- Joined
- May 30, 2017
- Messages
- 10,420
- Reaction score
- 8,035
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Does some kind of an objective reality actually exist or is the concept of reality just a working hypothesis which we humans use as an intellectual crutch to help us manage an irrational and non-causal universe of infinite probability fields and nearly infinite, human-created, observational collapsed superpositions. In essence, is reality a wilful act of faith or a rational construct based on evidence and which cannot be falsified? Does an Ur-reality exist and if so how do we go about finding and presenting evidence for it?
The language I am using is related to quantum physics and the nature of a possible "quantum reality".
A probability field is an aggregate of all possible fates of a particle or wave which actually coexist simultaneously. Because all possibilities co-exist simultaneously and co-locationally within a probability field, causation (cause and effect) don't really exist and causal ambiguity reigns supreme.
A probability field collapses when observation or measurement nudges the probability field to implode and to produce one definite outcome of the many possible outcomes co-located in the un-collapsed field. In other words observation triggers reality rather than observing a pre-existing reality.
A superposition is the specific version of observed reality which the act of observation or measurement triggered/caused by collapsing the probability field and forcing it to coalesce into one definite outcome.
If the hypotheses of the Copenhagen flavour of Quantum physics (for which there is some persuasive evidence and strong predictive success) are accepted, then can an Ur-reality be said to exist? If these quantum hypotheses are rejected, then are we not just forcefully willing upon ourselves a reality which may not actually exist by the imposition of will and purpose on a fuzzy and non-causal universe - essentially an act of faith.
Discuss and debate please. Feel free to use other vocabulary than I have chosen to use, but please define your terms first.
Cheers.
Evilroddy.
The language I am using is related to quantum physics and the nature of a possible "quantum reality".
A probability field is an aggregate of all possible fates of a particle or wave which actually coexist simultaneously. Because all possibilities co-exist simultaneously and co-locationally within a probability field, causation (cause and effect) don't really exist and causal ambiguity reigns supreme.
A probability field collapses when observation or measurement nudges the probability field to implode and to produce one definite outcome of the many possible outcomes co-located in the un-collapsed field. In other words observation triggers reality rather than observing a pre-existing reality.
A superposition is the specific version of observed reality which the act of observation or measurement triggered/caused by collapsing the probability field and forcing it to coalesce into one definite outcome.
If the hypotheses of the Copenhagen flavour of Quantum physics (for which there is some persuasive evidence and strong predictive success) are accepted, then can an Ur-reality be said to exist? If these quantum hypotheses are rejected, then are we not just forcefully willing upon ourselves a reality which may not actually exist by the imposition of will and purpose on a fuzzy and non-causal universe - essentially an act of faith.
Discuss and debate please. Feel free to use other vocabulary than I have chosen to use, but please define your terms first.
Cheers.
Evilroddy.
Last edited: