+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst 1 6 13 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 243

Thread: What controls the hologram?

  1. Link to Post #101
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    21st March 2010
    Location
    the foothills of le Massif Central, France
    Age
    77
    Posts
    1,352
    Thanks
    7,476
    Thanked 4,829 times in 1,059 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by sheme (here)
    One might, with equal holographic justification claim that the majority of humanity is the cause of it's own downfall by becoming engrossed and fascinated by low vibrational pass times and thoughts, "Like attracts like", as the experiment proves, It all goes away when you stop pushing peoples buttons!

    People, control your thoughts attract high vibrations by ceasing to empower Low stuff. That's all any of us really need to know-- YOU and YOU alone are responsible for your truths.

    (I bet I could prove that to you if you gave me a cartoon studio)
    Dear sheme

    I think if we want to change this 'downfall' we'll sure have to be pushing peoples buttons. That's the only way to change those low vibrational pass times and thoughts, as the interests of the mayority of western population is Dimes, Drugs, Disneyland and McDonalds, to mention a few.
    I hope this is what you mean by 'Low Stuff' and not the search for information to find out who has really been pushing this Low Stuff on humanity for ages while pulling the strings and benefitting in a repulsive way.

    The truth will set us free.
    Last edited by heyokah; 17th March 2013 at 16:23.

  2. Link to Post #102
    Avalon Member CD7's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th October 2011
    Location
    Port Saint Lucie, Fl
    Age
    55
    Posts
    1,562
    Thanks
    4,566
    Thanked 6,891 times in 1,408 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by Delight (here)
    You reminded me of a rant I wrote last year that is pertinent.
    I think that we receive EXACTLY in kind "what we give". This is not to me any more than the logic of the way we interact with the hologram.
    However, the manipulation of the hologram prevents our questioning some of the very basic beliefs like that of "FOOD". We might actually never ever realize that what we "eat" does not need to be taken from another being? The Celestine Prophecy did a great job of explaining the difference when we take in energy direct from "Source"...the Zero Point Field of infinite supply. The fear of starving and the reptile brain keep us going round and round as we cannot source energy from survival terror states (I think not anyway.. most of the time anyway).. Here is what i wrote and it was a SCREAM from my frustration.
    I knew this point was brought up in the past....thanks for the recap!

    All boogie men aside....like i said, we do our own destructive behaviors, so much so, to focus on another "species" AGAIN keeps us looking OUTSIDE ourselves continually...

    Interesting point you make......
    Quote We must see ourselves are organic foodstuff as much as the rest of creation to participate. As supremely natural moral beings, when we create eating others as part of our existence, we MUST accept to be eaten also. And the message we accept came from the Archons.
    Recently ive thought along these lines...if we STOP participating in these brutal behaviors--killing, eating, taking wht we do not need to survive..will then all "boogie man theories" fall by the waste side?
    Doesnt it stand in one's own life...when u are participating in negative behaviors..treating others bad..that this then turns into a paranoia of what others will come back and do to u?



    Instead of as above so below WHY NOT as below so above? Great conclusion AYE? now wht? LOL!!

    OK thts enough machinating key pad circles im going into at this point...originally was trying to get detailed information about what others may know of whts behind the hologram...but i should just GET IN LINE lol behind all the others asking these questions with no answers.....
    Last edited by ThePythonicCow; 18th March 2013 at 01:53.
    We X Billions want to change the world and it appears we are......
    PARADISE IS POSSIBLE EVERYWHERE 4 EVERYONE

  3. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to CD7 For This Post:

    Delight (18th March 2013), RUSirius (18th March 2013), seko (17th March 2013), sheme (17th March 2013)

  4. Link to Post #103
    Great Britain Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    23rd January 2013
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,006
    Thanks
    7,723
    Thanked 7,391 times in 1,757 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    I refuse to "downfall", my wish is to let folks know they can "uplift" if they choose, Truth is relative to the beholder, you make your own reality, if you believe you can, you will.

    Low stuff- well that is also relative isn't it? I promise I mean what ever you want me to mean. You have already decided. Peace and light to you.

  5. Link to Post #104
    Sao Tome Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    12th February 2011
    Location
    where ever there is a smile, ill be there :-)
    Posts
    2,041
    Thanks
    1,906
    Thanked 7,412 times in 1,702 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Id like to put up a an opinion here after reading the thread.

    Observer is trying to steer his thread for a reason. He has a belief about this holographic machine and wishes to dig deeper into finding better evidence to support it. ( correct me if i am wrong ) This is his interest.

    We have seen certain posters contradict them selves which he points out quite clearly. I think with regard to common courtesy it would be wise to respect the thread and what Observer is trying to achieve by enriching its purpose as opposed to stating anything is impossible.

    My opinion again , if anybody states something is impossible then they need to understand more about reality. Reality is about understanding that we know very little about anything. Facts are subjective along a line of true to falce based on an individuals perspective. So in reality there is no truth nor are there any lies.. just varying degrees of subjective belief.

    Eg , I believe this machine exists. But how on earth can i prove my belief ? the belief is subjective to my experience. I cant google my experience and provide proof can i ? no. so it is subjective.

    Personally i think certain people have made their points and should respect the thread for what it wants to achieve however i agree too it will be hard to find bona fide proof of such a machine. Real hard evidence of such a thing would be even more difficult, hence the frustration embedded in the subject.

    Personally i am on the cusp of aincient wisdom and modern science as a belief system. Neither can be discounted in my opinion if we want to understand the
    " impossible "


    Naniu

  6. Link to Post #105
    Great Britain Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    23rd January 2013
    Age
    73
    Posts
    2,006
    Thanks
    7,723
    Thanked 7,391 times in 1,757 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Even threads have vibrations -they resonate, we can be attracted or repelled or indifferent or any combination of all influencing the original vibration, we contribute we automatically alter the vibration of the thread and become co creators.

    If we may only vibrate at a similar level to the OP- then what is the point of a thread in the first place? Without agitation there can be no expansion.

    However I can take a hint. May light shine on your path.

    Oop's nearly forgot the answer to the OP question is.............42
    Last edited by sheme; 17th March 2013 at 20:44.

  7. Link to Post #106
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    20th March 2010
    Location
    Within a few kilometers of Avalon
    Age
    76
    Posts
    1,702
    Thanks
    3,990
    Thanked 7,178 times in 1,466 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
    I should hope, sheme, this will be the last comment I need to make to you in this thread.

    Your signature says everything that this thread IS about....

    May the light of understanding shine on the path of the Mass of Humanity.

    Reference to 42:
    I personally would have no objection to the destruction of all of this through the discovery of just how it all operates. Of course, in my universe, the destruction would lead to something better for all involved. So much for science fiction fantasy....
    Last edited by observer; 18th March 2013 at 00:46. Reason: add reference/spelling

  8. Link to Post #107
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,581
    Thanks
    30,501
    Thanked 138,438 times in 21,490 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by observer (here)
    Nothing, anyone attempting to discredit these findings has said, discounts the fundamental fact that when particles (of light, or sub-atomic structure it doesn't matter) strike a single slit they behave in one particular manner, and when they are aimed at a double-slit arrangement, they behave differently, except when those particles are being observed.

    Under those circumstances, the pattern formed goes-back to acting like a particle, and not a wave form.

    Has anyone in this debate shown that foundational conclusion to be incorrect? If they have, I missed it.
    Yes, observation can effect the results.

    Insertion of detectors, such as the beta barium borate crystal (BBO) photon splitters used in the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment that Stephen Davis quotes Thomas Campbell describing in the workshop videos you posted, effects the result of the experiment.

    It's not the conscious state of mind of the humans running the experiment that matters here. It's the BBO crystal in the light path, claims to the contrary notwithstanding.
    Last edited by ThePythonicCow; 18th March 2013 at 04:34.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ThePythonicCow For This Post:

    Finefeather (18th March 2013), Hervé (18th March 2013), RUSirius (18th March 2013)

  10. Link to Post #108
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,581
    Thanks
    30,501
    Thanked 138,438 times in 21,490 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Aha - here's an experiment, also using the beta barium borate crystal (BBO) photon splitter and entanglement, but in which the BBO splitter is placed before the slits, not after. They were able to determine which slit one of the entangled photons went through by observing its sibling. They were able to generate an interference pattern, while still determining which slit the photon passed through. See Disentangling the wave-particle duality in the double-slit experiment.

    So ... observation does not necessarily destroy the interference pattern.

    P.S. -- I checked some more links. This is the same experiment I reported on above, in Post #87.
    Last edited by ThePythonicCow; 18th March 2013 at 04:33.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  11. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ThePythonicCow For This Post:

    Finefeather (19th March 2013), Hervé (18th March 2013), RUSirius (18th March 2013)

  12. Link to Post #109
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,581
    Thanks
    30,501
    Thanked 138,438 times in 21,490 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Perhaps I should have split off my comments on double slit experiments instead of continuing here. I become torn between two sometimes opposing objectives. On the one hand, like good referees at a sporting contest, we moderators should allow all views equal opportunity, and we should ask members to respect all other members views. On the other hand, we share a common goal of better understanding, and that means sifting the truths from the confusions and favoring one over the other.

    Presently, if it's a subject I don't know much about, I just strive to maintain respectful discussion, but if it's a topic I'm more involved with, I may take a position and dispel what I consider to be significant confusions. The risk of course is that I get one wrong, and dispel important truths or discourage members who would otherwise have made additional valuable contributions.

    In any case ... here's one more delightful double split report: http://grad.physics.sunysb.edu/~amarch/ . In these experiments, enabling and disabling detectors on the entangled sibling photon effected whether the other photon that went through the slits caused an interference pattern, even if the sibling detectors were further away (encountered later in time) than the interference pattern detector.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ThePythonicCow For This Post:

    Finefeather (19th March 2013), RUSirius (18th March 2013)

  14. Link to Post #110
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    21st March 2010
    Location
    the foothills of le Massif Central, France
    Age
    77
    Posts
    1,352
    Thanks
    7,476
    Thanked 4,829 times in 1,059 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    I came upon the work of Robert Lanza, M.D. about BIOCENTRISM. :

    How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe.


    Quoting from Wiki :

    Quote According to Lanza's book, Biocentrism suggests that life is not an accidental byproduct of physics, but rather is a key part of our understanding of the universe.
    The theory states that there is no independent external universe outside of biological existence.
    Part of what the theory sees as evidence of this is that there are over 200 physical parameters within the universe so exact that it is seen as more probable that they are that way in order to allow for existence of life and consciousness, rather than coming about at random.
    Biocentrism claims that allowing the observer into the equation opens new approaches to understanding cognition.
    Through this, biocentrism purports to offer a way to unify the laws of the universe.
    OK Paul, and then of course here we go:

    Quote Some physicists have commented that biocentrism currently does not make testable predictions.
    Dr. Vinod Kumar Wadhawan and Ajita Kamal responded to the idea by stating that "The biocentrism approach does not provide any new information about the nature of consciousness, and relies on ignoring recent advances in understanding consciousness from a scientific perspective."
    Biologist PZ Meyers supported their views as well. Arizona State University physicist Lawrence Krauss stated, “It may represent interesting philosophy, but it doesn't look, at first glance, as if it will change anything about science."
    In USA Today Online, theoretical physicist and science writer David Lindley asserted that Lanza’s concept was a "vague, inarticulate metaphor" and stated that "I certainly don't see how thinking his way would lead you into any new sort of scientific or philosophical insight. That's all very nice, I would say to Lanza, but now what? I [also] take issue with his views about physics."

