used to perform pregnancy test because it does not correspond to the nature of the object of measurement. So, if the state of the measuring device changes, this change exists objectively as some physical signal (for example, the voltmeter's pointer indicates some value, or a litmus paper changes its color, etc.).  Then, the experimenter's sense organs transform this physical signal into physical sensory signal -- the electric impulse propagating along neuronal channels to the brain. And only then experimenter's consciousness can process this physical (sensory) signal and, possibly, transform it into new information for the experimenter. So, consciousness can only record/assess the result of measurement, but not affect it in the moment of performing the act of measurement (unless consciousness is not a measuring device itself, of course).  Kindly, Serge Patlavskiy From: Siegfried Bleher To: VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL Cc: Online_Sadhu_Sanga Sent: Monday, June 5, 2017 11:24 PM Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] RE: Physics and qualia Dear Vinod, The observer centrism I took was meant to imply space and time as we talk about them in physics are enmeshed with consciousness: each step in the process of observation I described gets folded into the end-result of a 'percept', but in such a way that the layering is at the end very difficult to discern. If modern physics does not exhibit this 'entanglement' explicitly, it does so implicitly.  Einstein's theory of Special Relativity, for example, admits that the particular point of view taken by an observer does affect the results of measurements.  Quantum theory also exhibits the importance of the observer's perspective.   Another step in the direction of recognizing the implicit way the observer is embedded in our  physics is explained by  cosmologist and mathematician G F R Ellis, who argues that initial and boundary conditions necessary to completely specify solutions to dynamical equations constitutes top-down causation from higher levels of organization to lower levels.   Such recognition gives some clues that equations that are symmetric under time reversal may nevertheless say something meaningful about time-directed and purposeful life.  Removing the assumption of continuity of spacetime adds to our understanding of the impact such assumptions make on our equations, and to the subtle expectations for ontology added by such assumptions.  So I believe further progress in any program that would incorporate the observer in an integrated view with science starts with a reassessment of hidden assumptions in what is an otherwise very successful science.   Вірусів немає. www.avast.com