Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
RabidMongoose

Quantum Sequencing Paradoxes

58 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

RabidMongoose

Its Friday morning at work and the fire alarm just went off unexpectedly (its the weekly test).

We have all been there. Look within yourself, be totally honest, and ask yourself have you ever be sat there thinking you knew the alarm was about to go of slightly before it did? No you arent psychic, you arent mad, you have just noticed a quantum sequencing paradox.

Your brain cannot sequence events that occur within 20ms of each other. So when faced with such a scenario it picks the sequence itself and feeds the decision to you as your experience. So when you feel startled at the alarm going off sometimes your brain places it before the alarm actually going off. That creates the belief that you know it was going to go off slightly before it did.

The bonkers bit is the Quantum Physicists have evidence that how reality plays out following such an incident is based on the sequence your brain picked. Mind over matter.

You dont believe me? Here is an experiment for you to try and you need a friend to help. You need a wall clock (pc wall clock will do). Every so often look at it and pay attention to what you initially see going on with the seconds hand. You are looking for it to tick back once before continuing to tick forward when you look at it. That ticking back is your brain sequencing events close to each other in time.

When you notice it tick back ask your friend if it ticked back for them too. Enjoy!

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sci-nerd

Can you please provide sources for your claims? Sounds interesting, but Google has no clue what you're babbling about...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nnicolette
Posted (edited)

That happens to me a lot actually glad to finally have a term for it. Did you make that up or get this from somewhere? I have actually noticed the illusion of the hand jumping back one first too, thanks for the information.

Im not so sure this is true though because when i reach for the phone before it rings often times other people have looked at me quizically before it rang... So im not so sure this explanation works for that.

Edited by Nnicolette
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
12 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

The bonkers bit is the Quantum Physicists have evidence that how reality plays out following such an incident is based on the sequence your brain picked. Mind over matter.

Where is this evidence?  You're suggesting reality cares what our brains think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coil
Posted (edited)

del.

Edited by Coil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coil
I think that consciousness can simply anticipate events that are in its visual field, are consistent or inevitable, and then consciousness is really ahead of matter but this has nothing to do with the quantum paradox.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
L.A.T.1961
Posted (edited)

I don't think I have ever seen a car driving through a traffic light jump back and forth. Is there a scale component to this effect or is it a general thing? Presumably at smaller time intervals it is just as useful, evolutionary speaking, to consider events as happening simultaneously ? 

Edited by L.A.T.1961

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RabidMongoose
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Nnicolette said:

That happens to me a lot actually glad to finally have a term for it. Did you make that up or get this from somewhere? I have actually noticed the illusion of the hand jumping back one first too, thanks for the information.

Im not so sure this is true though because when i reach for the phone before it rings often times other people have looked at me quizically before it rang... So im not so sure this explanation works for that.

I had a neurology paper investigating it saying they have evidence of quantum behaviour where how reality plays out following your brain sequencing events remains coherent with how it sequenced them.

Its actually called a `temporal sequencing of events` anomaly. At the neurological level the brain sequences two events occurring a short distance in time from each other and reality remains coherent with the decision going forward.

For the people who have experienced the clock tick backwards once before continuing forward then just think about that for a moment. How often have you noticed it? Every time you noticed it your day just grew 2 seconds longer (tick back and tick forward). The clock doesnt accelerate its ticking to catch up with where it should be. I will see if I can track down the neurology paper but with the second hand not accelerating to catch up to where it should be then there you have an example of reality going forward remaining coherent with your brains sequencing of events.

Edited by RabidMongoose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nnicolette
2 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

I had a neurology paper investigating it saying they have evidence of quantum behaviour where how reality plays out following your brain sequencing events remains coherent with how it sequenced them.

Its actually called a `temporal sequencing of events` anomaly. At the neurological level the brain sequences two events occurring a short distance in time from each other and reality remains coherent with the decision going forward.

For the people who have experienced the clock tick backwards once before continuing forward then just think about that for a moment. How often have you noticed it? Every time you noticed it your day just grew 2 seconds longer (tick back and tick forward). The clock doesnt accelerate its ticking to catch up with where it should be. I will see if I can track down the neurology paper but with the second hand not accelerating to catch up to where it should be then there you have an example of reality going forward remaining coherent with your brains sequencing of events.