    Richard Conn Henry, Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Johns Hopkins University writing for the Journal of Scientific Exploration said: “What Lanza says in this book is not new. Then why does Robert have to say it at all? It is because we, the physicists, do NOT say it––or if we do say it, we only whisper it, and in private––furiously blushing as we mouth the words. True, yes; politically correct, hell no!”

    Nobel laureate in Physiology or Medicine and physician E. Donnall Thomas said of biocentrism, "Any short statement does not do justice to such a scholarly work.
    The work is a scholarly consideration of science and philosophy that brings biology into the central role in unifying the whole."

    Indian physician and writer Deepak Chopra stated that “Lanza's insights into the nature of consciousness are original and exciting” and that “his theory of biocentrism is consistent with the most ancient wisdom traditions of the world which says that consciousness conceives, governs, and becomes a physical world. It is the ground of our Being in which both subjective and objective reality come into existence."
    Daniel Dennett said that he does not believe that the idea met the criteria of a theory in philosophy.
    ****

    Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe
    by Robert Lanza, Bob Berman

    Scroll down to the second article..... although the first one is interesting too !

    http://www.robertlanzabiocentrism.co...-isnt-the-end/

    ****
    Last edited by heyokah; 18th March 2013 at 08:50. Reason: styling

  15. Link to Post #111
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,581
    Thanks
    30,501
    Thanked 138,438 times in 21,490 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by heyokah (here)
    How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe.
    Now that I might agree with ... just not on account of any double split or entangled photon experiments .
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  16. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ThePythonicCow For This Post:

    araucaria (19th March 2013), Finefeather (19th March 2013), Hervé (18th March 2013), RUSirius (18th March 2013)

  17. Link to Post #112
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    21st March 2010
    Location
    the foothills of le Massif Central, France
    Age
    77
    Posts
    1,352
    Thanks
    7,476
    Thanked 4,829 times in 1,059 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    Quote Posted by heyokah (here)
    How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe.
    Now that I might agree with ... just not on account of any double split or entangled photon experiments .
    I'm sure in such a short time you will not have been able to study the article I ended with

    Quote Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe
    by Robert Lanza, Bob Berman

    Scroll down to the second article..... although the first one is interesting too !

    http://www.robertlanzabiocentrism.co...-isnt-the-end/
    add

    besides.... it's all about who is responsable for the (subjective) interpretation of the experiments .......

    (furiously blushing as we mouth the words. True, yes; politically correct, hell no!”)
    Last edited by heyokah; 18th March 2013 at 08:44. Reason: add & grammar

  18. Link to Post #113
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    20th March 2010
    Location
    Within a few kilometers of Avalon
    Age
    76
    Posts
    1,702
    Thanks
    3,990
    Thanked 7,178 times in 1,466 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    Click-on the forwarding arrow to see the content of Paul's comment #109
    [....snip]

    Quote .... if it's a subject I don't know much about, I just strive to maintain respectful discussion, but if it's a topic I'm more involved with, I may take a position and dispel what I consider to be significant confusions. The risk of course is that I get one wrong, and dispel important truths or discourage members who would otherwise have made additional valuable contributions.
    Paul,

    [Please take note:
    I only address this to Paul because of the negating effect a comment from the Administration Team has in any thread - when that comment concerns the validity of the data being presented.]

    I would respectfully submit herein lies one of those situations where your involvement is interfering with the pursuit of knowledge. [understanding]

    Here are the points that I find illogical to the arguments, from those attempting to debunk the data:

    1. Photons are associated with light. Whether photons are wave form or particles has no consequence to the conclusions being presented in this thread. If, as you assert, it is the barium borate crystal (BBO) that effects the photons, and not the observation itself, this information is irrelevant to the results of the 'double-slit experiment' as it relates to electrons.

    2. There is a distinct difference between photons of light, and electrons. Electrons represent sub-atomic particles that are either a wave-form, or a particle, depending-on if they are being observed or not. Electrons form a foundational building block for the creation of matter. Photons are the building blocks of light.

    3. Using data from experiments designed to determine the nature of a photon, has no consequence to the debate as to whether an electron is a wave form, or a particle, in spite of Amzer Zo's earlier argument. Comparing photons [with electrons], is not a comparison of apples to apples.

    The premise of this thread concerns whether this particular reality is controlled from an hyperdimensional source. It uses the Holographic Universe Model as the foundation of that premise. The Holographic Universe Model is built upon observations from a physics lab specifically related to the nature of how electrons behave in a certain experiment. Therefore, I would respectfully request that you, or any other individual wishing to debunk the premise of this thread show the members specifically where barium borate crystals (BBO) had an effect on experiments involving electrons.

    The "double-slit" experiment - as it relates to the behavior of electrons - where the observation of the path of those electrons effected the results of the experiment, is one of the foundational building blocks to the Holographic Universe Model. It seems to me, by using data derived from studies regarding photons, is derailing to that conclusion.

    I would also add, that contained within the data you have provided from Thomas Campbell, where he makes the assertion that, "we are living in a virtual reality", how do you see this as any difference from comparing this to an Holographic Universe? Perhaps we are talking semantics here.

    Virtual Reality/Holographic Universe, isn't the basic assumption of either an [acknowledgement] of a control mechanism?

