@Token Girl: ...as a matter of fact, I'm primarily in it for myself, but I try to take some time to help others when I can, I do have a goatee and what's wrong with dressing nice?
@shake_zula: I stated consciousness and you're obviously looking at a larger picture while I'm looking on a smaller localized scale, but doesn't have larger scale environmental differences. Also, as far as I know, things need to be observed to have results and inanimate objects may not have a similar observational quality needed. That is my interpretation of string theory. Actions of seeming inconsequence result in change, but not necessarily of widespread worldwide change to the environment in my thoughts. Back to the breakfast example, In universe A, you skip breakfast, leave home, hop in your car and head to work. At lunch, you bump into someone who you'll eventually date and marry. In universe B, you eat breakfast, leave home, find out your car has been taken by your sister, take the bus and get to work late. You decide to skip lunch because you have more work than usual because you were late and eventually you leave work, come home and post on Nintendo Life where sykotek decides to give a long winded scenario where actions are different, yet the environment stays pretty much the same and then he decides to pull his "I'm always right card," since its his universe and then type, "la la la, I'm not listening."
XD
I think our opinions differ at the point of this observational quality. I agree entirely with your scenarios, but how I think it applies to the concept of "ghosts" is different.
The way I see it, those events could play out exactly the way you described, but in scenario B sykotek returns indoors to get money for his bus fare after realising his car is gone. Once inside he decides that since he'll be extra busy at work, there's no need to take a book to read during his break, so he takes his copy of The Elegant Universe out of his bag and places it on the table. If universe A and B now collide or phase or whatever, a ghost book will appear in universe A. I don't personally see a reason to believe that a book differs fundamentally, in the eyes of quantum mechanics, from a human being.
Out of interest, why do you believe that this observational quality might be specific to certain bodies, such as human beings? I admit I don't know much about it further than Schrodinger's Cat, but I've never read anything during my limited studies to suggest that it couldn't be applied to inanimate objects. Is it an idea of your own, or are there published theories which predict it? Not that it matters either way, your opinion is perfectly valid, I'd just be interested to read about it.
@shake_zula: As you've deduced, Schrödinger's cat and quantum mechanics are what influence my ideas on the subject, if it can be stated that anything and everything has an observational impact then Schrödinger's cat would not be possible for the cat to be both alive and dead at any moment after the introduction of poison and radiation, but based on what I believe to be your focus on how you would interpret the matter, possible universes in your interpretations would include, A) The box would have the cat and the poison. B) The box would have the cat, radioactivity and geiger counter. C) The box would not be present, only the cat, radioactivity and the geiger counter. D) The cat would not be present. (this would be the option that makes me most happy, I really like cats btw) I'm not implying that you're wrong, but not focused on the point of the thought exercise. Oh yea, sykotek would never leave home without money or take the bus for that matter, at least not in this universe. If you skip breakfast from now on, I won't blame you. I guess the easy way to answer your question is that maybe we observe ghosts of humans because we are humans and maybe for you to see ghost books, you need to be a book, I mean, if it has observational relevance. Anyways, if I didn't answer the question, I'll try again later, I get easily sidetracked.
What is the meaning of life? That's so easy, the answer is TETRIS.
Despite my earlier smart remark, I'm fairly open-minded. I don't actively believe in them, but it does seem like there are some people who are more sensitive than others to their presence. I'm not talking about the fakers with TV shows who pretend to talk to the dead. I'm talking about people like my brother-in-law, who has had numerous experiences all his life, ranging from seeing a mother giving her daughter a bath in his bathroom when he was down the hall; to having a passenger suddenly appear in his car; to seeing my mother-in-law in the clothes she was buried in before the clothes had been bought.
I have never experienced anything myself, and I realize that when I feel a presence it's most likely all in my head. I'm not impressed by most "evidence" I see on TV, though I admit I find the show Ghost Adventures--and stories of hauntings in general--fascinating.
Moco Loco If you find yourself spiritually drifting (as I was for far too many years), remember that Jesus can and will walk across the water to reach you and bring you back to shore.
Okay, back on topic. Found this video, it should be interesting, but be aware its about 40 minutes. Not really scary, but kinda neat at points. It shows different paranormal activities. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5406487197364769612# Enjoy!
Yes, but i believe there are no bad ones. only ones who need help for them to rest in peace. but so be it, don't be scared. they're dead. they can't hurt you anymore. you are the only one who can control you. don't let them interfere with yourself.
@shake_zula: As you've deduced, Schrödinger's cat and quantum mechanics are what influence my ideas on the subject, if it can be stated that anything and everything has an observational impact then Schrödinger's cat would not be possible for the cat to be both alive and dead at any moment after the introduction of poison and radiation, but based on what I believe to be your focus on how you would interpret the matter, possible universes in your interpretations would include, A) The box would have the cat and the poison. B) The box would have the cat, radioactivity and geiger counter. C) The box would not be present, only the cat, radioactivity and the geiger counter. D) The cat would not be present. (this would be the option that makes me most happy, I really like cats btw) I'm not implying that you're wrong, but not focused on the point of the thought exercise. Oh yea, sykotek would never leave home without money or take the bus for that matter, at least not in this universe. If you skip breakfast from now on, I won't blame you. I guess the easy way to answer your question is that maybe we observe ghosts of humans because we are humans and maybe for you to see ghost books, you need to be a book, I mean, if it has observational relevance. Anyways, if I didn't answer the question, I'll try again later, I get easily sidetracked.
Schrödinger's cat is all about the cat being neither alive or dead, until it is observed. In class we were wondering about trying to prove that cats can travel in waves if we threw them through a think slit It was terrible yet awesome. Anyhow, the cat is not in multiple realities, the theory is just about observational qualities. I believe it is kind of based on the whole probability thing. Anyway, that's neither here nor there, I do kind of believe in supernatural stuff, but I don't believe in ghosts.
Sean Aaron ~ "The secret is out: I'm really an American cat-girl." Q: How many physicists does it take to change a light bulb? A: Two, one to hold the light bulb, the other to rotate the universe.
@Ravage: There's a "many-worlds" interpretation of quantum mechanics that sort of explains the Schrodinger's Cat paradox by allowing that all possible outcomes exist in one of many universes. Me and sykotek were talking about observational quality to deduce why there are sightings of ghost people but rarely of ghost inanimate objects.
I guess the easy way to answer your question is that maybe we observe ghosts of humans because we are humans and maybe for you to see ghost books, you need to be a book, I mean, if it has observational relevance. Anyways, if I didn't answer the question, I'll try again later, I get easily sidetracked.
Forums
Topic: Believe in ghosts?
Posts 81 to 89 of 89
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.