Does Consciousness Create Reality? Double Slit Experiment may show the Answer.

The double slit experiment - Does consciousness create reality? Quantum mechanics shows us that particles are in superposition, meaning they can exist in different states and even multiple places at the same time. They are nothing more than waves of probabilities, until the moment that they are measured. One interpretation of this phenomenon is that the measurement being made requires a measurer, or a conscious observer. If this is correct, then it implies that consciousness has to be is an integral part of creating the world that we observe. Could this consciousness then be required for creating reality? Does this mean that there would be no reality without consciousness?
Experiments can show that what we think of as particles behave like waves. Waves of probabilities. This is the foundation of Quantum mechanics. The famous double slit experiment illustrates this. What is bizarre is that when you try to find out what’s going on at the slits by placing a detector at the two slits to try to figure out which slit the individual atoms are going through - the “WHICH WAY” information, they all of a sudden stop behaving like waves, and behave like particles.
Why do atoms and other particles behave this way? There are many interpretations of this phenomenon.
The most widely accepted interpretation, called the Copenhagen interpretation, was devised in 1925 by Neils Bohr and Werner Heisenberg at the University of Copenhagen. Their theory proposed that the atom when it is not measured, is not distinct. But the Copenhagen interpretation does not say anything about consciousness. But what is measurement after all?
Does measurement take place at the instrument that measures it? Does measurement necessarily require a consciousness? This is called the “measurement problem of quantum mechanics.” Physicists do not universally agree on a resolution. There are various interpretations.
One such interpretation is called the von Neumann-Wigner interpretation. This says that in the long chain of measurement, the collapse occurs at the moment that a consciousness interprets the measurement. The consciousness of the physicist is making the particle distinct. And without this consciousness, the atom would just be a wave of probabilities.
One fascinating interpretation is the many worlds interpretation. It was put forth by Hugh Everett in 1957. This theory postulates that there is NEVER any collapse, that we may be a measuring it in our reality, but there is no measurement happening in a different reality, and the wave function continues in that different branch of reality. But at some branch of reality, the particle collapse never actually happens. There is some new evidence that seems to support this idea of multiple realities. A paper published just this year in 2019 by Massimiliano Proietti at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh Seems to support the idea that at least two equally provable realities could exist at a quantum level at the same time.
So what is the correct answer? First let’s summarize what we know for sure - we know that measurement that records the which-way information of a particle indeed collapses a particle’s uncertainty wave. This particle collapse is consistent forward or backward in time as well, as shown by the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment.
As for many worlds, the equation allow it to be true, but since the other worlds appear to be inaccessible to us, there is no way to prove it. So just because it could be true, doesn’t mean it is true.
The Copenhagen interpretation is the most widely accepted, and in my view likely correct. It does not require a consciousness to interpret or even observe the results. I think the problem is with the word “observation” - which for many people seems to imply that someone has to look with their eyes. And eyes have a consciousness behind them.
But in quantum mechanics, this is not what the word observation means. So this unfortunate terminology of “observation” is what causes the confusion. In quantum mechanics an observation simply means the interaction of two quantum states that can collapse each other’s probability wave function. Does consciousness play a role. Probably not. And there is some new evidence that seems to show this.
A paper published by Shan Yu and Danko Nikolic in 2011 showed that a conscious observer was not necessary for the collapse. Their experiments measured the which-way information of a particle, but recorded it in the state of an atom. This information was not available to a conscious observer, but was preserved in the atom, Conclusion in video...
Citations:
Two realities: www.technologyreview.com/s/61...
Delayed choice quantum eraser: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed...
Yu and Nikolic paper: arxiv.org/abs/1009.2404
#consciousness #doubleslit

[@realitybites1136]

Simplifying a complex topic like this requires a level of articulation and understanding that few people have in this world . Awesome job.

[@tim40gabby25]

Beautifully articulate comment. Old uk duffer here, enjoying the ride :)

[@infoharvester]

I read your comment as the video started. my experience was quite different

[@noamfinnegan8663]

Being reading Feyman 🧐

[@jamesfarrell8339]

I second that

[@tdward23]

Obvious B O T. B O T

[@mahnaymjyeff7559]

It's almost as if we are living inside a video game where different parts of the map load when we move near to them.

[@59vibhusharma31]

oh yes it's all coming together so god is the player and we are npc's

[@jeffreyhogueison8560]

In the immortal words of Art Bell; Ding ! Ding ! Ding!

[@deathball2331]

Mahnaym Jyeff Well there is nothing wrong with this statement from a human perspective. After all, your entire “reality” is merely your brain’s interpretation of raw sensual data. Your brain is constantly interpreting this data as your sensory organs stream it in. So it is technically correct to say that for a human, the world is procedurally generated around them while they are conscious.

[@mahnaymjyeff7559]

@@deathball2331 That makes me think, if two or more people are observing the same physical entity, all of their observations of that entity or object would be the same. So can we then say that the collapsing of that entity or object's waves to particles is subjective and experienced differently by each person? (But we know that this is not the case as all objects have a finite physical description). Or perhaps we are unable to measure this as yet on a wave-particle level? Would that then mean that the individual's observation does not have an effect on it? Basically what I'm asking is what if there are multiple people observing the phenomenon? Would that have a different effect to if there was only one person observing it, because if it does have a different effect we can surely say that each person's subjective observation influences the phenomenon. That could possibly provide evidence of consciousness existing, or more likely it could also provide evidence that a field exists and when the observer observes the phenomenon they disrupt the field which then has some sort of effect on the particles.

[@Kh-fv6qz]

@@59vibhusharma31 ¹1

[@iRMacMan]

Quantum reality makes my brain hurt. Just the same it is a fascinating topic and I keep coming back to it, hoping for a better insight or even a fractionally improved grasp of the concept. This is the most clear and succinct explanation I've come across to date. It still makes my brain ache some, definitely a little less than before. Thanks very much...

[@SuperYtc1]

Because it’s made up theory. No one understands it.

[@JerryDayton]

When regressing people back to the times of the crucifixion of Christ, people who believed with their consciousness that Christ was crucified saw the crucifixion. Those who didn't believe in Christ during their session, didn't see a crucifixion. So I tend to believe your observation or consciousness and belief, create a different reality. However, a hypnotist can create a suggested reality, and you in the state of hypnosis will create his reality. Example: your daughter is in the audience but no matter where you look, you cannot see her. Daughter is brought on stage to stand in front of him yet even though she is giggling he says he cannot see her. The hypnotist then takes a bracelet with a phrase that has been engraved on it. Then shows the audience what is engraved on it. He then places it behind the daughter who is standing right in front of the father who cannot see or hear his daughter a foot away from him, and then asks him to read the engraving. He reads it even though he has to read it through the body of his daughter! Proof our eyes don't see our conscious does.

[@rachalupa]

@@JerryDayton Jesus is truly the Messiah; just pray and ask him if he is the One and Only God before you go to sleep.

[@royrobinson7656]

Here's a question, I've researched Near Death Experiences for a few years now. Quite a lot of testimonies from people who claim they raise out of their bodies on point of death and ascend to another realm of existence, state they experience a life review. From birth until their death. They also claim to feel the harm they caused to other people and they get to feel it from the recipients point of view. My point is, how is every minute captured, only to be played back when they reach the other realm? My question is, how is it that no one is putting two and two together? There is literally thousands of testimonies from. People who have died and returned. We must live in a simulation, where every moment of every souls existence here on Earth, is recorded like data. You have to admire the intelligence of our Creator. An intellect, that is so incomprehensible, that our God given imagination cannot even fathom and never will. He said "Let us make them in our image" Not a mention on how smart we could end up being. Never going to create a species that's smarter than the Creator itself.

[@aden6427]

IMPORTANT: The observer effect is actually not based on consciousness, but rather just when an atom is detected. When someone thinks about a particle that is in its undetermined state, the particle does not suddenly resolve itself. This video is basically just trying to misinform people for social gain.

[@VegasPanhandlers]

Out of the many videos I've watched on this subject, this is by far the most in-depth and easy to understand. Appreciate you, brother.

[@OverRule1]

Yeah so many people make this way more confusing than it needs to be.

[@gantrieltharxius28]

"Maybe SOMETHING is observing the universe into existence" -This gave me goosebumps. AWESOME video!

[@oatnoid]

Maybe we are goosebumps.

[@Parinmahomedriaz4184]

Yes exactly, God is concious n God is observing with Conciousness !

[@oatnoid]

@@Parinmahomedriaz4184 That's great. Next time you two chat, ask Him or Her or It, whatever the case may be, to cut me some slack

[@lightyagami5483]

@@oatnoid lol xD

[@brianhill7905]

@@oatnoid Keep on the good fight! Skynet will fall. Easier days are ahead for you my friend.

[@Bad_Sick_311]

It refreshes the mind to hear a warm and confident voice explain these subjects in a manner that refrains from belittling the viewer.

[@xoxo_monique_8769]

This guy is 100% wrong about that paper being published as it was prooven to be completely falsified.

[@bjm6275]

Absolutely!!!

[@robertgoss4842]

Well said!

[@bobbysanchez6308]

xoxo_Monique_ When was it disproven? Any links? Thanks in advance!

[@timtimson313]

Arvin has a kind face and bright eyes

[@ruby2411]

I love the way you present this videos from many physicists view. Simplifying all the complex viewpoints. I got very confused prior to watching your videos . This one allows us to look at it from different viewpoints. Personally , at every single result of each experiment, every one is correct, as there are endless possibilities. Thank you

[@ashrafulhaque8759]

"What we probe is not nature, but nature under our method of questioning". Beautifully sums it up all!

[@pankam7800]

WOW... this is one of those channels you hit subscribe after watching only one video..!! Nice work

[@bryanguilford5807]

Yep i did about a month ago after the first one i watched.

[@betweendrinks8885]

Yes i did too

[@0ptimal]

Yea, if I remember correctly I subbed as soon as I saw his video titles. I was giddy.

[@rittis013]

I did it instanly on this vid now

[@philjamieson5572]

Me too. Without hesitation.

[@eliasseldon1644]

Thanks for explaining this stuff so clearly. Unfortunately for me, each time I understand one thing I realize I really don't understand two others. It's like: scratching an itch makes it more itchy. ... but it's so satisfying to just keep scratching.

[@Parinmahomedriaz4184]

🤣🤣🤣😅👌😂what u said is true !

[@lennykrabitz6039]

You just described my intellectual curiosity so profoundly.

[@DanMice1]

It seems every answer is another question. When does this end?

[@lilybond6485]

Ha !

[@hareecionelson5875]

a kick in the discovery

[@bigmemes8190]

I searched for three hours on a device that can access near all of humanity’s knowledge, and this was the first literature that let me truly understand this proposition. Thank you.

[@schmetterling4477]

That's because you have never read a physics textbook. ;-)

[@hughb5092]

Making very complex subjects understandable to us common folk is a gift, thank you.

[@iamthetinkerman]

Every time i watch these videos i feel it gets me a step closer to hack my own reality just by thinking! Thank you for making this video, its greatly appreciated!

[@caricue]

We thought the same thing back in the 60's. Meditating, doing acid, living "alternative" lifestyles, all kinds of attempts to subvert the terrible grip of reality, but we all ended up living pretty much like our parents and grubbing in the dirt like their parents. Go ahead and give it a try, but max out that 401k just in case (and for god's sake, take care of your teeth).

[@iamthetinkerman]

@@caricue appreciate that Steve 👍🏽

[@iamthetinkerman]

torch Sinse the 11 months ago when I first commented, i am now financially stable and waiting to move into my own home! Before then I literally had nothing! Trust the universe!

[@caricue]

@@iamthetinkerman As the old Native American said in Little Big Man, "Sometimes the magic works, and sometimes it doesn't". I'm glad it worked for you. When I was a young man, I could make things happen, but now things just happen to me. Peace.

[@iamthetinkerman]

@@caricue peace friend 👍🏽

[@matthewsheeran]

I like this guy: he succinctly summarises great gollups of theory into simple but accurate explanations!

[@ejenkins4711]

But they still can't combine gravity. It's because they have missed one simple thought that only a child would have.

[@yourkingdomcomeyourwillbedone]

E Jenkins God?

[@wallysalman2260]

succinate to what fumarate or something

[@ejenkins4711]

@@yourkingdomcomeyourwillbedone with a wall a slit and a wall the partial goes through as expected, then with a wall a slit a solid pillar a slit and a wall it creates the interference pattern. What if its the partial that splits around the pillar?

[@vasile.effect]

The electric fields caused by the power sources of the atom gun and the detector are messing with the flow of atoms. The first field makes the atom to follow the electric field lines which are curved. Thats why the atoms dont flow in a straight line as expected. And the second field of the detector cancels the first so the atoms now flow in a straight line as it was normally expected. And it is very easy to verify by plugging some other electric device instead of the detector to the same power source. The effect will most probably be the same. So it doesnt matter if you put a detector or an electric shaver.

[@stellastika]

Hi Arvin, I cannot thank you enough for explaining the confusion created by the word “observation” in quantum physics. On another note, the work of Shan Yu and Danko Nikolic is new to me and to millions of people. Could you please make a video just about their work? I don’t think I understand it well enough. Thank you again! ❤

[@galaxymetta5974]

Dean Radin experiments showed that getting meditators to focus on the double slit setup also collapsed it into particle. The more experienced the meditators, the greater the collapse. Cheers.

[@surangaputha]

Ohh now i know, why my wife doesnt like me observing her, because i mesure her through my knowledge of understanding, she wants to live beyond it

[@ZooxMaze]

LOL !!!!! :D =))))) |

[@vikkiiam3083]

😂

[@Piddlefoots]

hahaha I dunno bro, it seems to me you might be doing a little projection, I mean, what was SHE measuring last night hehehe.....Who has more to loose if those measurements ever get made public knowledge !! hahaha Will you let others verify the results HAHAHA

[@Eh_O_Nico]

Arvin: The answer is coming up right now! Also Arvin: Actually we don't know lol

[@RudahReis]

He just said "NO" conscience is not needed.