    [ Research Reference:
    Dare I even again suggest the members spend some time researching David Icke's Book, The Biggest Secret? -
    http://davidickebooks.co.uk/index.ph...d&productId=12
    David Icke's work goes further to demonstrate how this particular reality is controlled through an hyperdimensional source than anything I could present within this thread.]
    Last edited by observer; 18th March 2013 at 18:36. Reason: add text/clarity/spelling/add reference link

  19. Link to Post #114
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    20th March 2010
    Location
    Within a few kilometers of Avalon
    Age
    76
    Posts
    1,702
    Thanks
    3,990
    Thanked 7,178 times in 1,466 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by Amzer Zo (here)
    Click-on the forwarding icon to see the full text of Amzer Zo's comment #82.
    I again point-out, Amzer Zo, that all of the research you have referenced is relating to photons, not electrons. This, however, is not even the issue.

    The point of this thread is whether physical (objective) evidence exists to show that this particular reality is being somehow manipulated from an hyperdimensional source.

    In the OP, we explored how the evidence being presented could possibly lead to objective conclusions regarding this assumption. It would appear that many of the members, with conflicting points of view, wish only to disrupt the flow of information leading to this conclusion.

    The Holographic Universe Workshop, work by Michael Talbot's, and a book by David Icke were presented as a trail of evidence one might explore to come to these conclusions. I ask that any member wishing to debate the sources of this evidence, to first make themselves aware of the evidence, if at least only in a cursorily way.

    Please also note, that I included a caveat in the OP regarding what conclusions Stephen Davis, the producer, had to say in that Workshop. Through this thread, I have simplified the physics lab results found in that Workshop into a less time consuming format.

    Many times, in other threads, over the time I've been a member, I have referenced the work of David Talbott, and Wallace Thornhill regarding the possibility of an Electric Universe Model.
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=5AUA7XS0TvA
    (That is David Talbott, not to be confused with Michael Talbot.)

    I find the evidence you have provided in the Primer Field Videos to be supportive to the Electric Universe Model. I do not find the Primer Field Information having any bearing on the Holographic Universe Model. I personally have no difficulty merging the two unrelated concepts into one Unified Model, however.

    My conclusion, here would be: the same "something" that turned on the holographic projector, also flipped the switch that causes this Electric Universe to continue operating.

    This begs the question, how long will this experiment be allowed to operate, and when will "something else" come along and shut the switch off? Understanding the mechanics of the mechanism may possibly lead to the conclusion of this 'failed experiment' we all find ourselves time-trapped within - in an endless a$$-biting loop of birth-death-rebirth. I can only see greater understanding as a conclusion to be a good thing .

    So, in that regard, thank you for presenting a possibility that has allowed me to exound on the purpose of this thread. I hope all the members gain some understanding from this exercise.

    I trust all the members are on the same page now.... observer
    Last edited by observer; 18th March 2013 at 18:11. Reason: clarity

  20. Link to Post #115
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    21st March 2010
    Location
    the foothills of le Massif Central, France
    Age
    77
    Posts
    1,352
    Thanks
    7,476
    Thanked 4,829 times in 1,059 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    The Most Amazing Experiment

    From Biocentrism (Robert Lanza and Bob Berman)


    Quantum theory has unfortunately become a catch-all phrase for trying to prove various kinds of New Age nonsense. It’s unlikely that the authors of the many books making wacky claims of time-travel or mind-control, and who use quantum theory as “proof,” have the slightest knowledge of physics or could explain even the rudiments of QT. The popular 2004 film, What the Bleep Do We Know? is a good case in point. The movie starts out claiming quantum theory has revolutionized our thinking – which is true enough – but then, without explanation or elaboration, goes on to say that it proves people can travel into the past or “choose which reality you want.”

    QT says no such thing. QT deals with probabilities, and the likely places particles may appear, and likely actions they will take. And while, as we shall see, bits of light and matter do indeed change behavior depending on whether they are being observed, and measured particles do indeed appear to amazingly influence the past behavior of other particles, this does not in any way mean that humans can travel into their past or influence their own history.

    Given the widespread generic use of QT, plus the paradigm-changing tenets of biocentrism, using QT as evidence might raise eyebrows among the skeptical. For this reason, it’s important that readers have some genuine understanding of QT’s actual experiments — and can grasp the real results rather than the preposterous claims so often associated with it. For those with a little patience, this chapter can provide a life-altering understanding of the latest version of one of the most famous and amazing experiments in the history of physics.

    .............

    Here the last part of the article:

    .............

    The usual interpretation of why we see an interference pattern is that photons or electrons have two choices when they encounter the double slit. They do not actually exist as real entities in real places until they are observed, and they aren’t observed until they hit the final detection barrier. So when they reach the slits, they exercise their probabilistic freedom of taking both choices. Even though actual electrons or photons are indivisible, and never split themselves under any conditions whatsoever, their existence as “probability waves” are another story. Thus, what goes “through the slit” are not actual entities but just probabilities. . THE PROBABILITY WAVES OF THE INDIVIDUAL PHOTONS INTERFERE WITH THEMSELVES! When enough have gone through, we see the overall interference pattern as all probabilities congeal into actual entities making impacts and being observed – as waves.

    Sure it’s weird, but this, apparently, is how reality works. And this is just the very beginning of Quantum Weirdness. QT, as we mentioned last chapter, has a principle called complementarity which says that we can observe objects to be one thing or another – or have one position or property or another, but never both. It depends on what one is looking for, and what measuring equipment is used.

    Now, suppose we wish to know which slit a given electron or photon has gone through, on its way to the barrier. It’s a fair enough question, and it’s easy enough to find out. We can use polarized light (meaning light whose waves vibrate either horizontally or vertically or else slowly rotate their orientation) and when such a mixture is used, we get the same result as before. But now let’s determine which slit each photon is going through. Many different things have been used, but in this experiment we’ll use a “quarter wave plate” in front of each slit. Each quarter wave plate alters the polarity of the light in a specific way. The detector can let us know the polarity of the incoming photon. So by noting the polarity of the photon when it’s detected, we know which slit it went through.



