Please explain to me the observer effect /x/. I've seen it used to imply consciousness begets reality but I've also heard that this is not what the observer effect implies at all.
I recommend you do your own research on quantum mechanics because no one is going to know if you'll understand it or not.
>>17814454
This, throwing concepts at you WILL be counter productive, I've seen countless people spreading bullshit due to misinformation and lack of actual knowledge, if you really want to learn, start from the beginning, fill in the gaps.
>>17814439
You can't passively observe a photon. If a photon doesn't go in your eye it's invisible (and apparently behaves like a wave) That's all it really means.
The observer effect is more understandable in psychological term. If you know you're being watched, you behave differently.
There's no magic, it's simple logic when you wrap your head around it.
>>17814439
It's the idea that unconscious forces always yield to conscious forces, because they possess a will of their own, and thus can slow without losing speed, or cool without losing heat, if they were to so desire, they could stop entirely without becoming still
>>17814439
hermits crowley are good places to start
In quantum mechanics, they use the words "observed" and "absorbed" interchangeably. Just because something is absorbed doesn't necessarily mean it's observed. But, according to the axioms of quantum mechanics, a thing can't be observed, unless it was absorbed first. It is not known to quantum physicists whether or not the axioms of quantum mechanics are true. A quantum physicists assumes that the axioms of quantum mechanics are true, and then works from that point onward.
There isn't a lot of funding out for people who want to test the axioms of quantum mechanics, due in part because they were established about a century ago. As time progresses, the willingness of the scientific community to test their assumptions goes down. "Stands the test of time," I believe is the phrase.
Therefor, if the axioms of quantum mechanics are all true, then nobody will disprove them. If any the axioms of quantum mechanics are false, then quantum physicists are least likely group to hear about this first. If you believe that quantum probabilities can't be manipulated, then consciousness does not beget reality. If you believe that quantum probabilities can be manipulated, then consciousness might beget reality, and quantum physicists will be the least likely group to know about this first.
If you want to study the observer effect, you have the difficult task of learning everything a quantum physicist knows, without becoming one, and without allowing the scientific community to direct your curiosity. Furthermore, you will then have to learn things that even Albert Einstein, Maxwell Planck, and Werner Heisenberg were never able to conceptualize, since these men laid the mathematical groundwork for what's called quantum mechanics today. Schrodinger, Dirac, and Ernst Mach were possibly aware of the observer effect, but possibly not.
I do believe the information is already out there if you're willing to stretch the imagination without sacrificing a sense of scrutiny.
