"...To me - the really challenging issue is to come to terms with whether the so called collective unconscious is really real meaning that there is a realm of absolute meaning above and beyond individual interpretation or there is not. ..." - gw
I will assume that your first question was rhetorical. And, this (above quote) is your personal view…all of which is fine. Mixing the two [QM/science and mind] though can approach finding a method to arrive at a true answer to what you find challenging and hold opinions about. Even William James, someone I believe you have mentioned at least twice so far, in general proposed 3 methods to study mind. Put in layman terms, study of behavior, study of the physical body itself, and introspection. Shortly after he presented this, some of the more vocal in the field who apparently could/did not use the 3rd method said flatly that it didn’t exist in this context. This was similar to the result of materialism found in other branches of science and how it affects thinking about ontological realities, let alone epistemology. On Sep 16, 1:40 pm, [email protected] wrote: > Would someone please explain to me why the enthrallment with quantum physics > more precisely the idea of non locality and its supposed relationship with > consciousness. I thought that the core issue associated with consciousness is > the nature of meaning. In the PEAR experiments I don't see what they have to > do with this core issue of generating personal and collective meanings. > > To me - the really challenging issue is to come to terms with whether the so > called collective unconscious is really real meaning that there is a realm of > absolute meaning above and beyond individual interpretation or there is not. > If there is not, which I am inclined to be the truth of the matter, then the > issues associated with understanding the nature of consciousness (including > states of consciousness, the sub conscious, the personal unconscious, and the > likes shifts to the much overlooked realm of the personal not the collective > unconsicous. > > So far I am inclined to believe that the world of sub atomic physics while > exceedingly interesting has as yet little relationship to the macro world of > human beings continuing to order their individual chaos to be able to solve > their day to day problems so to be able to live the good life. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Justintruth <[email protected]> > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed, Sep 16, 2009 4:23 pm > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: Schrodingers Cat on verge of becoming real > > I guess I am confused. I thought that the cat experiment was trivial > to set up and only needed a quantum trigger mechanism. I thought it > wasn't actually set up out of concern for the cat - not that it took a > sophisticated technical setup was needed. > > I also thought that the whole issue was decided. If I flip a coin and > I look at the result and ask you the probability that it is a head you > will say 50/50 but if I show you the coin your "wave function" will > "collapse" and you will say its 100 or 0. Your "observation" affected > the probability. The only difference is that I posited that I looked > at the coin or at least that the coin exists. In quantum mechanics no > one can look at it and in some cases it can be shown that there is no > way that a coin could have gotten there by usual mechanism. But if one > tries to decide whether to posit an object that can't be experienced > then the answer is no by Ocham's razor. > > I don't get why there is a need for this experiment nor why its so > hard to set up? > > On Sep 15, 7:32?pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > Towards Quantum Superposition of Living Organisms > > > Oriol Romero-Isart, Mathieu L. Juan, Romain Quidant, J. Ignacio Cirac > > (Submitted on 8 Sep 2009) > > The most striking feature of quantum mechanics is the existence of > > superposition states, where an object appears to be in different > > situations at the same time. Up to now, the existence of such states > > has been tested with small objects, like atoms, ions, electrons and > > photons, and even with molecules. Recently, it has been even possible > > to create superpositions of collections of photons, atoms, or Cooper > > pairs. Current progress in optomechanical systems may soon allow us to > > create superpositions of even larger objects, like micro-sized mirrors > > or cantilevers, and thus to test quantum mechanical phenomena at > > larger scales. Here we propose a method to cool down and create > > quantum superpositions of the motion of sub-wavelength, arbitrarily > > shaped dielectric objects trapped inside a high--fines > se cavity at a > > very low pressure. Our method is ideally suited for the smallest > > living organisms, such as viruses, which survive under low vacuum > > pressures, and optically behave as dielectric objects. This opens up > > the possibility of testing the quantum nature of living organisms by > > creating quantum superposition states in very much the same spirit as > > the original Schr\"odinger's cat "gedanken" paradigm. We anticipate > > our essay to be a starting point to experimentally address fundamental > > questions, such as the role of life in quantum mechanics, and > > differences between many-world and Copenhagen interpretations. > > Comments: ? ? ? 8 pages, 4 figures > > Subjects: ? ? ? Quantum Physics (quant-ph); Mesoscale and Nanoscale Physics > > (cond-mat.mes-hall) > > Cite as: ? ? ? ?arXiv:0909.1469v1 [quant-ph] > > > Apparently, this is about actually putting a flue virus or possibly a > > water-bear (tiny - less than 1 mm) in the Schrodinger's Cat super- > > position using lasers. ?Water-bears can actually survive vacuum for a > > few days. ?The old thought experiments get ever closer to being made > > into real experiments. ?This one might answer the question of whether > > large objects aren't quantum because of interference from the general > > world or whether there is a size or mass for quantum behaviour as > > Penrose (Danger Mouse's best pal) suggests. ?I can't wait for the day > > I can approach some old mate blathering on about Schrodinger's Cat and > > accuse him of being a mindless philosopher before setting up my lasers > > and water-bears on the bar!- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
