Hi Richard Ruquist 

Yes, God is the supreme observer. See Leibniz.
The supreme monad sees all clearly.


[Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
12/3/2012 
"Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen

----- Receiving the following content ----- 
From: Richard Ruquist 
Receiver: everything-list 
Time: 2012-12-03, 05:59:05
Subject: Re: One cannot have 1p if there is no observer.


Roger,

Isn't your god an observer?
Richard

On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:55 AM, Roger Clough <rclo...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
> One cannot have 1p if there is no observer.
>
>
> [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net]
> 12/3/2012
> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>
>
> ----- Receiving the following content -----
> From: meekerdb
> Receiver: everything-list
> Time: 2012-12-01, 18:00:16
> Subject: Re: Against Mechanism
>
> On 12/1/2012 12:52 PM, John Clark wrote:
>>
>> Again there is nothing special about an observer in this, the same thing
>> would happen if nobody looked at the film, or even if you used a brick wall
>> instead of film, because the important thing is not that the photon makes a
>> record (whatever that is) but simply that it is destroyed.
>>
>>
>> > But you can do the experiment with electrons too, and the electrons are
>> > not destroyed.
>
>
> Good point. If electrons are used in the two-split experiment a brick wall
> probably wouldn't do, you'd need a metal wall. Brick is a pretty good
> insulator so you'd end up with 2 small negatively charged spots on the wall
> in slightly different places;
>
>
> How would you get two charged spots? Would each have charge -e/2? The
> experiment was originally done with photographic film, so that each electron
> ionized a silver halide atom resulting in a silver spot on the film. Now
> it's usually down is some kind of detector that amplifies the effect of each
> electron. Neither one has anything to do with destroying the electron.
>
> the walls would not be the same and so the 2 universes would not be the same
> and so they would not merge. However if it was a metal wall the electrons
> would just join the general sea of free electrons in the metal and there is
> no way even in theory to tell one electron from another. So the walls would
> have the same charge and mass.
>
>
> But in an entangled electron pair experiment (EPR type) detecting the path
> of one electron destroys the interference pattern on the other leg. But
> also just absorbing one electron destroys the interference on the other leg.
> To maintain the interference you have to absorb the electron at the focal
> point of a lens so that you not only don't detect the which-way information,
> you erase it.
>
> Brent
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to