|
|
|
|
|
by _8j50
2210 days ago
|
|
I believe experiments were conducted in a way measurement capacity is irrelevant. Either it's an effect of things being rendered (as in a real "simulation",much like pixels in a game depened on the "camera" to render) or there is an undiscovered quantum property that is confined to dimensions known or unknown that have yet to be discovered. In QM you have the observer, in relativity you have the reference frame, I think physics is exploring fundamental properies of the reality we experience,that it is a subset of something else. |
|
That seems like a very anthropocentric view of the universe. Why would it matter whether a particle is “being observed”, UNLESS the act of observation has a side-effect. If “observation” is purely passive then it can’t affect anything, by definition.
A MUCH simpler explanation is that the way that we observe things (by looking at them) is by bouncing photos off of them. Quantum particles are small enough that bouncing a photon off of it can change its course.
Here’s an analogy : you’re blind, but you’re super good at throwing and catching basketballs. The way that you observe the world is by throwing a basketball and then timing how long it takes to come back to you and catch it, and by observing if it comes back at an angle or with some spin on it. Imagine you come across a pigeon. You throw the basketball at the pigeon. You observe strange behavior of the pigeon when you “observe” it vs when you don’t. You formulate the pigeon uncertainty principle. You describe pigeons as spooky. You just accept that pigeons follow different physics than school buses.