Isn't Quantum Mechanics really describing the workings of the human mind?

Question

'If a tree falls in the forest and no one's there to hear it, does it make a sound?' QM's answer to that famous question seems to be 'No.' In QM the observer is an integral part of the system; observation creates reality out of a nebulous cloud of probability, Schroedinger's Cat being a classic example. Doesn't it seem much more likely that 'probability waves' aren't dependent on some arbitrary consciousness; the tree DOES make a sound, the cat IS alive or dead and all the other properties of matter exist indeppendent of an observer. It seems more like the equations of Quantum Mechanics describe the state of mind of an observer rather than the observed (or not) system, and it's human conceit that projects this onto the real world?

Answer 1

If you know something better, start teaching it. If you're right the world will beat a path to your door (or website) Meanwhile, it seems to work pretty well if you don't let yourself get wrapped up in the pseudo-paradoxes.

Answer 2

Hi. The answer to your main question is, "All of science really describes the workings of the human mind." As Heisenberg put it, "We do not experience nature, but instead nature's response to our mode of questioning." The key part of quantum mechanics is that an "observation", is the action of an "observable operator" on the wavefunction. You use these just as much when working out Hamiltonians (solving problems) between two quantum systems. So the key thing is that it is not a "human observation" that is required, but an "interaction". This interaction may be with other parts of the universe, not necessarily a human. Keep in mind that interactions are the definition of phenomena. In physics there are the traditional four: gravity (mass), electromagnetic (charge), strong, and weak (color and flavor). It is only through interaction that something "exists". I could say protons have a quality of phlogistin. Someone could ask, "What does phlogistin do, how can I measure it?" In other words, "How do I interact with it?" I would reply, "You can't", to which you could respond with, "Then it isn't real."

Just like the tree. If no one is there to interact with it, we can still assume a falling tree makes a sound wave, through the air, that IS there. But if there is no person there, the answer to question is of course, "No, it doesn't make a SOUND." The human concept of "sound" was never evoked once during the falling of the tree, the creation of waves in air, or in the final dissipation of this energy to heat. Sound did not exist in this event. The tricky thing with the mind is that concepts can be applied retrocactively, for instance, once hydrogen was discovered--that was the moment "hydrogen" comes into existence, but we can then assume that it always has been (giving it more credence as a "thing"), just like most people take the stance, "Well, IF I WERE THERE, I would hear a sound . . . so it must make a sound." A way of phrasing this question that makes the fallacy more apparent is, "Do sound waves that are too quiet to hear make a sound?"

Answer 3

♥ about fallen tree:
putting head into the sand an ostrich also thinks it is invisible!
♥ Schroedinger's Cat is not a classic example, it is a classic metaphor! Do u see the difference?
♦ "properties of matter exist independent of an observer" – here u r right!
♠ “Quantum Mechanics describe the state of mind of an observer” – here u r wrong! Another branch of science describes the state of mind – not QM;
♣ conclusion: learn to tell α·s·s from c.ό.c.k, although both are animals! And don’t read sίl·ly books! U r welcome to reason with me if u tell ur age;

▲Einstein did understand QM, the rumor is wrong about it; Schroedinger and Plank were Germans; there was a complicated political situation in those days;

Answer 4

No.

Quantum mechanics is an astonishingly accurate theory (the most accurate in the whole of science) and in no way depends on an oberver in the way you suggest. The so called Copenhagen Interpretation makes it appear as though it does, but think - the PC you are sitting at relies on quantum processes that work just fine even though you are not observing them.

The Copenhagen Interpretation is just one - albeit highyl unsatisfactory - quantum mechanical ontologies. An ontology in this sense is a way of relating the "weirdness" of quantum mechanics to reality. In this interpretation a broad distinction is made between the macroscopic world (observers) and the microscopic, with different rules applying to both. Clearly this must be wrong because the macroscopic world is made of microscopic components, so where this line is drawn is arbitrary.

However, despite being wrong it is one of the easiest ontologies to understand so it is widely known.

Answer 5

QM does a good job of explaining the microscopic world but yes the fact that its results are highly dependent on observer make it spooky. Einstein was himself never convinced by QM and believed in the simplicity of the physical world but QM does exactly the opposite, it makes everything seem so fuzzy.

Answer 6

Spooky or not, QM makes highly accurate predictions about the behavior of particles. No other theory comes remotely close, no matter how much sense it seems to make or not make to you. So as Dirac once said, "Shut Up and Calculate."

You would probably be interested in the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics. Look it up.

Answer 7

An ever growing number of real-world observations (patterns) suggest to me that everything that exists in this 4-dimensional universe, including human consciousness, is simply a fractal scale-up of effects at the time of the singularity and, from those effects at the quantum mechanical level. We, and everything about us, are but only one fractal 4D element in a far larger 11D fractal based universe.

Answer 8

yes

Its about the possibilities of the human mind.
It can be about how people see you, how you see people and how you see yourself...many ,many possibilities.

You know how Jelly Belly Jelly Beans have different flavors? You can have many many combinations.

The out come can be very different depending on your preference and the flavors and the amount of jelly beans you combine. That's QM.

The possibilities are endless!!!!