₦airaland Forum

Hahahahahahaha!
Poor lady doesnt know how far men will go to hit that spot!

jesusjnr2020:
Not surprised that it's the same "teachings of Jesus" that I came here preaching as my word, instead of the Bible, which drew the ire and fury of many 'Christians" here, but has continued to distinguish itself from the rest, as it's now being confirmed by others around the world, including some of the most respected preachers of this generation.

Now it seems to be the Words or teachings of Jesus specifically, instead of the Bible, which is drawing the richest and arguably most influential man on earth, to Jesus, yet again proving itself to be the greatest and most powerful tool on earth to win souls to Christ.

It's no surprise it's the teachings of Jesus, that Jesus Himself commanded His disciples to teach all men to observe, not the Bible. Matthew 28:20

Jesus should always know better on how to win souls into His kingdom.

God bless.

+
Go and sit down. You don't even know what it means when someone says they are a cultural Christian. Also who and who disagrees with the fundamental teachings of Jesus? Practically everyone will tell you they agree because it's simple things like love your neighbour etc. that's what Elon is saying, he is not "taking a stand for Christ" or any such BS.

As for me the teaching of bros Jay I don't believe in is turn the other cheek. That teaching is irresponsible and leads to calamity. If anyone slaps you, on a good day you should slap the person back ten times harder.

LordReed:
I didn't sy it wasn't. I maintain that the wave function DOESN'T collapse. Change in intensity is not that same as the wave function collapse. There are several ways of changing the interference intensity so it definitely not the same as the wave function collapse.

+
This is an effect on outcome and even if thats all you grant, my point is still proven.

LordReed:
If the wave function collapses the interference pattern ceases, that is what the Double Slit experiment shows. It doesn't happen here.

+
But you must perforce agree that there is an effect once you say there is a variation in intensity.

LordReed:
No, you didn't show the wave function collapse. The paper you cited shows variance in INTENSITY of the interference pattern. The interference pattern was still on. If the wave function collapses the interference pattern ceases.

+
-------------->

DeepSight:
+
Even if that is the case, you claimed that what I presented did not show wave function collapse whereas it says -

"In this context, the act of focusing attention to photons passing through the double-slit appears to collapse their wave function thus causing a shift toward particle-like behavior reflected in a decreased intensity of wave interference."

+
Looking at the underlined above it seems to me you are grasping at straws.

And oh, a variation in intensity is an effect on outcome.

LordReed:
This paper is just a review of that 1st paper you presented, it doesn't show an independent performance of the experiment.

+
Even if that is the case, you claimed that what I presented did not show wave function collapse whereas it says -

"In this context, the act of focusing attention to photons passing through the double-slit appears to collapse their wave function thus causing a shift toward particle-like behavior reflected in a decreased intensity of wave interference."

LordReed:
You like are someone telling me to provide evidence the teapot floating in orbit around Jupiter DOESN'T exist because I said no teapots were ever launched into orbit around Jupiter. That is not a logical step for me to take.

+
I dont understand. You insisted on showing that conscious observation collapses the wave function. I have now produced that. See my last post. So what are you on about now?

LordReed:
I thoroughly disagree. The wave function collapse ONLY occurs when a detector is introduced. You CANNOT cause wave function collapse by consciousness or else we would never have seen the interference pattern in the first place.

+
Support your disagreement with papers.

I am digging up papers to satisfy you. See above posts.

Yes again, LordReed, here is another study satisfying your request for a wave function collapse triggered by conscious observation -

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37714569/

Summary -

Abstract

The well-known, quantum physics "double-slit" experiment was the first demonstration of wave-particle duality of light-photons naturally behave like waves, but once they are registered by a conscious observer they switch to behaving like particles. In recent years, a new avenue of research has reported a psychophysical interaction occurring when focused attention was employed in the double-slit experiment. In this context, the act of focusing attention to photons passing through the double-slit appears to collapse their wave function thus causing a shift toward particle-like behavior reflected in a decreased intensity of wave interference. Contrary to the common belief that physical events have a unidirectional, first-order causal effect on cognition, these studies suggest that mental activities are capable of influencing physical systems.

The full paper of the six experiments I originally cited.

www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/Consciousness-and-the-double-slit-interference-pattern-Six-experiments.pdf

The summary is -

.
Publications
Consciousness and the Double-Slit Interference Pattern
June 1, 2012
Arnaud Delorme, PhD, Dean Radin, PhD
Six Experiments
Radin, D., Michel, L., Galdamez, K., Wendland, P., Rickenbach, R., Delorme, A. (2012) Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: Six experiments. Physics Essays: June 2012, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 157-171.