[@idichekop]

@@RudahReis He said. But it is what he thinks the answer is...

[@RudahReis]

@@idichekop Man... 8:28 consciousness is not needed to colapse the wave function... and there is an experiment that proved it. The scientist stored the 'which way' information in an atom, we can't look to an individual atom, so nobody knows the 'which way' information and it is impossible to retrieve the information. But still it colapsed the wave.

[@irokosalei5133]

@@idichekop why do you think consciousness is involved? Only humans record informations? That's delusionaly self-centered and the very reason man is so toxic to its environment. A rock records informations. Your body records information.

[@KazimierzSurma]

"we ddon't know" is a quite valid answer - better than pretend to know :)

[@iy3165]

I am very staggered by the amazing science communication here. I love it when someone conveys information in his way, I didn't have to repeat any part of the video.

[@seneca451]

I'm a total layperson exploring this - through I want to say I love your presentation style - really helps me understand.

[@jasonbertles]

I've never found a good definition (or explanation) of the term, Observer, in relation to the double-slit experiment until this. Excellent video - I wish I could give it more thumbs up.

[@mgandulfo]

However, do those photons not interact with any other particle or photon before colliding with the screen? What happens if one illuminates the scene with dim light. Do the photons behave like particles?

[@GMMDMMG]

An observer, the measurer, is whatever interacts with the thing being measured. In other words, every interaction is a measurement.

[@marcsman07]

@whatever04 yep this vid and the explanations given by neil degrasse Tyson make the most sense and demystify a loot of the "woo" nonsense tied to this subject

[@justicewarrior9187]

You are literally one of the most interesting channels and the best explaining one!! Just found out this channel today!! I hope you blow up on subscribers!! 👍

[@KOSMIKFEADRECORDS]

I agree!

[@zrad723]

Yep

[@sin.raghuuu]

Yeah man. You guys can also check out pbs space time. it's an amazing channel too.

[@tomrhodes1629]

You might appreciate this, Justice: Consciousness not only creates the limited "reality" that you are experiencing, it IS your current, extremely limited, virtual-reality-type experience. And consciousness actually BLOCKS absolute Reality from your awareness in order to accomplish this. You have fallen from an infinite sampling rate, as it were, into an infinitely-lower sampling rate. From Light into darkness. But the "good news" is that this is a temporary condition. I have all of the important answers. And I sure am lonely out here. But that's alright.

[@justicewarrior9187]

@@tomrhodes1629 What??

[@user-hj8uo1zl6k]

I am theoretical physicist. Among others, I am much interested in the topics of this marvelous video. When a detector is present, the relevant quantum state is not only the electron going through the slit(s), but the electron, the detector and whatever recording device If the detector is on and monitors the electron, then such an overall state cannot give the interference pattern on the screen. This is a consequence of the quantum mechanics, according to which the state with the electron, the detector on and the recorder (be it an atom or a macroscopic device) is a different state than the state with the electron, the detector off and the recorder. It does not matter whether or not I look at the recorder. Consciousness is not directly relevant in this setup, only that we know whether or not we have turned on detector. Consciousness would be relevant if the detector would be in a superposition of the states 'on' and 'off'. Then, the overall state would be a superposition of two states: in one of the states there would be an interference pattern on the screen, whilst in the other state there would be no interference. The observation would be now to detect which pattern is on the screen. To know it, I have to look at the screen. Instead, I can put a camera and record the appearance of the scree. But until I looked at the screen or at the recorder, I would not know the result; relative to me, the state would be a superposition of the two possibilities (interference pattern and no interference pattern).

[@DutchStar]

If you record the data and the pattern, but deleted the data before revealing the pattern, would it be an interference pattern?

[@Pete.Tingo18]

I'm glad you commented bc ive got a few questions I've wanted to ask that could just me from my lack of understanding or a misunderstanding of a very complicated field of knowledge. Especially since you are on the theoretical side of the field, since that is the side I relate to bc I love to theorize things that I don't really understand all the time...lol. so please wnlightment me after reading my ideas and questions and just let me know if any of them could actually be something that could even have the slightest bit of relevancy pertaining to possibilities .... or if I'm completely idiotic and in no way could my thoughts even be a possibility in any way shape or form. But , please explain to me why it would be beyond possibility so that I'll actually understand my stupidity. First off , to my understanding that the science of quantum physics works differently than the other sciences because it isn't focused on finding an answer or law bc the focus is on evolving the science as a whole instead of a specific isolated aspect? Is that correct or is my knowledge already demolished? Either way I guess my thoughts and ideas aren't necessarily dependent upon whether I'm correct or incorrect on that first inquiry. So my first question is if the objective is to evolve the science as opposed to proving the science then why does the science shy away from ideas that can't or don't know how to measure even when it is seems to be overwhelming present or even if underwhelming present? What am saying is why does consciousness not get the attention or only acknowledged as being present but not considered to be more of a component of the science itself? Is it only bc there is no way to measure it? I guess that while watching several different videos and hearing the many interpretations and explanations of many smart smart humans with an actually understanding of this subject that I know I clearly don't share... I noticed consciousness is brought into the discussion on nearly every video. But the ideas vary widely on how much of a role or what role it plays. But, I kept wondering why all of them connected consciousness with only the observer in some way every time? Why hasn't it been considered that the particles or wave should themselves could be conscious and that being observed either by the observer or the measuring tool is what causes the interaction to caise the particle to wake up from its unconscious state into a consciousness state in which it itself decides its trajectory. What if everything in the quantum world is conscious of itself in its own state of awareness or being? Wouldn't it become measurable if that be the case ? Wouldn't that help in understanding string theory or the interaction of particles that become intertwined with another? Could consciousness be the unified field? If everything is information could that mean the information is dark matter and why the universe seems to be expanding bc it's recieving more information / data and it gets deposited into the universe forcing expansion w/everybit of data deposited? And if the unified field was consciousness then it would have access to and be the cause of all of the information that's ever been and will be until every thought has been thought and the expansion stops and begins to contract into itself until it's back into its original state prior to the big bang?

[@user-hj8uo1zl6k]

@@Pete.Tingo18 All these are complex questions that I cannot address here, at least not in a way that would make sense. If you look at my book "The grand biocentric design: How life creates reality", written in co-authorship with Robert Lanza, you might find some clarification and insight into the enigmatic concept of consciousness and its relation to quantum mechanics. Also watching my video kzbin.info/www/bejne/aX3KeKlqn8dmqbc on the KZbin channel "Chasing Consciousness" could be useful. You are right that consciousness should not be excluded from investigation in physics and other natural sciences. It was rightly excluded since Renaissance until the discovery of quantum mechanics, because that enabled the rapid, unprecedented, development of physics and technology. But with quantum mechanics, the circle is closed: we can no longer proceed without bringing consciousness into the game. All the difficulties in understanding and interpreting quantum mechanics stem from the lack of properly involving consciousness.

[@user-hj8uo1zl6k]

@@DutchStar If I delete the data on the recorder but do not destroy the screen, the pattern on the screen would be in a superposition. Looking at the screen would reveal the pattern. If I destroyed the screen before looking, then the information about the pattern would be encoded as a superposition of the degrees of freedom of the environment. Being a part of the environment, my body together with my eyes and the brain would be in a superposition as well. I would not know what the pattern was, until performing a measurement on all those many degrees of freedom, which is practically impossible.

