On 9/24/2012 8:02 PM, smi...@zonnet.nl wrote:
Citeren meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net>:
On 9/24/2012 9:28 AM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 9/24/2012 12:02 PM, John Clark wrote:
Thus the moon does not exist when you are not looking at it.
I expected better from you! This quip is based on the premise that "you" are the
only observer involved. Such nonsense! Considering that there are a HUGE number of
observers of the moon, the effects of the observations of any one is negligible. If
none of them measure the presence of the moon or its effects, then the existence of
the moon becomes pure the object of speculation. Note that being affected by the moon
in terms of tidal effects is a measurement!
So who or what counts as an observer. Young's slit experiments on fullerenes seem to
indicate that a few IR photons or gas molecules qualify.
If I don't observe it, then it doesn't matter who/what else observes something, the rest
of the universe is still a superposition. It doesn't matter whether or not an
interference pattern can be detected.
?? I could matter. Suppose I bet you $100 there's no interference pattern when the
buckyballs are hot? Then it would matter. But apparently it wouldn't matter whether
anyone observed the IR photons or not.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at