But when the phone rings before i reach for it, often times people are looking at me as if they cant figure out what im doing until it does ring. That doesnt fit.

I have noticed the clock doing that several times though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nnicolette
12 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

Where is this evidence?  You're suggesting reality cares what our brains think.

double slit experiment? I believe it was expanded upon more recently, but i dont recall the name of the follow up. I thought it was a pretty standard premise of quantum physics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RabidMongoose
13 minutes ago, Nnicolette said:

But when the phone rings before i reach for it, often times people are looking at me as if they cant figure out what im doing until it does ring. That doesnt fit.

I have noticed the clock doing that several times though.

I have never had the one with phones, I wonder if its the same thing causing it or something else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nnicolette
10 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

I have never had the one with phones, I wonder if its the same thing causing it or something else?

Maybe it is just different. You got me wondering if my brain is having a problem prcessing sequence of events :lol: so this is normal? Why are we the only ones seeing it? I will have to go somewhere with a wall clock and look again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Nnicolette said:

double slit experiment? I believe it was expanded upon more recently, but i dont recall the name of the follow up. I thought it was a pretty standard premise of quantum physics.

Which has nothing do to with your brain's perception of events.  These experiments are done with detectors, humans are unable to see a single photon.

Edited by Rlyeh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nnicolette
5 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

Which has nothing do to with your brain's perception of events.  These experiments are done with detectors, humans are unable to see a single photon.

So your telling me the test didn't involve human observation? That was the defining factor in the test. It should be pretty blatant how that relates to observation of reality. Also if you forgot this is the statement i was responding to... If you reject the evidence that is your problem.

On 3/5/2019 at 12:47 AM, Rlyeh said:

Where is this evidence?  You're suggesting reality cares what our brains think.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
10 minutes ago, Nnicolette said:

So your telling me the test didn't involve human observation?

That's a straw man argument.  I'm asking where is the evidence reality cares about what our brains think?

I'm not asking for experiments testing the behaviour of photons when interacted with.

 

10 minutes ago, Nnicolette said:

That was the defining factor in the test. It should be pretty blatant how that relates to observation of reality. Also if you forgot this is the statement i was responding to... If you reject the evidence that is your problem.

The test is about the behaviour of light, not the brain.  Of course humans observe the results.

The fact you can quote my question and without understanding it is amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John from Lowell
18 hours ago, Nnicolette said:

Maybe it is just different. You got me wondering if my brain is having a problem prcessing sequence of events :lol: so this is normal? Why are we the only ones seeing it? I will have to go somewhere with a wall clock and look again.

Hi,

My understanding is that we are all telepathic. You know when the phone is about to ring because that thought to call you on the phone was known, lets say in your subconscious.

It is true that most of us depend on linear logical thought processes. The processing sequence is some thing we are trained to observe. However the greater awareness within each of us does not require sequential recognition. Only the logical intellect is retarded in that way. The gifted artist, who uses the imagination, has no sequental processing limitations other than the way in which the expression of that art is done.

John

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nnicolette
2 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

That's a straw man argument.  I'm asking where is the evidence reality cares about what our brains think?

I'm not asking for experiments testing the behaviour of photons when interacted with.

 

The test is about the behaviour of light, not the brain.  Of course humans observe the results.

The fact you can quote my question and without understanding it is amazing.

It seems your the one whos understanding is falling a bit short. You said is there evidence reality cares what our brains think and i said yes the double slit experiment. Apparently you are not fully familiar. The results of the test indicated that the reality of the results was dependant on human observation. Reality is literally dependant on what we are paying attention to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
1 minute ago, Nnicolette said:

It seems your the one whos understanding is falling a bit short. You said is there evidence reality cares what our brains think and i said yes the double slit experiment. Apparently you are not fully familiar. The results of the test indicated that the reality of the results was dependant on human observation. Reality is literally dependant on what we are paying attention to.

Actually I am familiar with it and the delayed choice quantum eraser, in fact I know it's been done without human observers but rather computers.  So no it's not dependant human observation.

Get your facts up to date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RabidMongoose
3 minutes ago, Nnicolette said:

It seems your the one whos understanding is falling a bit short. You said is there evidence reality cares what our brains think and i said yes the double slit experiment. Apparently you are not fully familiar. The results of the test indicated that the reality of the results was dependant on human observation. Reality is literally dependant on what we are paying attention to.