[@user-hj8uo1zl6k]

@@Pete.Tingo18 All these are complex questions that I cannot address here, at least not in a way that would make sense. Also watching my video kzbin.info/www/bejne/aX3KeKlqn8dmqbc on the KZbin channel "Chasing Consciousness", you might find some clarification and insight into the enigmatic concept of consciousness and its relation to quantum mechanics. You are right that consciousness should not be excluded from investigation in physics and other natural sciences. It was rightly excluded since Renaissance until the discovery of quantum mechanics, because that enabled the rapid, unprecedented, development of physics and technology. But with quantum mechanics, the circle is closed: we can no longer proceed without bringing consciousness into the game. All the difficulties in understanding and interpreting quantum mechanics stem from the lack of properly involving consciousness.

[@charleshuguley9323]

This is one of the best explanations of the subject I have seen. Thank-you.

[@petercoxable]

Your videos blow my mind. I get more satisfaction and stimulation from watching one of your videos than I do from a Hollywood blockbuster movie.

[@MrRobot-gm9cv]

Agree

[@imgonnagogetthepapersgetth8347]

Brown 👃 er

[@edgregory1]

Hollywood can go to h-e-double toothpicks.

[@madams3478]

High school physics should be a mix of the basic stuff and the interesting stuff. Thanks for an excellent video! 🎸😊🎶

[@ArvinAsh]

Sure. But I think basic stuff can be interesting too. It's just a matter of how it's presented.

[@rajveerkanojiya2985]

@@ArvinAsh Arvin are you Indian who goes to us and now a us citizen🤔

[@dickarmstrong4092]

I really love and appreciate your videos and teaching style. Thank you so much for sharing these wonderful educational exercises with all of us. As a layperson,, we are allowed to benefit greatly from your education and understanding.

[@larrygraham3377]

Hi Arvin ; In this universe I really enjoyed your video but in another universe I didn't like it so much... then again in another universe there was no video at all !!! Man this really makes your head spin. !!!

[@gr4707]

“Something observes the universe into existence”. Wow!

[@vincentzito3933]

Flying Spaghetti Monster?

[@potita24]

Maybe it observes it self. Unless you are capable of doing science research and proposed different theories. I really want to know how this world we live in came to exist; what is there beyond its borders; how come when you add a Aton of oxigen to H20, then water becomes peroxide. How can I send a text message or a picture around the world wirelessly in a split second?

[@prathamnagpure5290]

@Raine Riny 7 Can't you observe yourself

[@alpacamaster5992]

@@arc-xisgaming3604 for me I've never fully understood atheism it's like when you look at the pyramids of egypt you think there must have been ancient egyptians but when you look at the universe you don't think of something like God?

[@Piddlefoots]

Yes but another atom or a photon can be the measurer........It does not require any human for an observation to happen, just atomic clocks.

[@kashemvai5025]

I saw many double slit exp videos this one by far made me understand the experiment.

[@ne1cup]

how can we put people through a double slit?

[@horseandhumantraining]

I love the video. Thank you for the information. I also love that you (the author) lean towards the belief that it does not take a consciousness to get the variation of results from the atom. I believe there is a consciousness, and am blown away that we simply don't ask that consciousness for the answer concerning its involvement. Actually, I think our scientific investigation does indicate the asking. So, my thinking stems around our receiving the answering. A technique to receive the answer is to sit quietly for a designated period of time (20 minutes a day for a week) with the intent of receiving contact from the consciousness. Rules of the challenge are don't ask again…, it's been asked. Quiet the mind by focusing on a low thought-provoking sound like the ticking of a clock, sound of a stream, air blowing through a condenser. I'd love to hear results.

[@omgdflea]

to be able to accumulate all these different experiences into a single "conscious experience" built from so many things happening so crazy freaking fast at scales sometimes smaller than a nano second is mind blowing that the mind is even capable of performing it in the first place. looking at ancient cave art painting now has a new experience for me creating a undescribable sensation of awe. to think about how incredibly complicated and highly improbable the chances that a living being can even exist in the universe, let alone make tools to create paint just to draw what's on the mind

[@mahjan5996]

Great stuff. What I like most is his style of narrating and the fact that it is all in text form as well in the description.

[@555Trout]

I wish I'd never learned about the double slit experiment. It haunts me and makes me question everything.

[@ArvinAsh]

Check out my video coming tomorrow, I think it will help you visualize what's happening, and you will not be haunted.

[@DomCurtis2023]

Try learning about the law of attraction

[@555Trout]

@@DomCurtis2023 You know I have learned about it. And I'm certain it us valid. The universe is weird. Our "mind" appears to be all there is ultimately. I wish I'd have learned this so much younger.

[@DomCurtis2023]

555Trout that’s because schools will never teach you what kind of power the conscious mind is capable of. They keep us in the dark. It’s truly mind blowing and made me question why certain things would happen to me even unintentionally even tho it’s intentional 🤔

[@555Trout]

@@DomCurtis2023 Indeed. Drones are better worker bees. I always think of the "Borg" as our future. I first thought the internet was going to be the best thing for humanity. Now, not so much. Hive mentality seems to be favored by the internet. Free thinkers seem to get crushed by the hive. 😬

[@Kritiker313]

I'm just a layperson who took two semesters of applied physics in college but I loved everything I learned. That said, I understand just enough about the phenomena of particle physics to be totally enthralled by it. The mystery of the wave function collapsing when an observer is present is super fascinating! I am also fascinated by superposition and quantum entanglement! Now I'm 63 and I want to learn more. Thanks for this video!

[@selvarajakandasamy4744]

I just came across on your video, observing the universe into existence within me was what i learned. Quantum Physic is in our daily life and it is going through every second on this formula UN- Conscientiously. TQ Mr.Arvin.

[@MFikhi]

The universe is a simulation and every time we try to measure something they were like: "oh shit they are trying to measure it, lets troll them lol"

[@spaceycaveco.698]

Shhhh! Or else they’ll send the Agents...

[@arsemyth8920]

Joking aside, I've often thought of the un-collapsed wave function as simulation 'code' not needing to be written unless observed, to save on computing time/power, or some such nonsense like that

[@scottboehmer1114]

Damn I was gonna say the same thing

[@smb123211]

Even if we were living a simulation (an idea that for some reason became popular after the MATRIX - LOL) we would never be able to know definitively since the tools used to detect it are also simulated! The idea is not mine but I think it's brilliant. Why should our detection tools be "real" in a simulated universe?

[@scottboehmer1114]

If this is a sim are black holes waste bins?

[@politicallycorrectredskin796]

This is really the best available explanation for a broad meaning of life. The observer role must be filled by something in order to make stuff real, so the Universe creates that too along with everything else.

