Two-split experiment proves God does not exist

Originally posted by znsho
1) Results of the two-split experiment shows that waves become matter when observed.

2) The two-split experiment shows that waves exist when not observed.

3) God / Allah is supposed to observe EVERYTHING, including two-split exepriments.

4) Since waves exist, they are not being observed.

5) It follows that God / Allah does not exist, since, if he / she / it did exist, then waves should not exist.

What I'm interested in is how mere human observation effects whether light acts as a wave or a particle. The fact that mere observation does effect light alludes to some direct form of influence, which may or may not be physical.

Perhaps it is the human soul/spirit which effects light from a place quite outside time-space, i.e., the same "presence" which rides the electro-biochemical activity of our brains, and finds its expression there. After all, light occupies the demarcating line between time-space and timelessness (one foot in time and one foot in eternity, as it were), and it makes sense that if there is a spirit occupying the higher/deeper dimensions of which we are only dimly aware of, if at all, that it would communicate within our time-dimension through light and electricity; exhibit A: our brains.

--------------

God is omniscient, that is, all-knowing, which means in one sense that He "sees all," but I don't think it is accurate to portray Him as a physical observer like as we are; God is not physically manifest in His creation at the moment. But I do not doubt that Christ effected light much the same way we do when He walked the earth.

The universe works as it does because God made it, quite independent of His own substance. Therefore, in order to draw your particular conclusion with the best degree of accuracy, I would suggest waiting until Christ returns and performing a two-split experiment with His direct participation. I'm sure He would be good-humored and graceful enough to oblige.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
What I'm interested in is how mere human observation effects whether light acts as a wave or a particle. The fact that mere observation does effect light alludes to some direct form of influence, which may or may not be physical.

Perhaps it is the human soul/spirit which effects light from a place quite outside time-space, i.e., the sam s direct participation. I'm sure He would be good-humored and graceful enough to oblige.

I have been investigating. Apparently, it does not need HUMAN observation. The observation device alone, set up such that the results of the observations are not seen and are impossible to be obtained by the human investigator, also leads to the collapse of the wave. That is, a robot observer leads to particle formation. It is the medchanism of observing which results in wave collapse.

Since I do not believe in God or the second coming of Jesus, there is no point in suggesting I wait for him to return!

Originally posted by znsho
I have been investigating. Apparently, it does not need HUMAN observation. The observation device alone, set up such that the results of the observations are not seen and are impossible to be obtained by the human investigator, also leads to the collapse of the wave. That is, a robot observer leads to particle formation. It is the medchanism of observing which ...[text shortened]... in God or the second coming of Jesus, there is no point in suggesting I wait for him to return!

I have been investigating. Apparently, it does not need HUMAN observation. The observation device alone, set up such that the results of the observations are not seen and are impossible to be obtained by the human investigator, also leads to the collapse of the wave. That is, a robot observer leads to particle formation. It is the medchanism of observing which results in wave collapse.

How do we know, then, that it is indeed observation which transforms the wave to a particle? Is it possible to observe light without an observation device, be it organic or artificial? And if not, might the wave/particle phenomena be a matter of perspective rather than whether light has an observer or not? Perhaps there is really no objective transformation taking place at all. Could it be that our irrevocably subjective roles as observers is creating its own difficulty here, somewhat like the inability to look directly into the "infinity" created when two mirrors are facing each other?

Since I do not believe in God or the second coming of Jesus, there is no point in suggesting I wait for him to return!

I know you don't, I was being facetious in that respect. However, not believing in the second coming of Jesus won't change anything if the Bible is objectively true, in which case I am quite serious that Jesus would be good-humored and graceful enough to oblige.

Originally posted by znsho
As a biologist all my life, I have finally discovered the wonders of physics and I'll spend my retirement reading around this.

For now, I have a question:

Has a two-slit experiment been performed whereby the observing device is in place, capable of determining when electrons (particles) pass the slit but the result is not made available outside of the bo ...[text shortened]... you follow me.

If such an experiment has been done, what is the result? Particles or waves?