Abstract
A double-slit optical system was used to test the possible role of consciousness in the collapse of the quantum wavefunction. The ratio of the interference pattern’s double-slit spectral power to its single-slit spectral power was predicted to decrease when attention was focused toward the double slit as compared to away from it. Each test session consisted of 40 counterbalanced attention-toward and attention-away epochs, where each epoch lasted between 15 and 30 s. Data contributed by 137 people in six experiments, involving a total of 250 test sessions, indicate that on average the spectral ratio decreased as predicted (z=-4:36, p=6·10-6 ). Another 250 control sessions conducted without observers present tested hardware, software, and analytical procedures for potential artifacts; none were identified (z=0:43, p=0:67). Variables including temperature, vibration, and signal drift were also tested, and no spurious influences were identified. By contrast, factors associated with consciousness, such as meditation experience, electrocortical markers of focused attention, and psychological factors including openness and absorption, significantly correlated in predicted ways with perturbations in the double-slit interference pattern. The results appear to be consistent with a consciousness-related interpretation of the quantum measurement problem.

See also -

https://www.academia.edu/5281943/Consciousness_and_the_double_slit_interference_pattern_Six_experiments

LordReed,

Here is a very thorough and exhaustive write up. It is very detailed so you may have to distill carefully. But I distill the following for you from it -


To be or not to be

The decision to travel as a wave or as a particle has to be made at the first beam splitter, however, this decision depends on the last beam splitter being there – particle – or not being there – wave.

The outcome of the Australian experiment is that the behavior of the atom – interference or not – is always in line the ‘presence’ of the last beam splitter. See figure below. The red curve shows the hits when the last beam splitter was ‘present’. The hit rate shown by the red curve depends on an extra added phase shift. This is clearly unquestionably the case. The blue line shows the hit rate when the last beam splitter was not ‘present’. An extra added phase shift – Δφ – has clearly no influence on the hit rate, both detectors are hit evenly. There is no interference.

How do we explain this outcome? We have these options:

1. The atom knows the status of the last beam splitter in the near future and adapts its behavior on that knowledge.

2. The atom changes its behavior backwards in time depending on the presence of the last beam splitter.

3. The atom, its wave or particle behavior and its detection become manifest at the moment of detection. It does not exist as a particle before measurement but only as a possibility wave.

The last option is – although contrary to our impression of a world of permanent objects – the least unbelievable in my opinion.

However, if this was just one single stand-alone experiment, we could perhaps still ignore it despite the the scientific and academic status of the experimenters. Luckily, there are other experiments confirming the above results. When you follow the guided tour you will come across them.

You can find the above here -

https://quantumphysics-consciousness.eu/index.php/en/a-delayed-choice-mach-zehnder-experiment/

But the entire article starts here -

https://quantumphysics-consciousness.eu/index.php/en/quantum-physics-consciousness-and-information-the-double-slit-experiment/

Follow the links at the bottom of each page to read through.

keemsleek:
u

Thanks for the correction noticed. Thats ur own opinion and it doesn't change how others feel. Some says buhari is d worst, Jonathan was corrupt, obi was d worst governor. Everybody with thier own opinion.

+
It is the opinion of the honest majority.

Buhari was a star compared to Bola.

LordReed:
I dunno what you mean by insist on a particular outcome. The wave function collapse is one of the things the experiment is famous for.

+
I don't even mind a discussion where we dig into that because I can show you the details of that paper by paper.

What frightens me is the principle you are deploying.

If we say that consciousness affects outcomes, the point should be ceded once any outcomes are provably affected.

To say no, the point will only be satisfied if outcomes are affected in a specific manner is scary.

If you accede that any effect on outcomes goes to the point, that would be fair enough. But the principle behind saying only one kind of effect suffices is something I can't cope with.

Having said that, here is a study (in medicine this time) with the following conclusion:

. . . . we have shown that the presence of the subject in a state of high concentrated attention had an influence on wave-particle duality of the electromagnetic wave, attenuating visibility (wave properties) significantly and consequently increases corpuscularity, except for the relax group, in all groups compared to control. This fact means that the laser wave function collapsed in the interactive field of focused attention
---
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306987719307352

keemsleek:
I don't get it, Is it that tinubu doesn't have good PR? Cos all this while, they where saying he did nothing in the North and suddenly boom different project, when you add them up it's much than the calabar lagos coastal road. Even in the south south, south eastern we beginning to see projects video but not much from south west. prosperity will judge every president that ruled nigeria. Someday we will appreciate what each president did. No president can do it all.

+
Posterity (not prosperity) will record Bola as the worst president in the history of this country.

LordReed:
I don't know what else to tell you. My position is it does not cause the wave function collapse. Your paper says it causes something else which a counter paper says it doesn't. My initial position was not countered.