[@ChristineAudler]

History is taking place here in Venice, LA. The mouth of the Mighty Mississippi River. All of this information was very important to our sustainability efforts to save the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico. Bless your heart

[@easytriops5951]

I find the end and especially the quote of Heisenberg of the end of the video you brought up very interesting. The quote of Heisenberg, after my understanding, implies that when we pose greater questions, we could find out more of nature. So we can't even probe nature as it is, but only nature under the restriction of our questioning and understanding of nature, which we might never completely and truthfully figure out. So maybe we don't even pose the right questions in order to find out nature. That struggles my mind.... Anyways great explanations! You certainly have another subscriber following your videos and commenting his thoughts under your videos!

[@guitarsoundsaround]

We have an abundance of nature right under our nose and toes, without such a basic understanding of how much value it can bring, without thorough observances.

[@luizrafael7939]

Wow, what is this channel. I mean, when I first started to dig around physics, astronomy and futurism on the KZbin, every thing was new, but after a while it was getting hard to find new stuffs to amuse me. And see, I'm pretty deep into channels like Isaac Arthur, Fraser Can, John Michel Godier, SpaceTime, Sharkee, etc. I've seen all of their videos. And out of no where, KZbin recommends your channel and you show me this 2011 experiment that seems to show that as long as information is extracted of, the probability wave collapse. That is awesome. Thank you.

[@chazriley7075]

So happy KZbin recommended you, was trying to explain this to a buddy the other day.

[@st.lukesguesthouse4112]

Thanks for your videos Arvin. I would suggest looking at Bohmian mechanics. It provides an alternative and logically intuitive explanation of both the double-slit and measurement problems.

[@darwinbarrett86]

Loved this video, and it is consistent with my own personal TOE. When talking about any infinite thing that consumes space, there can only be one thing. That one thing would contain all atoms and have infinite possibilities.

[@Anandam1971]

What if the whole universe is conscious and the quanta are conscious of being measured?

[@bradmodd7856]

if the universe is conscious, then it is creating it's own reality. These are great questions...are we even able to understand the answers? We may need to evolve beyond biological life and exist in a virtual 10 dimensional cybernetic network of one unified consciousness to even begin to comprehend what this is all about.

[@kyjo72682]

​@@bradmodd7856 Consciousness isn't creating anything except an internal subjective IMAGE of reality, a simplified model of it, not the reality itself. Objective reality = everything that exists, whether observed or not.

[@KOSMIKFEADRECORDS]

what happens when you start trusting the voices in your head?

[@GuruTurtle]

@@kyjo72682 If you break that down though, ALL reality is a subjective experience. Objective reality is an idea or belief, not something that can be proven to actually exist. Observations of any potential proof and all the thoughts and theories related to it still happen through one's subjective perspective, as a subjective experience. There is currently no actual proof of any objective reality, only experiments and interpretations of them - thoughts, ideas, beliefs, which all still always happen within one's subjective experiences.

[@kyjo72682]

​@@GuruTurtle Well, yes, considering the possibility of extreme solipsism you can't 100% prove existence of anything beyond your current conscious experience - because that is the only access to reality you can get. But. Everything else suggests that the objective reality exists and is independent on subjective experience of it, and furthermore that the subjective experience is completely dependent on the objective reality. For example, you can observe temporal evolution of your consciousness. You know you are conscious now, but also that you were conscious a second ago, miture ago, etc. And that you know more now than you knew in the past. This alone is a very strong indicator that information is coming from the "outside" and is not being generated by the consciousness itself. In fact the amount of information in our consciousness is almost infinitesimally small compared to the infinite amount of information which seems to be out there. You can also observe that established scientific theories (all of which assume realism) give very good explanations of the observed phenomena and have strong predictive power. For example, based on medical/biological knowledge (which asserts that consciousness is generated by the brain, building upon chemistry, physics and math) you can say that applying sedatives to your nervous system will critically affect your conscious experience. Or, even simpler, you can say that brain needs sleep and sooner or later it will force your "subjective experience" to switch off for a while. Also, besides the proofs and theories, abstract objects like numbers and geometric shapes seem to have existence of their own, independent on space and time and presumably conscious observers. It is also useful to think about what "consciousness" actually means. Some critical components of it such as memory, information processing, abstract thinking, deduction, etc. require external substrate and mechanisms. The solipsist view also implies that you can't prove that other people and beings (and things in general) have consciousness. In fact you always have to assume this based on observing similarity between their bodies and behaviors to what you assume is "your body". Combining extreme solipsism with idealism would basically mean that your consciousness generated the whole universe, including all the events that had to have happened for you to have your current conscious experience (fine-tuning, big bang, evolution, etc.) including all the information you've learned up to this point, most of which came from "other people".

[@c_________]

amazing. most in depth video I've found without becoming a deep dive. have seen no others mention that moving the observer creates no change, and that being observed isn't about consciousness

[@joewebster903]

Your explanation was much clearer than those past narratives on the subject the only thing I am missing is how the which way detector functions

[@kingpin6389]

I have been explained this from other people but its the first time I actually understand it. Very easy and clear explanation. Its really spooky.

[@TheKeldman]

The way you explain is some of , if not -the best on astronomy topics . Subscribed !

[@mccfrank1212]

You deserve many more than 100k views! To say nothing of the 65k subscribers. This is totally fascinating stuff and I am nearly 80.

[@JakeTapeWallets]

That’s beautiful and wow now I really think the universe solely exists for consciousness and life. That’s what I have always believed deep down tbh.

[@chrisradzion2148]

I’ve always liked the consciousness aspect. It doesn’t need to be a observer as we might think; it could be an observer we don’t know or understand. I love this experiment because it drives so many hard scientists nuts. It is where hard science crosses back into the world of mysticism.

[@mariorqmsilveira3270]

I´ve once read that what matters is the INTERACTION going on.... BUT WE CAN CONSTRUCT A THEORY WHERE ANY ENTITY - EVEN A STONE - SUPPORTS SOME LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS. FOR SURE, ANY LIVING BEING DOES DEPENDING ON THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OUR THEORY IS BASED ON. Thank you for your post.

[@crashtestdummy87]

@@mariorqmsilveira3270 there's no need to yell

[@Dannysen]

it took me many years to watch other videos about wave functions, collapse, super position, none of that make sense to me until this video. Never though of observation is an obscured term but yet most important part of quantum mechanic that even changed reality once and for all. I really like your interpretation that help a common folk like me to understand the most complicated concepts in this world.

[@ronaldbrunsvold5632]

The old “If a tree falls in the woods and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound” question. On a macro scale.

[@danrazART]

Yes it does. If you and me exist and not until we post something online, we still exist. Cat in a box paradox is inaccurate representation of probability. Because if it is a real cat, depending on the time it will be kept in the box without food and water or oxygen. We can surely say when it would not be possible for the cat to be alive. Let's say mummy's from the pyramid were long dead.

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

@@danrazART make an autocat feeding device

[@danrazART]

We are a tree falling in the woods and nobody is there to listen to us and we do not exist. Or Someone IS listening and recording all the data and we are just avatars and npc in this simulation . Enjoy.

