"The observator influences the observation"

[David Maes]

What does this actually mean?

[Graybeard]

David ..... not sure what you mean......?

If you mean this statement 'The observator influences the observation' it loosely refers to Quantum Decoherence .... I suppose from the heisenberg principle point of view it means that the physical act of observation materially affects the outcome of the observation. It would have a different outcome if not observed.

But today this is not so much the point of view, uncertainty is considered part of the territory observed or not. I think ........ ?

cool bananas ... greg

[Profpat]

In what context David?

Metaphysically I guess it means what it says. In fact you could go further and say "the observer creates the observation. "

On a more real world basis I think there have been some studies now that confirm that we affect or influence the obervation.

On a physics level I agree with Greg.
That its relating to the uncetainty principle.
That you can't measure momentum and position simultaneously.

The very act of measuring changes, probability to actuality.

Best to all,

Pat

[MJA]

"The observator influences the observation"...thus the flaw of mankind is simply measure.

=
MJA

[Tina]

Quoted from New Scientist No 2599 (14 April 2007)

Article: Impossible Things for Breakfast by Robert Matthews

The Copenhagen interpretation: it is the act of observing that triggers a panoply of possibilities to collapse down to the single reality we experience....

Paraphrased next section; this raises the the question of truth in quantium theory because it implies it's impossible to know truth until it is actually observed.

[David Maes]

The fact that something only exists when you look at it, I have really trouble to believe that.

I only believe the fact that the real (micro)world is different than the world observed by our brains, which together with our senses are focussed on the macroworld.

[bsaucer]

I think the proper term to use is "measurement", rather than "observation". Even an inaminate object can perform a "measurement", even if no one "observes" the measurement. The quantum state is still disturbed (collapsed, number of superposed states reduced) by the measurement, nevertheless.

[MJA]

...and life without measure is equal.

=
MJA

[Tina]

What does this actually mean?

There have been studies done to determine if people can detect/sense when they are being watched. Results indicate - YES.

What science has to determine is how energy is being transmitted towards to watched object and the effect this energy is having on the object right down to quantum level.

[dleviwing]

Rather than discussing it the way you are, just think of it as saying “WE DON’T KNOW” the status or state of an object without performing an observation or measurement. In the macro world this has insignificant consequences on the object; in the micro world though, any attempt to measure has a huge effect on the object being observed. This is where the statistics of probability and limits of uncertainty play the largest role of interpretation. There are scientist who claim that mysterious actions and even multiple spatial dimensions may exist at these immeasurable levels of uncertainty; that’s where most of the BS is coming from. The fact is that no one KNOWS because we can’t measure things or interactions at that small of scale. IMO fundamental matter must behave the same at that level as it does at levels we can observe and measure; the true laws of physics must remain valid in both the macro and micro realms of reality.

There have been studies done to determine if people can detect/sense when they are being watched. Results indicate - YES.

Tina;
Though the studies have been done, no conclusive data has emerged. Those who claim otherwise are probably selling a book or just misinformed. If you have a source of evidence, I would be happy to evaluate it for you.