Originally posted by seer
View Post
But that doesn't mean reality is completely independent of our perception. On the contrary, your perception is never exactly the same from moment to moment; it's dependent on your perspective. Size, shape, color, texture, etc--all "properties" of matter can be cited as different from one moment to the next. For instance, look at any object under a microscope--is it still the same color? The "properties" of matter can be demonstrated to affect and associate with each other, yes. But if you assert that the apple is really red, and the gray color of its molecules is false (or vice versa), then you throw all perception into doubt. How are we to tell false perception from true? Consistency? The apple's atoms are consistently gray under the microscope, and consistently red by eyesight alone. Mistrusting either resurrects the Matrix problem.
QM's conclusions are based on the same principle, taken to a more drastic degree. It's not just partially dependent on our perceptions, it's completely dependent on our perceptions. If we don't see the phenomena, it literally doesn't exist. Like thoughts.
Just because observation from one perspective--the macroscopic scale--is only partially dependent on human observation, doesn't make it nonsensical to assert that a different observation--the quantum scale--is completely dependent on human observation.
Note that when I say "quantum scale," all I'm referring to is whether the scientists observed a wave or a particle function. The fact that the electrons went from point A to point B is the independent aspect of their perspective, the "structure" mentioned in the video.
The video showed that the quantum scale is completely dependent on perception. "We are not just passive observers." The key is that it doesn't necessarily have to be human perception that all reality is dependent on. In fact, it can't be. Otherwise you have to assume that there's an infinite regression of human minds observing minds.
Comment