[@gammakeraulophon]

@@danrazART Not quite so simple as 'yes it does'. I think it is fair to say that any tree falling anywhere shall create shock waves in the medium that is air. But it takes the apparatus of ear/brain and consciousness for those shock waves to become translated into 'sound'. Without all of that, the tree does indeed fall silently. As for Schroedinger's Cat; it is a thought experiment.. one is not to suppose that it is a real cat at all! The thought experiment merely required a living subject to be killed or not killed by another circumstantial state within the closed system of the thought experiment. Place a digital LCD in a box, and adapt the thought experiment so that what must be predicted is whether the display shows 1 or 0, would work just as well toward expressing the pure conjecture. Your own objection is somewhat pedantic, in that you are introducing a notion (that the cat may be predicted to die of some other natural cause at some point along some real time line) which is in fact outside of the closed boundaries of the thought experiment. The 'reality' of the Cat is not supposed to be taken so literally as that at all.

[@gammakeraulophon]

@@steorswe I think it is fair to say that any tree falling anywhere shall create shock waves in the medium that is air. But it takes the apparatus of ear/brain and consciousness for those shock waves to become translated into 'sound'. Without all of that, the tree does indeed fall silently. But the tree and the medium of air (and the forest, and etc..) are still in existence without sensual witness.

[@DavidDiMuzio]

Totally wild. Great breakdown!

[@dimension2788]

You are the explainerator. Thankyou Arvin.... My Elmer was elucidating this puzzle to me today and thought consciousness causes reality and the dual slit experiment is a detector of consciousness. I agree with you Arvin the photon exchange idea is in reality what is happening.

[@santiagog.3866]

Dude! I can't believe you have only 93k subs, I've been around in profund physics youtube videos and yours is one of the best!

[@yaswanthpakalapati9994]

You are the only guy who can make sense of difficult concepts very easily on KZbin platform

[@SelfActualisation]

I'd love it. I had a greatt challenge understanding the concept of measurement problem and you wonderfully put it into terms. Wana say bunches of thanks.

[@schmetterling4477]

There is no measurement problem in physics. There are only people who don't know what a measurement is. ;-)

[@user-mz6pd3hp3s]

Great presentation again, Arvin!!

[@seanu6840]

I remember when this channel started. I thought it was one of those ( buy my product) channels. I'm so happy it has become something beautiful as it has

[@kushalrmodha]

# suggestion your explanation is much better than PBS space time. Can you please do a video about universe boundaries and great void

[@daithiocinnsealach1982]

PBS Spacetime doesn't dumb much of it down. He's just a bit too technical for most of us.

[@alokd1205]

PBS spacetime should first change their narrator, his accent is very confusing. The guy before him was brilliantly clear

[@eattoast6378]

@@alokd1205 His diction is perfect. I've never missed a word. Is English not your first language?

[@bjm6275]

He is the best I have heard!!!

[@KingoftheJuice18]

@@daithiocinnsealach1982 "A bit"--that's putting it mildly!

[@GetWisdomTV]

Thank you so much for this video, was thinking about this question last 15 years.

[@George-bz1fi]

Thanks Alvin, for a clear explanation of the problem.

[@carwai2301]

I've started watching your videos like 2 or three days before and I can't count how many of them I have already watched 🤩

[@phillipgregory9671]

My new favorite science KZbin channel 🙂 you explain things very well.

[@dylanburroughs4841]

You answered a very difficult question that I've been seeking an answer to. What is an observer, and where does observation happen in the process? This has been bothering for literally years. Thank you so much (even if the answer is still a bit intangible)!

[@spacejaime]

Mind blowing. I did not know that placing the measuring probe AFTER the slits would result in the same way as placing it before the slits.

[@schmetterling4477]

You need to read up on this a little bit more because you don't understand it, yet.

[@seenathpanchowrie1767]

Mr.A Nash, you are very knowledgable and a fantastic lecturer. Thank you for your videos

[@ManishKumar-jm1wr]

Best known channel to understand complex science in a simple way.

[@ruchikadias]

Great video! Thanks for trying to throw light on a very complicated topic

[@ChitChat]

Despite consciousness not really dictating if reality exists I still find it fascinating that because of the Heisenberg Uncertainty we have an almost direct effect on reality itself based on the choice of what parameter of the particle we choose to measure and learn about.

[@Bless-the-Name]

Since you have asked for our input on the subject - here is an article that was written in 2015. Apricate (in) Truth During the 1930s, the great scientific minds, such as Einstein; Schrödinger: Planck, et alia, developed Quantum Mechanics (which is also known as Quantum Theory). The quantum-mechanical atomic model has succeeded spectacularly, whereas classical science had previously failed, in explaining the microscopic universe. However... for all its successes - it still hasn't resolved the issue of the Measurement Problem. This is the situation where they could see the particle displayed wave functionality but when they attempted to measure the collapse from a particle to a wave - the observation caused the particle to maintain particle functionality. In other words... they couldn't measure the collapse of the wave function because reality is affected by the observation of the person making the measurment. This led to abstract mathematics that describe the nature of particles and wave function, to provide information about the probability amplitude of position, momentum, and other physical properties at the atomic level. Quantum Theory was accepted but, Einstein never felt convinced it was complete because, the theory is open to infinite interpretations which led to some fantastic postulations that threaten the credibility of science. The main contenders, of interpretation, include: 1) De Broglie-Bohm Theory 2) Many Worlds Theory 3) Ghirardi-Rimini-Weber Theory 4) Quantum Bayesianism Theory The De Broglie-Bohm Theory This interpretation of quantum theory shows the wavelength in the space of all possible configurations and an actual configuration that exists even when unobserved. The explicit non-locality of the theory is intended to resolve the "measurement problem" because it provides a link between the probability density of a particle and the wave function as a hypothesis (rather than a basic law). Basically... this theory provides an equation to embrace the non-measurability of a wave becoming a particle that is measurable. The Many Worlds Theory This theory asserts the objective reality of the universal wavefunction and denies the subjective reality of wavefunction collapse. The hypothesis states there is an infinite number of (real) universes, and everything that could possibly happen has occurred in some other universe. Basically... the theory allows for the possibility of multiple universes to exist which means the wavefunction is ubiquitous in some way - thus rendering all probability a reality. The Ghirardi-Rimini-Weber Theory This theory, which is often referred to as Spontaneous Collapse Theory, attempts to circumvent the Measurement Problem because spontaneity causes the particle's wave function to collapse without any consideration of the observer's role. The theory is compatible with single-particle experiments, that do not observe spontaneous wave-function collapses, because spontaneous collapse is posited to be extremely rare. However... the theory still describes the observed phenomenon of quantum collapses, whenever we measure subatomic particles, because quantum measurment involves entanglement. This is because the measured particle becomes entangled with other particles that make up the measuring device. Basically... this theory differs from other collapse theories because it proposes the wave function collapses spontaneously - and that diminishes the component of observation. The Quantum Bayesianism Theory This theory is the subjective degree-of-belief account of quantum probability, and is very similar to the Copenhagen interpretation that is taught in textbooks. The theory is affectionately referred to as Qbism and is often considered a philosophical approach to the quandary of issues surrounding the Measurement Problem because it focuses on the observer being an integral component of the whole process. Basically... the theory deals with common questions in the interpretation of quantum mechanics about the nature of wavefunction and etanglement from a subjective point of view. This, minefield of conjecture, was the result of the famous double slit experiment which caused the scientific community to scratch their heads. What's happening at this moment in time is they are attempting to understand the relationship between the wave - which is characterised as a field of probability (unseen) and the particle which is a measurable component of reality (seen). They are aware consciousness affects experiments but they are trying to exemplify a means of determining experiments without consciousness causing an effect. This seems comical to me - because the relationship between the unseen and the seen is an intrinsic value of consciousness. The observation of wavefunction collapse is causing the wave to change its functionality - thus they call it the Measurement Problem. Recently, however, science is postulating the universe is a two dimensional projection that gives the illusion of a third dimension like a Holographic Universe. This theory is describing the interconnected relationship between the unseen and seen realms that give rise to the third dimension we are familiar with. Indeed... the relationship between the two realms remain a mystery because they do not recognise the significance of the conscious mind that allows the wave function to collapse. Einstein said, "I'd like to think the Moon is still there when I close my eyes," but he has missed the point. It is going to be there as long as a conscious mind is able to allow the wave function to collapse. The question here is... when will science learn to appreciate consciousness "governs" all of reality? This is important because the introduction of delusion caused entropy to enter into the equation and the more people become deluded the more the rate of decay will accelerate. Right now... science is aware entropic values can variate - but they think this is caused by cosmological conditions within the universe (given the fact thermodynamics fluctuate throughout the regions of the cosmos). The wavefunction collapses because the conscious mind governs the relationship between the unseen and seen - and, as such, there is no probability other than the freewill of the observer. This is to render quantum entanglement, as a means to verify a theory, is nothing more than a glimpse of the relationship - because reality is made up of the unseen and seen which is interconnected. Atoms that seem to pass through objects are demonstrating the ability to fluctuate between the wave and particle because they are in a microscopic universe where the relationship is governed by the consciousness of mind. On the one hand we have theories such as Many Worlds postulating consciousness came into existence of its own volition - whereas Holographic Universe postulates consciousness existed prior to the existence of the universe. This is to say ... on the one hand we have theories that allude to the self-creation of consciousness which panders to the mystery religions and on the other hand we have a theory that alludes to the pre-existence of a creator which confirm the scripture that tells us: In the beginning ... God (conscious observer) created the Heaven (unseen) and the Earth (seen). This sounds like the setting up of an apparatus to let the holographic universe come into existence. The account then goes on to describe how the creator used sound (wave) when He said, "Let there be light," which became a particle (collapsed wave) to bring the hologram into existence after He saw that the light was good. Now ... I'm not saying here which theory is correct (even if you can sense a bias in my delivery) - but it does make one wonder what is going on here.