Almost right.

Its not what we are paying attention too, its what we are gaining information on. With the sequencing anomalies then the brain cannot tell which information it got first to it has to construct a story itself.

Then that story plays out as reality and you can see it happening as with the clocks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RabidMongoose
1 minute ago, Rlyeh said:

Actually I am familiar with it and the delayed choice quantum eraser, in fact I know it's been done without human observers but rather computers.  So no it's not dependant human observation.

Get your facts up to date.

You`re wrong I`m afraid.

In physics the transfer of heat from one object to another is the leakage of information from one object to another. So if something isn't leaking information to you then it doesnt exist as an object. Furthermore you can be in the presence of an object with no heat energy because it is cooled down to absolute zero.

And when that happens it behaves quantum mechanically too even in your presence. And that applies to objects large enough for you to see not just microscopic ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

You`re wrong I`m afraid.

In physics the transfer of heat from one object to another is the leakage of information from one object to another. So if something isn't leaking information to you then it doesnt exist as an object. Furthermore you can be in the presence of an object with no heat energy because it is cooled down to absolute zero.

It sounds like you're trying to describe quantum decoherence but you've got it wrong, quantum decoherence is independent of the observer.

 

Quote

And when that happens it behaves quantum mechanically too even in your presence. And that applies to objects large enough for you to see not just microscopic ones.

You're wrong here too.  You're talking about The von Neumann–Wigner interpretation which Wigner later abandoned because it implies solipsism and doesn't apply to large objects. 

Edited by Rlyeh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh

You're effectively saying the rest of the universe outside the observable universe doesn't exist.  We know that's not true as we can detect past cosmic objects that have since moved outside the observable universe.

This idea an object doesn't exist if you're not receiving information is the typical silliness of quantum mysticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RabidMongoose
11 minutes ago, Rlyeh said:

It sounds like you're trying to describe quantum decoherence but you've got it wrong, quantum decoherence is independent of the observer.

You're wrong here too.  You're talking about The von Neumann–Wigner interpretation which Wigner later abandoned because it implies solipsism and doesn't apply to large objects. 

No I`m not.

In physics information is heat energy. We can talk about it terms of entropy but unless you have a strong physics background you wont know what I`m going on about.

The heat leakage from Object A to Object B is why Object A exists to Object B. If that transfer of heat energy is prevented then Object A does not exit to Object B. It dissolves into a wavefunction instead which in simple terms is the potential for the thing to exist with any of its possible outcomes.

I think I have tried explaining this to you before but a wavefunction is not an object. It has no mass, no energy, no location, it is not an object. It is only the potential for the object to exist at that potential contains all of the possible outcomes for the object.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RabidMongoose
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Rlyeh said:

You're effectively saying the rest of the universe outside the observable universe doesn't exist.  We know that's not true as we can detect past cosmic objects that have since moved outside the observable universe.

This idea an object doesn't exist if you're not receiving information is the typical silliness of quantum mysticism.

Even worse, who says the contents of the next room in your house even exist?

In practice there is a grey murky area of heat leakage. Some might be making its way from an object in the other room to you despite the wall in which case it exists. If no heat energy is reaching you from it then the object doesnt exist.

It instead has become the potential for the object to exist. People automatically reject that as ridiculous as you are about to do. But thats quantum mechanics for you, welcome to crazy!

Edited by RabidMongoose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
Just now, RabidMongoose said:

No I`m not.

In physics information is heat energy. We can talk about it terms of entropy but unless you have a strong physics background you wont know what I`m going on about.

The heat leakage from Object A to Object B is why Object A exists to Object B. If that transfer of heat energy is prevented then Object A does not exit to Object B. It dissolves into a wavefunction instead which in simple terms is the potential for the thing to exist with any of its possible outcomes.

I think I have tried explaining this to you before but a wavefunction is not an object. It has no mass, no energy, no location, it is not an object. It is only the potential for the object to exist at that potential contains all of the possible outcomes for the object.

Quantum decoherence is independent of observers as it's information leaking to the environment.

The wavefunction is a mathematical description of the system.

I recall posters on this forum who have backgrounds in physics correcting you on your fringe theories.  Hasn't changed a thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.