    Now we repeat the experiment, shooting photons through the slits one at a time, except this time we know which slot each photon goes through. Now the results dramatically change. Even though QWPs do not alter photons except for harmlessly shifting their polarities (later we prove that this change in results is not caused by the QWPs), now we no longer get the interference pattern. Now the curve suddenly changes to what we’d expect if the photons were particles:



    Something’s happened. Turns out, the mere act of measurement, of learning the path of each photon, destroyed the photon’s freedom to remain blurry and undefined and take both paths until it reached the barriers. Its “wave function” must have collapsed at our measuring device, the QWPs, as it instantly “chose” to become a particle and go through one slit or the other. Its wave nature was lost as soon as it lost its blurry probabilistic not-quite-real state. But why should the photon have chosen to collapse its wave-function? How did it know that we, the observer, could learn which slit it went through?

    Countless attempts to get around this, by the greatest minds of the past century, have all failed. Our knowledge of the photon or electron path alone caused it to become a definite entity ahead of the previous time. Of course physicists also wondered whether this bizarre behavior might be caused by some interaction between the “which-way” QWP detector or various other devices that have been tried, and the photon. But no. Totally different which-way detectors have been built, none of which in any way disturbs the photon. Yet we always lose the interference pattern. The bottom line conclusion, reached after many years, is that it’s simply not possible to gain which-way information and the interference pattern caused by energy-waves.

    We’re back to QT’s complementarity – that you can measure and learn just one of a pair of characteristics, but never both at the same time. If you fully learn about one, you will know nothing about the other. And just in case you’re suspicious of the quarter wave plates, let it be said when used in all other contexts, including double slit experiments but without information-providing polarization-detecting barriers at the end, the mere act of changing a photon’s polarization never has the slightest effect on the creation of an interference pattern.

    Okay, let’s try something else. In nature, as we saw in the last chapter, there are “entangled particles” or bits of light (or matter) that were born together and therefore “share a wave function” according to QT. They can fly apart – even across the width of the galaxy – and yet they still retain this connection, this knowledge of each other. If one is meddled with in any way so that it loses its “anything’s possible” nature and has to instantly decide to materialize with, say, a vertical polarization, its twin will instantaneously then materialize too, and with a horizontal polarity. If one becomes an electron with an up spin, the twin will too, but with a down spin. They’re eternally linked in a complementary way.

    So now let’s use a device which shoots off entangled twins in different directions. Experimenters can create the entangled photons by using a special crystal called beta-barium borate (BBO). Inside the crystal, an energetic violet photon from a laser is converted to two red photons, each with half the energy (twice the wavelength) of the original, so there’s no net gain or loss of energy. The two outbound entangled photons are sent off in different directions. We’ll call their paths direction p and s.



    We’ll set up our original experiment with no which-way information measured. Except now, we add a “coincidence counter.” The role of the coincidence counter is to prevent us from learning the polarity of the photons at detector S unless a photon also hits detector P. One twin goes through the slits (call this photon s) while the other merely barrels ahead to a second detector. Only when both detectors register hits at about the same time do we know that both twins have completed their journeys. Only then does something register on our equipment. The resulting pattern at detector S is our familiar interference pattern:



    This makes sense. We haven’t learned which slit any particular photon or electron has taken. So the objects have remained probability waves.

    But let’s now get tricky. First we’ll restore those QWPs so we can get which-way information for photons traveling along path S.



    As expected, the interference pattern now vanishes, replaced with the particle pattern, the single curve.



    So far so good. But now let’s destroy our ability to measure the which-way paths of the s photons, but without interfering with them in any way. We can do this by placing a polarizing window in the path of the other photon P, far away. This plate will stop the second detector from registering coincidences. It’ll measure only some of the photons, and effectively scramble up the double-signals. Since a coincidence-counter is essential here in delivering information about the completion of the twins’ journeys, it has now been rendered thoroughly unreliable. The entire apparatus will now be uselessly unable to let us learn which slit individual photons take when they travel along path S because we won’t be able to compare them with their twins – since nothing registers unless the coincidence counter allows it to. And let’s be clear: We’ve left the QWPs in place for photon S. All we’ve done is to meddle with the p photon’s path in a way that removes our ability to use the coincidence counter to gain which-way knowledge. (The set-up, to review, delivers information to us, registers “hits,” only when polarity is measured at detector S AND the coincidence counter tells us that either a matching or non-matching polarity has been simultaneously registered by the twin photon at detector P). The result:



    They’re waves again. The interference pattern is back. The physical places on the back screen where the photons or electrons taking path s hit have now changed. Yet we did nothing to these photons’ paths, from their creation at the crystal all the way to the final detector. We even left the QWPs in place. All we did was meddle with the twin photon far away so that it destroyed our ability to learn information. The only change was in our minds. How could photons taking path S possibly know that we put that other polarizer in place — somewhere else, far from their own paths? And QT tells us that we’d get this same result even if we placed the information-ruiner at the other end of the universe.

    (Also, by the way, this proves that it wasn’t those QWP plates that were causing the photons to change from waves to particles, and to alter the impact points on the detector. We now get an interference pattern even with the QWPs in place. It’s our knowledge alone that the photons or electrons seem concerned about. This alone influences their actions.)