[@rajprasad5899]

An explanation which transcends the boundaries of science and philosophy. Science is still on its journey of application of the rational mind within the confines of this unreality.

[@Bless-the-Name]

@@rajprasad5899 Unfortunately .... science cannot make progress when it is self-correcting (admits perpetual error) and doesn't deal in proofs (embraces delusion). It is my hope science will sort itself out and stop ignoring the truth.

[@Gibb-cn2xn]

The answer to the double slit experiment it's so simple I can't believe so many people can't see it I hear the Nobel Prize is almost a million dollars I wish I knew how to apply for it plus I know a whole bunch more things

[@Gibb-cn2xn]

@@rajprasad5899 I would love to but I need money the Nobel Prize is almost a million dollars many things we used today are very simple like the light bulb generating electric batteries the automobile engine but someone had to see the idea I'm a repairman by trade I seem to have a gift for understanding how things work

[@Gibb-cn2xn]

There are millions of people that are much smarter than I am I am just using the knowledge that other people before me have figured out

[@andrewpaulhart]

Thanks for that. The bit that blew my mind was the fact that you can place the detector after the slits. I had always believed it was the interaction between the detector eg a photon causing the wave collapse. I guess reality is just way weirder than my mind can fathom

[@JonnyD17]

I think of consciousness as an observer of time created in a quantum field connected everywhere in space. When the egg and sperm combine there is a chemical reaction that takes place creating a ripple in the quantum field of consciousness. That ripple is our unique identity or our coordinates in the consciousness dimension. The ripple or wave has a distinct beginning and end. As the ripple travels along time it comes in contact with different interferences and begins to break down and loose clarity. As these waves break down the clarity in our DNA replication also starts breaking down and that’s what gives us aging.

[@seniorswalkingthecamino]

enjoyed this very clear explanation - appreciate it!

[@dr.gayfirstlookmri]

Arvin, Great distillation of QM! Thank you for boiling away all the fat and summarizing the confusing concepts in such down to earth terms. The work you are doing on your channel is truly wonderful and is greatly appreciated.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thank you. I really appreciate that!

[@nicetomeetyou555]

Thank you for explaining different topics in an understandable, easy way. Very good channel indeed.

[@cosmosaic8117]

No matter what arguments you use against Consciousness, including the test at the end that somehow disproves the need for Consciousness, once again, you still needed your Consciousness to observe that data and results. Your Observation from your Consciousness is ALWAYS the final step.

[@schmetterling4477]

I never need a conscious observer. All I need is an irreversible process. ;-)

[@IWill_iTV]

Your the G.O.A.T. of science intros and explaining things, my goodness you make me feel like Einstein after these videos until i really try to act like einstein lol. Thanks for all you do to make these videos!!!

[@anwarulmamoon4299]

I fully agree with the Copenhagen interpretation.There is no need for conscious observation. Let us do an experiment with Double slit experiment by attaching a camera to it.Now First take a photo of screen when detector is off.Photo will show wave like nature on the screen.,Then we go away from the room starting a time switch.After say for 10 sec. detector is on and camera take a photo of the screen.Then we come back and see the photograph taken.This time the photo will show two distinct line on the screen,that is wave function is collapsed.This clearly show there is no need for conscious observation.Actually in quantum state particles are both wave and particle in nature,both exists simultaneously.The detection process interact with quantum particle collapsing their wave nature to particle like nature.Thank you Mr.Arvin Ash for presenting this Quantum theory beautifully.

[@zenitc]

No no no I don't know why physicists are running away from this. It is only is humans that will ultimately decide if something has been or being observed, so it ultimately depends on us. The question regresses to what mechanisms do chemicals do to create consciousness in other words we need a deeper insight into human perception of reality. But as for this experiment it is ultimately contingent on our human consciousness. I think experiments should be designed to know if only human consciousness collapses the wave function, but then that would entail among other things teaching frogs how to speak a human language.

[@jamesfarrell8339]

My favorite KZbin creator I don't know how he does it but I really appreciate it How to take a very complex subject and break it down so that everyone can understand it A truly unique gift Thank you Arvin for breaking down very complex ideas and also making them very entertaining

[@marymorris8442]

Smart is so dam sexy!

[@johnmartin5671]

There are physicists who maintain that our thoughts/consciousness change the world (we have moved from the sub-atomic level to the macroscopic level). I have reason to think that they are right and that certain modified states of consciousness greatly increase the possibility that our thoughts modify the probabilities of events and therefore interfere with reality.

[@hemadayal7815]

i understood...this is advanced stuff...u r a teaching genius...thanks.