+
It is possible this conversation has failed if you insist this way.
Because I cant imagine how anyone can insist on the bold when it is obvious that the issue is consciousness affecting outcomes. To insist on a particular outcome is beyond me and I dont think I have the intellectual capacity to address myself to such a strange position.

Willy2025:
Shame will never allow PO and his supporters to admit that they were wrong about this road in the beginning. That's why they are secretly plying the road quietly

+
Even if that road turns out to be the best highway in the universe it remains a wrong priority in a nation with no power and it remains a corrupt enterprise given by a corrupt man to his corrupt friend corruptly.

LordReed:
We might be talking past each other. I am focused on the collapse of the wave function as you can see with this post from the other thread.


The paper you linked DOES NOT show that the wave function is collapsed by conscious observation.

+
Are you telling me that even when it is shown that conscious observation affects outcomes, if it is not shown to affect the collapse of the wave function specifically then you will insist that conscious observation does not affect outcomes in the experiment?

advanceDNA:
Its a metaphor of dealing with the flesh of the unrepentant church member….Na u nor read bible…. But u dey accuse pastor

+
That is no metaphor ol boy.

Eriokanmi:
Males are endangerd species in the hands of the female folks globally and it didn't start today. Several notable men had been accused of rape and people swallowed their story hook, line and sinker. I remember the otobo girl vs pastor suleman of edo state. People carried the story for months and despite the lady openly apologising later,.many still didn't believe it never happened. They said the man of God had bribed and threatened her behind the scene. There have always been reported rape cases, (people should not misquote me), Rapists exist and need to be dealt with)but how many of such reports are actually true? Some are defamatory.

This is a year of confession among the female gender. I hope our society treats such cases with all manner of seriousness. Rape should be viewed from the perspectives of both genders. I had been raped before as a child. I felt so disgusted when the woman was doing the nonsense. I didn't understand what it was cos it was so strange to me . Till today, I didn't tell my mum about it. Anytime such is being reported by female, true or untrue, people go emotional, as if the man should be eliminated. Who will now apply the same emotion to the account of males who also report such? You can imagine the falsely accused had been lynched, as it happens in some odd societies all in the name of religion. He'd have died for nothing. How many of false accusers had ever come out to apologise sef?

+
The matter is as old as Joseph and Potiphar's wife.

revelation2013:
What I think is that the church should have done is to continue to counsel both of them. And if she still refuse advise that she initiates the divorce proceedings so that the man can remarry and get someone suitable this time around.

The church should not label her a demon, that is wrong. They can also excommunicate her after the divorce so that another brother will not fall victim. But it is wrong for the church to label her a demon.

+
Not only that oh, they said they are delivering her unto Satan and praying for her destruction!

How can you say you don't love Isaac? Demon!

We are praying for your destruction.

We have delivered you unto Satan.

victorazyvictor:
No wonder poverty and all the atrocities are enormous in Brazil.

+
You people are so lost. Kai.

LordReed:
I don't even need it to since yours doesn't even claim the wave function is collapsed by consciousness.

+
Excuse me?

Please this is the sort of thing that is worrisome. I have said at all times that the outcomes are affected by consciousness, this has been my statement. In light of that please go to my post again and read the bits I put in bold red and underlined.

I certainly hope that will do as opposed to introducing a specific requirement on what consciousness must do to the wave function.

LordReed:
My argument is the collapse of the interference pattern was not affected by consciousness and that is what this shows. The fringe visibility the paper notes is well within error rates or else it would have been significant.

+
But your paper does not successfully debunk the research paper I provided which you asked me to. Frankly I didn't even need to because the results of the experiment are well known and as such you need something far stronger than that paper to properly rebut it. I could present you many other papers if you insist, but I am sure the point is proven.

LordReed:
Read this:

A two year long experimental dataset in which authors of [1] claim to find evidence of mind-matter interaction is independently re-analyzed. In this experiment, participants are asked to periodically shift their attention towards or away from a double-slit optical apparatus. Shifts in fringe visibility of the interference pattern are monitored and tested against the common sense null hypothesis that such shifts should not correlate with the participant’s attention state. We i/ show that the original statistical test used in [1] contains an erroneous trimming procedure leading to uncontrolled false positives and underestimated p-values, ii/ propose a deeper analysis of the dataset, identifying several preprocessing parameters and carefully assessing the results’ robustness regarding the choice of these parameters. We observe, as in [1], shifts in fringe visibility in the direction expected by the mind-matter interaction hypothesis. However, these shifts are not deemed significant (p > 0.05). Our re-analysis concludes that this particular dataset does not contain evidence of mind-matter interaction.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6366771/

+
Even this admits some effect on outcomes in the bold even if it argues they are minor. So you can't use this as a rebuttal. You need a stronger rebuttal.