I don't know if I'm following you but I'll say what I think I've got. If the experiment is being conducted and the results are being stored then the experiment will show the usual interference pattern. Cause in that case you have the classical instrument interacting with the quantum world. It doesn't matter wether if a human being looks at the results today, tomorrow or in a thousand years. If he looks at them eventually he will see the interference pattern. Well, what if nobody ever looks at the results. What do they store. The easy answer is the interference pattern but if we want to be real problematic and somewhat pedantic the answer is nobody knows. And in a sense this question makes no sense. I mean quantum mechanics makes predictions about things we are going to observe. I think the experiment has been done in this way but I don't know for sure.

Another interesting thing is if you do the double slit experiment with some kind of detector on the slits. You will see at each time one detector detecting the particle but never the other and you look at the pattern that is made on the projector you will no longer see the interference pattern but just a normal distribution. The kind of thing you would expect if the particles were everyday particles. So the act of having the information about where the particle actually passes makes you destroy their wave behaviour.

If you are a biologist I'm guessing yu had some mathematical and maybe physical training so my advice is for you to get Sakurai's Modern Quantum Mechanics. I think it is a great book and very well written. The exercises my be a little too difficult, and I always advice people to do the exercises on the books they read - it is a great way (maybe the best) to test if you really learned something, but try to do the easy one and focus on the ideas that are being explained.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
What I'm interested in is how mere human observation effects whether light acts as a wave or a particle. The fact that mere observation does effect light alludes to some direct form of influence, which may or may not be physical.

Perhaps it is the human soul/spirit which effects light from a place quite outside time-space, i.e., the sam ...[text shortened]... s direct participation. I'm sure He would be good-humored and graceful enough to oblige.

What I'm interested in is how mere human observation effects whether light acts as a wave or a particle.

Nobody knows that! It is a very hot and controverse topic and I think that one should only talk about it after some real serious thought, a lot of discussions with other people, and some real serious research. I don't know if I'm being cocky or snob but everytime I see people talking about subjects they don't have the vaguest idea of how complex they are I just look at them as being fools. For one to talk about quantum-mechanics it isn't enough a few po(o)p-science books or some tv shows. You really need to study what's happening. And talks with friends at the pub doesn't cut it too. Read some serious good books and talk with knowledgeable people too.

. The fact that mere observation does effect light alludes to some direct form of influence, which may or may not be physical.
The easy answer to that is that to observe something you need to make interact with the observing object. For instance if you are boserving electrons at the microscope you have to iluminate it. So the electron will interact with photons and photons carry momentum. So momentum is transfered to the electron and this influences the electron. So as you see no need for aspooky effects here.

Perhaps it is the human soul/spirit which effects light from a place quite outside time-space, i.e., the same "presence" which rides the electro-biochemical activity of our brains, and finds its expression there. After all, light occupies the demarcating line between time-space and timelessness (one foot in time and one foot in eternity, as it were), and it makes sense that if there is a spirit occupying the higher/deeper dimensions of which we are only dimly aware of, if at all, that it would communicate within our time-dimension through light and electricity; exhibit A: our brains.

I'm sorry to say this but what you said here really makes no sense at all.

Originally posted by znsho
1) Results of the two-split experiment shows that waves become matter when observed.

2) The two-split experiment shows that waves exist when not observed.

3) God / Allah is supposed to observe EVERYTHING, including two-split exepriments.

4) Since waves exist, they are not being observed.

5) It follows that God / Allah does not exist, since, if he / she / it did exist, then waves should not exist.

The 'waves' you are talking about are merely a mathematical model of reality and not reality itself.

As long as God is not a physical entity then you have 'proved' nothing. No rational human being believes that God is a physical entity in this universe.
But then believing in God isn't rational either...

Your claim that God observes everything by definition is flawed in that no such claim is made by most theists. (there is a difference between 'know' and 'observe'.)

Originally posted by twhitehead
The 'waves' you are talking about are merely a mathematical model of reality and not reality itself.

How do you know that?

Originally posted by twhitehead
The 'waves' you are talking about are merely a mathematical model of reality and not reality itself.

