On 9/18/2011 9:25 AM, Darren New wrote:
> Again, this is contradicted by experimental evidence.
>
> Unless you have something else to point to, that shows where an
> experiment where the scientists took a measurement but then didn't look
> at it still caused the collapse?
>
:head desk: ?? This is nonsense. You can't take a measurement without 
causing a collapse *period*. Try talking to an actually physicist about 
that, and not Depok Chopra. Measurement, by definition, means that your 
test particle had to have an effect on another particle. It is not 
possible to do that, without both particles affecting *each other*, thus 
triggering the collapse. The measurement *is* the observation, and the 
test equipment *is* the observer. That some other later on read a 
computer screen, and went, "Yup, the particle hit the detector.", is 
irrelevant to the result. It was already "observed" by the measuring device.

Or, do you have some magical way to "measure" this stuff, which somehow 
doesn't involve particle collisions?

Post a reply to this message