    Okay, this is bizarre. Yet these results happen every time, without fail. They’re telling us that an observer determines physical behavior of “external” objects. Could it get any weirder? Hold on: Now we’ll try something even more radical – an experiment only first performed in 2002. Thus far the experiment involved erasing the which-way information by meddling with the path of p and then measuring its twin s. Perhaps some sort of communication takes place between photon p and s, letting s know what we will learn, and therefore giving it the green light to be a particle or a wave and either create or not create an interference pattern. Maybe when photon p meets the polarizer it sends s an IM (instant message) at infinite speed, so that photon s knows it must materialize into a real entity instantly, which has to be a particle since only particles can go through one slit or the other and not both. Result: No interference pattern.

    To check out whether this is so, we’ll do one more thing. First we’ll stretch out the distance p photons have to take until they reach their detector, so it’ll take them more time to get there. This way, photons taking the S route will hit their own detectors first. But oddly enough, the results do not change! When we insert the QWPs to path S the fringes are gone; and when we insert the polarizing scrambler to path P and lose the coincidence-measuring ability that lets us determine which-way info for the S photons, the fringes return as before. But how can this be? Photons taking the S-path already finished their journeys. They either went through one or the other slit, or both. They either collapsed their “wave function” and became a particle or they didn’t. The game’s over, the action’s finished. They’ve each already hit the final barrier and were detected – before twin p encountered the polarizing scrambling device that would rob us of which-way information.

    The photons somehow know whether or not we will gain the which-way information in the future. They decide not to collapse into particles before their distant twins even encounter our scrambler. (If we take away the P scrambler, the S photons suddenly revert to being particles, again before P’s photons reach their detector and activate the coincidence counter.) Somehow, photon s knows whether the “which-way” marker will be erased even though neither it, nor its twin, have yet encountered an erasing mechanism. It knows when its interference behavior can be present, when it can safely remain in its fuzzy both-slits ghost reality, because it apparently knows photon p — far off in the distance — is going to eventually hit the scrambler, and that this will ultimately prevent us from learning which way p went.

    It doesn’t matter how we set up the experiment. Our mind and its knowledge or lack of it is the only thing that determines how these bits of light or matter behave. It forces us, too, to wonder about space and time. Can either be real if the twins act on information before it happens, and across distances instantaneously as if there is no separation between them?

    Again and again, observations have consistently confirmed the observer-dependent effects of QT. In the past decade, physicists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology have carried out an experiment that, in the quantum world, is equivalent to demonstrating that a watched pot doesn’t boil. “It seems,” said Peter Coveney, a researcher there, “that the act of looking at an atom prevents it from changing.” (Theoretically, if a nuclear bomb were watched intently enough, it would not explode, that is, if you could keep checking its atoms every million trillionth of a second. This is yet another experiment that supports the theory that the structure of the physical world, and of small units of matter and energy in particular, are influenced by human observation.)

    In the last couple of decades, quantum theorists have shown, in principle, that an atom cannot change its energy state as long as it is being continuously observed. So, now, to test this concept, the group of laser experimentalists at the NIST held a cluster of positively charged beryllium ions, the “water” so to speak, in a fixed position using a magnetic field, the “kettle”. They applied “heat” to the kettle in the form of a radio-frequency field that would boost the atoms from a lower to a higher energy state. This transition generally takes about a quarter of a second. However, when the researchers kept checking the atoms every four milliseconds with a brief pulse of light from a laser, the atoms never made it to the higher energy state, despite the force driving them toward it. It would seem that the process of measurement gives the atoms “a little nudge,” forcing them back down to the lower energy state–in effect, resetting the system to zero. This behavior has no analog in the classical world of everyday sense awareness and is apparently a function of observation.

    Arcane? Bizarre? It’s hard to believe such effects are real. It’s a fantastic result. When quantum physics was in its early days of discovery in the beginning of the last century, even some physicists dismissed the experimental findings as impossible or improbable. It is curious to recall Albert Einstein’s reaction to the experiments: “I know this business is free of contradictions, yet in my view it contains a certain unreasonableness.”

    It was only with the advent of quantum physics and the fall of objectivity, that scientists began to consider again the old question of the possibility of comprehending the world as a form of mind. Einstein, on a walk from The Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton to his home on Mercer street, illustrated his continued fascination and skepticism about an objective external reality, when he asked Abraham Pais if he really believed that the moon existed only if he looked at it. Since that time, physicists have analyzed and revised their equations in a vain attempt to arrive at a statement of natural laws that in no way depends on the circumstances of the observer. Indeed, Eugene Wigner, one of the 20th century’s greatest physicists, stated that it is “not possible to formulate the laws of [physics] in a fully consistent way without reference to the consciousness [of the observer].” So when quantum theory implies that consciousness must exist, it tacitly shows that the content of the mind is the ultimate reality, and that only an act of observation can confer shape and form to reality– from a dandelion in a meadow, to sun, wind and rain.

    http://www.robertlanzabiocentrism.co...-isnt-the-end/

  21. Link to Post #116
    South Africa Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    14th May 2012
    Location
    South Africa
    Age
    78
    Posts
    1,124
    Thanks
    5,043
    Thanked 7,472 times in 1,084 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by heyokah (here)
    It was only with the advent of quantum physics and the fall of objectivity, that scientists began to consider again the old question of the possibility of comprehending the world as a form of mind. Einstein, on a walk from The Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton to his home on Mercer street, illustrated his continued fascination and skepticism about an objective external reality, when he asked Abraham Pais if he really believed that the moon existed only if he looked at it. Since that time, physicists have analyzed and revised their equations in a vain attempt to arrive at a statement of natural laws that in no way depends on the circumstances of the observer. Indeed, Eugene Wigner, one of the 20th century’s greatest physicists, stated that it is “not possible to formulate the laws of [physics] in a fully consistent way without reference to the consciousness [of the observer].” So when quantum theory implies that consciousness must exist, it tacitly shows that the content of the mind is the ultimate reality, and that only an act of observation can confer shape and form to reality– from a dandelion in a meadow, to sun, wind and rain.
    ..."equating the advent of quantum physics with the fall of objectivity" is another way of saying that we only see what we want to see and this is evident in life and the real reason we each might describe the same thing differently...However, that does not mean the object is different. Another thing to think about is peripheral vision...although we are..say...only concentrating on the thing in front of us, the rest of the picture is still there...albeit a bit unnoticed. It is only when we close our eyes that the objective world does not exist for us anymore...it still exists in our mind and in the objective reality of the guy next to you with his eyes open. The more conscious we are the clearer objectivity becomes.
    Lovely subject...
    Take care
    Ray