As long as God is not a physical entity then you have 'proved' nothing. No rational human being believes that God is a physical entity in this universe.
But then believing in God isn't rational either...

Your claim that God observes everything by de ...[text shortened]... ch claim is made by most theists. (there is a difference between 'know' and 'observe'.)

I put in this thread to stimulate discusion, so don't take it too personally.

I believe that Momons think God lives as a entity on a planet somewhere. I might be wrong, but a Mormon once said this to me.

At school, I learned during religious education that God was omnipotent and observes everything.

So, I hope you see where I am coming from.

In reality I don't believe in God and, quite frankly, don't care if he / she / it exists or not. I am, however, fascinated by results of the two-slit experiment and am simply trying to induce feedback.

Shall we get on to 'entanglement'?!!!!

Originally posted by znsho
I put in this thread to stimulate discusion, so don't take it too personally.

I believe that Momons think God lives as a entity on a planet somewhere. I might be wrong, but a Mormon once said this to me.

At school, I learned during religious education that God was omnipotent and observes everything.

So, I hope you see where I am coming from.

In rea ...[text shortened]... periment and am simply trying to induce feedback.

Shall we get on to 'entanglement'?!!!!

As sad as it sounds Mormons do believe something along those lines...I grew up a Mormon and even got my Eagle Scout through the church. But because I realy had differing views I ended up leaving the church...it always bothered me having to go into the Bishop's office every week after i turned 13 and be asked if I was masturbating.

Then I really made my Stake president mad when I asked him why every church had a cross...cause I thought if jesus really does come back do you think that will the first thing he wants to see?

"Oh thanks for reminding me of that day!"

That one and when we were in bible study and talking about Moses leading those people around lost in the desert for 40 years and i piped up and said..

"After two days I would have yelled 'Hey Hippie...can I have a look at that map?'"

Bad thing about religion...no sense of humor.

Dave

'.......the Bishop's office every week after i turned 13 and be asked if I was masturbating.....'

What?!!!!?????!!!!

Originally posted by nmdavidb
As sad as it sounds Mormons do believe something along those lines...I grew up a Mormon and even got my Eagle Scout through the church. But because I realy had differing views I ended up leaving the church...it always bothered me having to go into the Bishop's office every week after i turned 13 and be asked if I was masturbating.

Then I really made my S ...[text shortened]... can I have a look at that map?'"

Bad thing about religion...no sense of humor.

Dave

I love your sense of humour. Well done!

Originally posted by znsho
'.......the Bishop's office every week after i turned 13 and be asked if I was masturbating.....'

What?!!!!?????!!!!

Sad but true.

Every week untill I was 18.

dave

Originally posted by znsho
I love your sense of humour. Well done!

True quotes that didn't go over too well...I mean it was not like I told my bishop any of those jesus jokes...like the one with M&M's...but I got into alot of trouble with those because of other people laughing...seems that was against the doctrine.

Oh well...guess that is why I tell people i am basically a Deist now.

They have a sense of humor 😀

Dave

Originally posted by nmdavidb
True quotes that didn't go over too well...I mean it was not like I told my bishop any of those jesus jokes...like the one with M&M's...but I got into alot of trouble with those because of other people laughing...seems that was against the doctrine.

Oh well...guess that is why I tell people i am basically a Deist now.

They have a sense of humor 😀

Dave

Keep up the sense of humour. It helps get us through this life. I think......

Originally posted by adam warlock
[b]What I'm interested in is how mere human observation effects whether light acts as a wave or a particle.

Nobody knows that! It is a very hot and controverse topic and I think that one should only talk about it after some real serious thought, a lot of discussions with other people, and some real serious research. I don't know if I'm bei ...[text shortened]... ins.[/b]

I'm sorry to say this but what you said here really makes no sense at all.[/b]

Nobody knows that! It is a very hot and controverse topic and I think that one should only talk about it after some real serious thought, a lot of discussions with other people, and some real serious research.

Well, I'm not a scientist and this is not a scientific journal, so you probably shouldn't expect anything more than pure, undisciplined speculation. 🙂

Would a serious scientist ever concede that imagination is more important than knowledge?