[@AresNeon]

This problem has always blown my mind if I understand this video. Just the act of measuring which way the particles go can collapse the wave function.

[@jdmayfield88]

Always carry a ruler. Thus you can be Measurer of Reality! I think Black Sabbath wrote something about that. Maybe it was Metallica. Hmm.

[@QED_]

@paul sanders: Apparently only 39% of physicists accept this mind-blowing "Copenhagen" interpretation of what happens in QM. In the Bohm "pilot wave" interpretation, for example, the apparent "collapse" of the wave function is understood as hidden information that was already there but only revealed because/when you do the measurement . . .

[@HarryHeck2020]

@@QED_ It does make the story nice and neat, but wait just a second, Pilot Wave Theory has it's problems too, mainly it can't be merged into quantum theory and general relativity and newton's third law and quantum field theory and uncertainty principle... Just about everything really. Plus the wave function must vanish instead of collapsing which is odd. It was never really meant to work. It was just a kind of 'proof of concept' for disgruntled scientists, pissed off that steady state got poopoo'd by reality and came up with the EPR Paradox. The Pilot wave theory was proposed to counteract that paradox, but has not exactly fit with anything else. And, to make things worse nonlocality experiments with photons are working as theorized by the non-positional interpretations. It's getting a little wobbly. It is about to go to the trash bin if it don't get some lovin'.

[@porkbeanz6076]

I really enjoy your channel and your videos, thank you for the time you put into the content, I appreciate it, just wanted you to know that.

[@kirkrussell9130]

Imagine that you are looking at a map and you have a memory of going to that place on that map, being created in your head. You imagine your friends that were with you, the feelings that you had when at this place and you start to relive the experiences of visiting this place as you were gazing at the map. All of the sudden, you noticed someone standing beside you and that someone made a comment out loud; "I've been to Ireland!!". Ireland is the location of the map you were just gazing upon and where all your memories were created just moments before the individual beside you, blurted out the comment, "I've been to Ireland!!". You thought the voice was familiar and before you could turn your head to see the person's face, you decided that the voice was indeed a person that you knew that was with you in Ireland. You turned to greet the person, said their name out oud and assumed it was the person that you had imagined it to be as you extended your hand to shake their hand (intention). The person put out their hand and shook your hand. You then quickly made a statement about who the person was and how you knew him. "The geyser's in Ireland were amazing!", You stated... He replied as if he knew what you were talking about with details that only the someone that was with you at that moment in Ireland could have known. He answered questions as if he was the person you assumed he was...Then you came to realize, that he wasn't that person at all. As soon as you realized that he wasn't the same person as you assumed, but had the same name as the person you assumed he was and answered your responses with answers that coincided with your experience of the Geyser's in Ireland, there was a "wave function collapse". You came out of the zone, no different than playing a sport and reacting to your environment in a subconscious mindset, as you reacted out of second hand nature in a state of knowing. Confidence is where this "wave function" exists. It is a frequency that attracts results. When you become "self conscience" and lose your confidence, you break that flow and there is a wave function collapse in conciousness in the creation of flow. At that moment you came to realize, you didn't know him but you had carried out a conversation with the individual as if he represented that someone whom you assumed him to be. You then realized, you dont know this person at all but all the information that was related to the individual you thought he was in conversation, was the experience of you believing that you knew who he was and you confidently walking with your beliefs of who that person was.... This is where the flow in a wave function exists in conciousness. It is reacting out of intuition, perceiving from the gut, inner trust, knowing in faith and it is the story of Genesis. Concious observer as a concious creator. How do you or how can you measure the tool that is doing the measurement with itself....? = Wave function collapse

[@Brendacho]

I think that although what we call reality is relative to our observation and understanding, objective reality still exists and will always exist outside of them. Relative and objective reality may become more and more similar the more we learn, but we’ll forever be an indefinite distance away from the full picture.

[@j.d.waterhouse4197]

Fantastic...very nice explanation of the double slit experiment. I'm finally beginning to grasp it.

[@skalderman]

J.D. Waterhouse well put. Though can't be sure

[@markfoster1520]

I observe: it is well-put. And so it must be.

[@cathyzhu9240]

This is the best explanation of double slit experiment ever! Very clear!:)

[@vbefrequency]

I love it. So whats left of the consciousness role in all of that is simple the awareness of that quantum state of being regarding the two different behaving abilities that a particule have and that we know so far from our reality and world we live in and have consciousness of living in it. There is more proprieties to a atom, string, that are yet to be discover. I know, I travel Time and space with my consciousness and I observed it 😉 YES I DO. The next thing for this humanity is how to use what we know here so far to put it at service for all in a benevolent way for all, and that can start by solving and providing solutions that have the best interest for all instead of few like we had till not too long ago. Thank you Sir and Team for what you are doing and putting out there

[@Chumblybum]

It’s great you pointed out the difference between conscious observation and a detector (it’s not as if a human can directly observe a atomic particle anyway), this is often something that is hijacked by some groups.

[@araamudhan3261]

If u Learn biology.. And relate it with physics and study engineering.. U can understand that.. Human eye got photoreceptors same like a sensor/deteector where photons interact and the info is taken to brain even eyes are made of particles man same as detector.. How t f it is left out of equation 🤷‍♂️

[@batmandeltaforce]

Wow, how short sighted:) Amazingly so. The "Infinite" universe itself is Consciousness and nothing but that. "We" are but points of awareness on that infinite field of divine Consciousness and so is EVERYTHING else. Your need to separate everything is the problem.

[@elizandrogarciaroos3562]

I wonder what Jiddu Khrisnamurti would say about this whole thing.

[@KOSMIKFEADRECORDS]

Cant help but agree!!

[@RobertMunro]

It's amazing how these experiments correlate with the human experience. Hiedegger describes truth by arising and falling away much like a photon passes.

[@ThinkGarza]

Instant follow. What a great teacher!

[@richardgordon8015]

I showed a room full of scientists at the University of Arizona, a phenomenon that deals with the impact of consciousness. Everyone agreed it was unquestionably real. Four of them said they wanted to research and publish, but quickly decided the doing so would be academic suicide. Although I’ve written five books that are in 17 languages, I have no one of influence to talk to you on this matter.

[@SK-vg3xh]

0:37 me while watching all Arvin Ash videos

[@GP-qb9hi]

LOL

[@rachellopes3704]

hahah so trueeee

[@peterlarsson7064]

I like your channel a lot. Keep up the good work :)

[@tomdorman2486]

I enjoy your work. You. Make some great videos. On the question of consciousness clasping the wave function. It seems to me that if anyone every looks at the results, they have introduced their consciousness. Not to mention that the atom/ eletron... may have some form of consciousness, or perhaps their is a consciousness behind all of space time.

[@Mark-ef7pi]

I specifically clicked this video in search of the very answer given, well explained. I've recently decided to learn more about the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (that damned cat!) and the role of "observation", which to me insinuates consciousness plays a role in reality, which sounds completely ridiculous. As Arvin describes the effect of detection instruments on the double-slit I was wondering why no one has just used the instrument without observation, sure enough he covers it. Thank you.