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Finefeather For This Post:

    Hervé (18th March 2013), heyokah (18th March 2013)

  23. Link to Post #117
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,581
    Thanks
    30,501
    Thanked 138,438 times in 21,490 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by observer (here)
    The premise of this thread concerns whether this particular reality is controlled from an hyperdimensional source. It uses the Holographic Universe Model as the foundation of that premise. The Holographic Universe Model is built upon observations from a physics lab specifically related to the nature of how electrons behave in a certain experiment. Therefore, I would respectfully request that you, or any other individual wishing to debunk the premise of this thread show the members specifically where barium borate crystal (BBO) had an effect on experiments involving electrons.
    I will concede that it is quite doubtful that BBO would be useful in such an experiment involving electrons. I would expect (though have not verified this) that the electrons would bounce off, or be absorbed by, the BBO, not pass through, much less pass through and do anything with the electrons analogous to producing two entangled down-converted photons for each incoming photon, a process called spontaneous parametric down-conversion (SPDC).

    Here is a screen shot from part three of the Workshop material you posted, near the beginning of the portion by Thomas Campbell.
    At the point that I took this screenshot, Mr. Campbell is saying the words "and these are called quantum erasure experiments." On the screen shot, you can see the phrases "Light is a wave", "Light is a particle", and "1 Photon".

    In my Post #86 above, I tracked down more accurate descriptions of these quantum erasure experiments using light photons, and they involved BBO crystals and entangled photons, so that observations can be made of, and alterations made to, one entangled photon while its sibling traverses the dual slit apparatus.

    As I reported above, a more accurate description of these experiments shows subtle interactions with the test equipment, including even interactions that clearly show the quantum entanglement that I earlier disparaged, but all these interactions are over and done with in the space of a fraction of a microsecond, and do not involve or depend on conscious human awareness. Mr. Campbell's interpretations of these experiments, such as in his Gedankenexperiment, are in my view, as I explained, seriously incorrect.

    The key lesson implicit in my earlier posts on this thread, which I will now make explicit, is that it is risky to accept others interpretations of experimental results. If the results are important to one's own work, one needs to track down as closely as practical the original research and understand it and verify whether the interpretations are justified.

    It is, as I just documented above, the case that Stephen Davis's Workshop material quotes Thomas Campbell discussing quantum erasure experiments using photons of light. I did nothing improper or misleading by presenting in more detail these experiments using photons, au contraire.

    It may well also be the case that some experiments involving electrons support the conclusions of this Workshop and your position in this thread. If you wish that we also discuss experiments with electrons, not just photons, on the grounds that the "Holographic Universe Model is built upon observations from a physics lab specifically related to the nature of how electrons behave in a certain experiment," then the burden of proof lies with you to:
    • Show that the Workshop Material of Stephen Davis that you presented is supported by this "Holographic Universe Model".
    • Show that the "Holographic Universe Model" is built upon observations relating to electrons.
    • Track down these observations relating to electrons as close as practical to the actual experimental results (not someone else's interpretations or simplified expositions).
    • Show, if this is the conclusion you would have us reach, that the actual experiments demonstrate the essential involvement of human consciousness in determining their results.
    ~~~~~~~~
    Quote Posted by observer (here)
    I would also add, that contained within the data you have provided from Thomas Campbell, where he makes the assertion that, "we are living in a virtual reality", how do you see this as any difference from comparing this to an Holographic Universe? Perhaps we are talking semantics here.

    Virtual Reality/Holographic Universe, isn't the basic assumption of either an [acknowledgement] of a control mechanism?
    The phrases "virtual reality" or "holographic universe" are metaphors, attempting to describe something quite unfamiliar to us in terms more familiar to us. As such, metaphors always have their particular limitations, past which they no longer properly describe the actuality. One cannot deduce hidden aspects of a reality from the logical properties of some metaphor for that reality. Or, as I wrote earlier: "Do not confuse the model with what it models." This same caveat applies when the model is a metaphor as when it is a physics theory.

    In other words, as I have stated before in this thread, I absolutely disagree with the conclusions that some controlling agent, as an identifiable separate and intelligent entity, exists separately from our "holographic" universe. Just because there is elaborate structure does not mean there must be a distinct designer of that structure, just as the existence of an elaborately created universe does not mean there must be a separate creator of that universe. Just because this holographic metaphor (such as we see on our credit card security symbol or in the movies) has a separate and distinct designer does not mean that our "holographic" reality has such a designer. Similarly, using a metaphor from an earlier century, just because a watch has an intelligent designer, distinct from the watch itself, doesn't mean the universe has one.

    (And besides, I don't much concern myself with what phrases Thomas Campbell uses, as I find at least his efforts to ground his work in physics to be seriously flawed, as I enumerated earlier.)
    Last edited by ThePythonicCow; 18th March 2013 at 20:19.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  24. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to ThePythonicCow For This Post:

    araucaria (19th March 2013), Finefeather (18th March 2013), Hervé (18th March 2013), heyokah (18th March 2013), observer (18th March 2013)

  25. Link to Post #118
    Unsubscribed
    Join Date
    21st March 2010
    Location
    the foothills of le Massif Central, France
    Age
    77
    Posts
    1,352
    Thanks
    7,476
    Thanked 4,829 times in 1,059 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by Finefeather (here)

    ..."equating the advent of quantum physics with the fall of objectivity" is another way of saying that we only see what we want to see......
    .....,or what we have been programed to see, leaving us with just a possibility to add a little personal 'flavor' to it.

