--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Xenophaneros Anartaxius" <anartaxius@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shanti2218411" <shanti2218411@> wrote: > > > Chopra seems to be referring to the notion that observation/ consciousness > > collapses the probability wave function which results in one possible > > superposition state becoming physically manifest.This is one of a bunch of > > theories that attempt to explain the weirdness of quantum mechanics.A > > recent proponent of this is Robert Lanza in the book Biocentrism. Another > > aspect of this theory is that conscious beings are required to allow the > > observer effect to take place. > > An implication of the latter is that only universes that have conscious > > observers can physically manifest. Since conscious beings would only be > > present in universes where life developed and evolved into conscious > > beings, it would follow that while evolution is required for conscious > > beings to exist,the reverse is also true.A related concept to this > > discussion is the block universe which says that the time-space continuum > > simply is and that the "past" > > "present" and "future" are completely relative and entirely dependent on > > where a conscious observer is in the space-time continuum. OTOH I don't > > think any of the above supports the > > idea that consciousness "guides" evolution. > > An acquaintance of mine recently emailed this link to me. Some interesting > work on the nature of the quantum wave function: > http://phys.org/news/2012-04-quantum-function-reality.html > > And the abstract of the original paper: > http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v108/i15/e150402 > (If you want to get the original paper online, it costs US$25. I declined.) >
I would think that the statement "based only on the assumption that measurement settings can be chosen freely," maybe problematic i.e exactly what does "freely" mean in that sentence(see abstract). I think that part of the problem with trying to resolve questions regarding what is the nature of reality has to do with the likelihood that assumptions must be made in any explanation that are themselves unprovable.