LordReed:
I think our disagreement can be resolved by you linking a scientific paper stating that the Double Slit Experiment had its results due to human consciousness. I'll wait.

+
Before dropping a first link (and I may drop others) I want you to appreciate two elementary things which it does not seem to me that you appreciate. I dont know if you followed the progress of the experiment or you just read somewhere some conclusions about it. But a long time ago I have watched a documentary which showed its development step by step and in that documentary it is clear that conscious observation was seen to interfere with outcomes. The scientists then went so far as to step away from the experiment and replace direct observation with detectors and still the same results occurred. The point being that so long as there was a conscious being attempting to observe, either directly or indirectly (through detectors) the outcome was affected. This is why I think that your pointing to detectors is not only irrelevant but shows that perhaps you dont know how they arrived at detectors in the first place. It was in a bid to try to see if the outcomes would be different after direct observation had already altered outcomes.

The second point you miss is elementary. Conscious observation could be direct or indirect. For example, I can stand physically present to watch an event. That's direct. I can deploy CCTV t record it. That's indirect. Neither case changes the factor of a conscious being observing. This is why I find the distinction you are attempting to make tiresome and irrelevant.

Now, please have a look here -

"A double-slit optical system was used to test the possible role of consciousness in the collapse of the quantum wavefunction. The ratio of the interference pattern's double-slit spectral power to its single-slit spectral power was predicted to decrease when attention was focused toward the double slit as compared to away from it. Each test session consisted of 40 counterbalanced attention-toward and attention-away epochs, where each epoch lasted between 15 and 30 s. Data contributed by 137 people in six experiments, involving a total of 250 test sessions, indicate that on average the spectral ratio decreased as predicted (z=-4.36, p=6 x 10(-6)).

Another 250 control sessions conducted without observers present tested hardware, software, and analytical procedures for potential artifacts; none were identified (z=0.43, p=0.67). Variables including temperature, vibration, and signal drift were also tested, and no spurious influences were identified. By contrast, factors associated with consciousness, such as meditation experience, electrocortical markers of focused attention, and psychological factors including openness and absorption, significantly correlated in predicted ways with perturbations in the double-slit interference pattern. The results appear to be consistent with a consciousness-related interpretation of the quantum measurement problem. (C) 2012 Physics Essays Publication. [DOI: 10.4006/0836-1398-25.2.157]"

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258707222_Consciousness_and_the_double-slit_interference_pattern_Six_experiments

There is nothing to conclude from this but the fact that conscious observation has an effect on outcomes in our reality and this more than strongly shows that your much touted "object permanence" has no root in science and that the likelihood that we live in a programmed simulation directed by consciousness is far greater.

LordReed:
I define reality as the shared space which contains all our shared experiences and all the objects of those experiences. It will also include objects which we will eventually experience even though we are currently not experiencing them yet. You will note that by definition this does not escape solipsism and that is because I don't even give it any credence because to me there is no way to prove we AREN'T a brain in a vat. However, within the bounds of our experience this foundational definition suffices to exclude things that are not real. It also means you will have to prove that we ARE brains in a vat or any such solipsistic framework.

It also highlights the difference between reality and VIRTUAL reality. The key difference being that shared space only exists as a construct that is distinct from the space in which our "real" shared experiences take place. Another being that VR can never reach the fidelity of the "real" space because of constrains that we will further explore when we talk about simulation.

+
Noted. Lets move on to your response to the other paragraphs one at a time. Lets try the double slit experiment.

Ijaya123:
Tell us exactly how much the government has borrowed?

+
I am not your employee. The facts are in the public domain.

Ijaya123:
But you didn't mention that you were borrowing forty naira to maintain that five naira all those times.

+
Just as you haven't mentioned that strangely after removing subsidy, this govt has proceeded to borrow like never before.

Besides, I was referring to general inflation and not the price of PMS.

Jakumo:
I was not even accurate in my ranting because one of the most famous UFO incidents was witnessed by school children in Zimbabwe, along with their teachers, in 1994.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8pymWSKAPQ

+
Exactly. Famous incident. Watching some of the teachers recount it in their old age gives one goose pimples.

Jakumo:
This is very true. The only word that makes sense to a hungry man is "food".

This largely explains why there is zero curiosity about alien life in most of Africa.

The only word that computes in the brain of a hungry man is "food."

Even if an alien flying saucer landed in a typical Africa town, nobody would bother to go and look at the vehicle UNLESS it is unloading FOOD.

+
Haba, take am easy on ya kwantiri-men