    Now the question is, " Who or what is doing the programming, who or what is writing the blueprint, or the play we have to perform in?

  26. Link to Post #119
    South Africa Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    14th May 2012
    Location
    South Africa
    Age
    78
    Posts
    1,124
    Thanks
    5,043
    Thanked 7,472 times in 1,084 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by heyokah (here)
    Quote Posted by Finefeather (here)

    ..."equating the advent of quantum physics with the fall of objectivity" is another way of saying that we only see what we want to see......
    .....,or what we have been programed to see, leaving us with just a possibility to add a little personal 'flavor' to it.

    Now the question is, " Who or what is doing the programming, who or what is writing the blueprint, or the play we have to perform in?
    There is no programming...Our ignorance and bad attitudes cause our uphills...our wisdom and love cause our downhills.

  27. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Finefeather For This Post:

    araucaria (19th March 2013), greybeard (18th March 2013), heyokah (18th March 2013)

  28. Link to Post #120
    United States Administrator ThePythonicCow's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Language
    English
    Age
    76
    Posts
    28,581
    Thanks
    30,501
    Thanked 138,438 times in 21,490 posts

    Default Re: What controls the hologram?

    Quote Posted by heyokah (here)
    The Most Amazing Experiment

    From Biocentrism (Robert Lanza and Bob Berman)
    Yes, as I noted in my Post #109, this is some delightful work. Both the material you post, and the material I posted there, refer to work done by S. P. Walborn, M. O. Terra Cunha, S. Padua, and C. H. Monken at the Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais in Brazil. Their work was published in March 2002, in Physical Review A, (65, 033818, 2002). The pdf version of the publication can be found here.

    Quote Posted by heyokah (here)
    Now we repeat the experiment, shooting photons through the slits one at a time, except this time we know which slot each photon goes through. Now the results dramatically change. Even though QWPs do not alter photons except for harmlessly shifting their polarities (later we prove that this change in results is not caused by the QWPs), now we no longer get the interference pattern. Now the curve suddenly changes to what we’d expect if the photons were particles:
    Quote Posted by heyokah (here)
    Of course physicists also wondered whether this bizarre behavior might be caused by some interaction between the “which-way” QWP detector or various other devices that have been tried, and the photon. But no. Totally different which-way detectors have been built, none of which in any way disturbs the photon. Yet we always lose the interference pattern. The bottom line conclusion, reached after many years, is that it’s simply not possible to gain which-way information and the interference pattern caused by energy-waves.
    The above two bold phrases are mutually contradictory, therefore at least one of them is false:
    • except for harmlessly shifting their polarities
    • none of which in any way disturbs the photon

    Quote Posted by heyokah (here)
    All we did was meddle with the twin photon far away so that it destroyed our ability to learn information. The only change was in our minds. How could photons taking path S possibly know that we put that other polarizer in place — somewhere else, far from their own paths? And QT tells us that we’d get this same result even if we placed the information-ruiner at the other end of the universe.
    This bold phrase is also false. There were changes to the laboratory equipment, as clearly spelled out, in both the document you referenced and the one I referenced. Moreover, the changed results of the experiment would have occurred (I claim) even if no human mind noticed! It was exactly the changed laboratory setup, not the change within or conscious notice by some human mind(s), that changed the results.

    Quote Posted by heyokah (here)
    To check out whether this is so, we’ll do one more thing. First we’ll stretch out the distance p photons have to take until they reach their detector, so it’ll take them more time to get there.
    ...

    It doesn’t matter how we set up the experiment. Our mind and its knowledge or lack of it is the only thing that determines how these bits of light or matter behave. It forces us, too, to wonder about space and time. Can either be real if the twins act on information before it happens, and across distances instantaneously as if there is no separation between them?
    What they have here are an excellent demonstrations of quantum entanglement, of action at a distance, and that there is more going on "beneath the surface" than our intuitions, currently formed from the physics of Newton, Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and the Standard Model, can explain. If for example, events unnoticed in our current conventional physics models, occurred at super-luminal speeds, ahead of a photon's travel, before it "arrived" at a place, intimately related to that photon's journey, then the principle of causality need not be violated, and no "magic" recourse to "it all being just a figment of our imagination" need be made.

    But what they do is to take this excellent demonstration of quantum entanglement and action at a distance, and then apply to it the constraints of our current conventional physics, to "prove" that it didn't really happen that way, that it's really a grand version of Hollywood special effects played out on a universal scale, where the impossible is made to appear real on the screen of our minds.

    Their "proof" proves no such thing. It just proves that our conventional physics has its limits, and that there is more to the underlying reality than we can explain with such physics.

    Quote Posted by heyokah (here)
    Again and again, observations have consistently confirmed the observer-dependent effects of QT.
    The final fatal logical flaw ... all the above is twisted (using manifestly false statements as noted above) and using manifestly limited physics (as their own work so delightfully demonstrates) to anthropomorphize changes in the laboratory setup. We are told that what are actually changes in the detection and manipulation equipment used in the experiments is actually only changes in human observations. Not so.
    Last edited by ThePythonicCow; 18th March 2013 at 20:22.
    My quite dormant website: pauljackson.us

  29. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ThePythonicCow For This Post:

    Finefeather (19th March 2013), Hervé (18th March 2013), heyokah (18th March 2013)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst 1 6 13 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts