Language precedes matter & all lifeforms. The most intelligent combination of words ever put into a sentence! These words came out of this amazing Wizard disguised as a human!
Dean Radin it's one of many Galileo's of our time. Scientific community sometimes act like dogmatic group more than real truth seekers due to the pressure they have to publish and being financed. But for me as an individual I focus on exploring and living my life as awareness more than centered in a Egoic materialistic point of view.
Exactly you have to be dogmatic materialist to be funded and taken serious. No one challenges this, they just move on and do calculations, they don't think.
I'll give you an example why people shouldn't be that way. Dr Maxwell Maltz wrote a book called psycho-cybernetics in the book he is speaking about the 2 self images human beings have. One is the outter self image which is the way you look in front of a mirror and there is a inner self image that which automatically decides what is possible and not possible in accordance to that puts a limits to itself if it's not improved it's a cybernetic mechanism also can be called a servo-mechanism it's like an autopilot suppose you get out of your field of ''what is possible'' immediately you'll get back to your ''what is possible'' field cause the system works that way it creates tremendous discomfort for one to expand their self image and funny thing is that whole world or the scientific community has an self image think it's like a human organism if you get out of ''what is possible'' field you'll find yourself in an extremely uncomfortable situation that happened to some people who were stepped into genetics field versus epigenetics field in some university I saw in one of the dr bruce lipton video where a teacher refused to change the text books and the way they teach because it would cost their job and the text books currently exist in the university you may be skeptic and would have a mind that contains a filter you wouldn't go by assumptions but in the end it takes guts to change things, it takes guts.
Usually, my precognitive events usually are in thoughts and images when I'm awake. I've started meditating for about 4 months starting for 5 minutes and then working my way up to 20 minutes. My dreams are really vivid and colorful now. Last night I believe I had a dream that is precognitive but would occur over a longer period. But the climax hasn't occurred yet. My father had a precognitive dream when I was about 10 that involved the whole family and it became true the next day after he dreamed it. Also remote viewing is pretty cool.
cool......Dean Radin does "solid" science imho. Non-standard/idealism-based models such as Campbell's VR's or Kastrup's Altar's for instance are quite promising. As they already unite physics/metaphysics/philosophy/super-natural/PSI/para-normal/theology etc. to a pretty large extent. & all under simple & sensible paradigm(s).
Excellent idea. One invention I've been tossing around for a while now...an AI/robot with consciousness (which I suspect, free will becomes greater, the higher it is). One issue is, if awareness is fundamental, then consciousness is everywhere. Personally, I think Tom Campbell is on to something with his Theory Of Everything (there's a video where he met Radin and chatted). Based on that, the tricky part with giving a robot/AI a "soul" (sort of my goal) is creating the interface between this dead, virtual, junk we think of as the material world with the hidden, non-local world.
Computer no, but our belief that he can do it will collapse it. So We will believe computer done it but always it will be our belief. Also believe of particles is recorded in to Us, That is the reason We ware able to observe this so called "collapsing wave function experiment"
Can you elaborate further on this idea please? i never heard of it quite before, but also, I need more literature on this issue, since I consider myself a layman on quantum theory. Gracias!
Oh, and one more thing: The practical implications described here, of understanding and exploiting such mechanics... they don't even scratch the surface. Think what would happen if we learned to amplify and control the ability of remote viewing, and literally see other planets... alongside a lot of spying scandals mind you. Let's not mention talking to dead people, without questionable methods like Ouija Boards and what not. Also this could be a fantastic interface for a mind controlled computer... no more keyboard and mouse, just look at the screen and select commands by will! And so much more...
The secret is in water. Three states, one thing. Take a lake: Take some and freeze it, Take some and boil it, Take some and leave it alone(control substance) Are those three separate things, or still one thing in three places? I propose they are both at the same time in space and matter through being, Working together to be, regardless of opinion/mind, matter, space, hence water is the link to understanding, Father Son Spirit. Three in one, All one in the same: Time, Space, Matter, Up, Down, Around, Solid, Liquid, Gas, Thoughts, Feelings, Behaviour, Bathtub, Toilet, Sink, Food, Water, Air, Love, Hate, Indecision, Good, Bad, Ugly, Humans, Animals, Bugs, Right, Wrong, Ignorant, yet all are based on one directive of existence: For one thing, MOTIVE: YOU'RE EITHER IN SUPPORT OF LIFE, YOU'RE IN SUPPORT OF DEATH, OR YOU'RE IN SUPPORT OF LIVING A MUTE EXISTENCE(IGNORING CHOICE/MOTIVE/LOVE.)
They did a study on the messages that the brain sends to the heart.. and somehow discovered that the heart sends more messages to the brain, than it receives.. by a bunch. They didn’t know why, nor did any of the researchers dare speculate the reasons for this I myself thought right from the possible reason.. the observer is within the heart, and the reason throughout history things were always heartfelt.. or in your heart of hearts you knew Infant the strongest feelings of what is right, or wrong.. let alone the falling in love.. are all from your heart, and seems to always shape your thoughts, long before the what some say is rational thinking, that you may think is in your brain..? Any chance of this being the observer? It makes you think
But they sure can speculate on everything under the sun, hypothesize (falsely), and misinterpret what they do get. And, while spinning up a bunch of speculation and blending it with facts, they are wasting time and money chasing after the wrong aspects of everything they are studying. Noetic "sciences' are filling their own bank accounts for retirement. I see zero actual proof and facts that can be used for future research. I see a lot of speculation and nonsense. Prof. Persinger did more to promote actual science in one study. Radin is wasting our time.
Loved your presentation Dean. With respect to 11:30, where you say "you could create a robot that is as conscious as we are..." Here is an excerpt from my book, in which I talk about the mechanisms of the mind that control our behavior, based on what we see in our unconscious, when we go into very deep states of trance: "... On this planet, our bodies are built based on carbon molecules. It doesn't have to be like that. One day we will have robots that are sophisticated enough to make it worthwhile to a Unit of Consciousness to insert itself into one of them. As you ready this book, you will see that this idea is not as far-fetched as it sounds. Our computers today pale in comparison to our bodies. Our robots can only provide an extremely limited interaction with the physical world, compared to what our bodies do. It is not worth it, to a Unit of Consciousness to waste its time with such a primitive vehicle, when it can use this other one (the human body) that is superior. So right now, the only practical choice to interact in earth's environment is through our carbon-based bodies..." By Unit of Consciousness, I mean what we truly are, our essence. What we see in the fields of the transformation of the mind, strongly suggests that it is not physical. This does not contradict science, it is just another dimension that we have yet to learn to study but that, for now, science simply does not have the tools to access it, as it does with the physical world. So, indeed, it seems to me so ironic that it is so difficult to accept the idea that "robots" could be conscious. We are.
Interesting. You're essentially implying that the "me" - as in the higher soul - made a decision to be here and chose its vehicle, which is this avatar. In the future it could be possible for other souls to decide to choose the vehicle of an AI or robot, if its sophisticated enough.
Just a thought while the vid plays - About the observer, man or measuring machine, at the double slit experiment: what if you let a dog be the observer? And a trained dog to look at the slits? And a great ape, a bonobo for instance? And at last: a trained bonobo? How will these results relate to those of a human observer? My (wild) guess: the more 'consciousness' is to be found in the animalistic oberserver, the more it looks like the human effects. And vice versa. Force an ant in the observer situation, and the experiment will develop as if no-one & no-thing is watching & measuring. What do you think?
In fact, in the real experience, there was a measureing device, a detector, measuring the photon or electron. It was not "only looked at" and because of this changed it's behavior. It was measured and detected via an technical device. Big difference!
Nothing would change because this was caused by the interaction with the equipment itself. Not the person or being observing it. The big crushed the little, basically. I heard it describing was a robotic arm meant to take measurements of an egg, crushing the egg. The egg was just too fragile for the robotic arm to measure without destroying it.
I experienced precognitive events throughout my childhood until 1990, then it resurfaced this year just before a family member had a major accident. How do I get in touch with Dr. Radin?
Over the top presentation with the macro TV and hand held microphone. The images and print are easy to see you're really a foot tall and so relaxed. The chalkboard and wall screen discourse in the lecture hall is wave formed.
double slit experiment. Im curios about the video where you shown a picture of a puppy/dog. What if we try to a certain type of animal besides human and see the result in the eyes of that animal. Would it behave as a wave or particle. I believe animals are not yet conscious to create a particle.
Hi, I have told many people regarding the famous double-slit experiment but they ridiculed it - nobody buys it. Could you please demonstrate in a live experiment the observer effect? In the sense to prove that it is the attention by human that collapses the wave function instead of their physical presence or the interference of measurement system. A Physics professor of mine back in Indonesia can do it live in the middle of the classroom and conclusively showed that it is not our physical presence but our attention that collapsed the wave function/interference pattern.
They don't buy it because the observer effect has nothing to do with a person looking. Observer means interaction in the QM world. It doesn't mean mind or consciousness. There was an interaction with the equipment used, not our brains.
I thought of the Turing test also, but what about consciousness as expressed by primates? Or non primates like Dolphins or even highly intelligent invertebrates like Octopi? Is this limited to human consciousness?
I think mister Dean might be the first person to fully crack those incredible mechanics... in a way the average and scientific person can understand in today's language, and without having an excuse to yell "superstition" or "pseudoscience" as has been the case until now. Personally I think the next step should be pressuring all scientific institutions to do these tests and tell us exactly what they observe: Once skeptics see for themselves that this actually works, most will want to cover their ears and just pretend the whole thing was never brought up... the norm will probably only change if they can be convinced to admit that this is a matter of science and that it is real. It would be amazing if we'd live to see Stephen Hawking (who explicitly said afterlife is not real) or Neil Degrasse Tyson (who once described the concept as this weird thing that wouldn't make sense) admit that there was this one thing they were wrong about.
A series of newly proposed, innovative quantum wave-particle duality experiments (variations on classical double slit) has the potential to clearly demonstrate whether or not material reality is actually virtual. These experiments constrain all variables so that the only possible explanation/reason for “probability wave function collapse,” if that happens, will be because a conscious observer has knowledge of, or potential knowledge of, the which-way data. Which would mean that consciousness - or, more precisely, the availability of the which-way data to conscious observers - is, indeed, the one and only reason for “probability wave function collapse." The team who wrote the peer reviewed paper includes physicists and mathematicians from NASA, JPL and Cal Tech. They're currently forming a 501c3 to raise funding for the experimental set-up. From the paper: On rendering reality: It is now well understood in the emerging science of Uncertainty Quantification that low complexity computation must be performed with hierarchies of multi-fidelity models. It is also now well understood, in the domain of game development, that low computational complexity requires rendering/displaying content only when observed by a player. Recent games, such as No-Man’s Sky and Boundless, have shown that vast open universes (potentially including “over 18 quintillion planets with their own sets of flora and fauna”) are made feasible by creating content, only at the moment the corresponding information becomes available for observation by a player, through randomized generation techniques (such as procedural generation). Therefore, to minimize computational complexity in the simulation theory, the system performing the simulation would render reality only at the moment the corresponding information becomes available for observation by a conscious observer … Hopefully the experiments will be undertaken relatively soon: www.ijqf.org/wps/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/IJQF2017v3n3p2.pdf
Wait so is the pattern on the wall actually changing with an observer? Are you telling me that you shine a light through the slits, it will be a zebra pattern, but as you bring in an observer, the pattern on the wall will change? I want to see a video of this and not a simulation or animation.
How do you know observation of quantum phenomena can actually change the measured results of this experiment when it's impossible to measure the results without an observer? "it does not matter whether the observer is an apparatus or a human being" - Werner Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy, p. 137
You just gave me a whole new meaning for the term, "Order out of Chaos" that is what our minds are doing or possibly depending on your perspective it could mean "Chaos out of Order"
"The Field" is the sandbox of creation. The spirit splinters and projects itself through the field to render this reality. Our bodies are experiencers and transceivers and perceivers, not conceivers. This is the echo mirror of creation. Enjoy the ride!
More importantly, it opens the door on psychic phenomena. And where would the finger of blame and persecution be,…. if the mind was examined and the heaven and hell it chooses between was exposed? How would you react if a person on trial for murder was cleared on the grounds that he was possessed by a dead spirit. (And the dead spirit had their name cleared because of some remnant ju ju???
A smaller N statistically leads to different hit rates (N=600 ... 50% hits versus N = 67 ...60% hits). It's easy to see why: N=1 can only lead to 100% or 0% hits. As in your example (at 13:16) the 60% hit rate on the smaller N=67 is not surprising, but it is NOT 10% above the 50% hit rate !!! It is in fact 20% above 50. But there is a correct way to express it: 60% is 10 percentage points above 50%
The interesting thing about this experiment is that if the observer happens to b a camera instead of a person, the particles behave as though they have been also measured by a sentient entity. This implies that the particles do not differentiate artificial intelligence from whatever we believe we r...
Tom Campbell My Big TOE offers a significant base for understanding based on consciousness... to joing both works would significantly improve results. Mario Jorge
If observing makes it act like a particle then in the first place wave nature of light was discovered? The person to perform double slit experiment who saw interface pattern for first time should not have seen it because of observer effect . Someone pls explain how can you say that light shows particle nature or wave nature when not being observed? The moment you look for result observer effect comes into play, is it correct????
18:25 - People's opinion control the test results? That's really weird unless the test "setup" is subconsciously made with the "results in mind". Is there any evidence for that?
What happens if you do this to someone with ADD? Would you have the same result with someone not paying attention at all? Would be cool to test on children to see if they perceive different.
The experiment demanded people to alternately (for 20-30s each) pay attention to and then remove their attention from the device or a defined goal. It turned out that focusing did, with high statistical significance, change the interference pattern, while removing one's attention didn't change much. It was also made clear that experienced meditators were much more successful in this experiment than non-meditators, and there was essentially no effect when a computer was used. So from this, the answer to your question should be obvious: There should be no significant effect when someone doesn't pay any attention at all, and I would expect people with ADD to perform very badly, probably worse than the non-meditators used in the experiments.
Max Plank: “A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it”. Imagine if Scientists were actually scientific. We must acknowledge that in principle there is no reason to believe things are very different to the days of Galileo.
Science is a method for observing the thing we call reality. The human context introduces ideology and professional hubris to this blameless activity. Radin makes an excellent point in another video, where he asks what the percentage of human knowledge is, expressed as a fraction? Materialists generally express it close to a whole number, whereas the reality may well be close to zero.
What if there is more than 1 observer? 1 ist looking and the other is not? Two cameras OR mesauring devices. One of them is measuring and the other is not measuring.. See what happens then?
The double slit experiment shows that we live in a simulation of sorts and not a multidimensional verse. Why? Well actually the 'observer effect' confirmed that to me. Here let me explain; in a computer simulation the actually calculations happen before the virtual world is rendered. So two boxes collide only after the code to check if they did. And there you go now you know too, why the observer effect take place. The result of the experiment is calculated and know before it is finished on the simulation side before it is rendered.
I disagree, my motive is not to argue however to enlighten through experience. I've taken computer programming and have an insight you may not be aware of which contradicts your hypnosis. (To be humble, I welcome your retort(: I see the big bang like God(The creator of physics, as Einstein put it: the Cosmos obeys certain laws and someone must have wrote them) computer programed files then compiled them and executed his work (double clicked an EXE. per say): Loop If this ... Then that ... Exit loop when ... This is how programs are made. Web designers can relate, as they program in frames, yet their homepage calls the separate variables/files to play out as intended. INTENDED, not simulated. I know religion doesn't normally relate with science, however in spite of that, we have the creation days of Genesis being understood only thousands of years later by Astrophysicists and Geologists as being completely accurate yet those words of information were wrote by unscientific rabbis who couldn't have known such knowledge, as Moses(the author) and Job who wrote scientifically accurate realities about the Universe long before discovered to be true by astrophysicists: "Can you bind the chains of the Pleiades, Or loosen the cords of Orion?" It wasn't discovered until only recently that some galaxies are Tidal Locked, yet Job knew about them (without a telescope)? This is undeniable proof that God (through the/his Spirit) has enlightened the worthy through out time. Much like how DNA has proven Darwin incorrect in his hypothisis that over time complex organisms can and do fall into place, we now realize that DNA (Amino Acids connected by Peptides forming chains to create Proteins) could not possibly formed by chance no matter any time frame: Hence DNA requires proteins to exist AT THE SAME TIME protein wouldn't exist without the instructions from DNA in the first place. Hence the chicken or the egg first age old question was answered by creation and never could be by evolution. Life is a school for the soul, not a simulation, as choice is a major factor for each and everyone of us: MOTIVE to LIVE, MOTIVE to DIE(sleep forever).
@@relimic Genesis got it wrong. According to the Elohim (Gods) light was created after the earth was created and not before. Therefore Genesis is proven to be incorrect and your entire bases for your argument false. Also if this is a simulation clearly there must be creators and so simulation theory is saying there is a god/creator. And if god, gods made a reality outside of their realm it will be a simulation or virtual world no matter how you look at it. Also this will take nothing away from life and its meaning if we were is a simulation. To us this is our reality no matter what. If you are truly enlightened perhaps you can give a convincing argument to why light came after the earth was created from the perspective of a paleontologist or geologist.
of course we have to interact to observe. our eyes must focus light. our brains must focus consciousness to a point in time. granted, theory. hammeroff's microtubules could do that.
The sound on this clip sounds "wave-like" and distorted. I have been technologically engaged by satellites that were "too close in range". Is this a shared reality by other monitors or my biology/sensory?
What if it ties in with joseph Murray's book power of the subconcious mind. And your belief or disbelief in something caused changed in the probability of events
If true, then its entanglement triggering a modulation or an AB effect not collapse. While it's not collapse-if true- then its still profound given mind seems to modulate the wave function
People are so confused about the observer effect. It is not surprising because most of them have no clue about how mathematics works. The wave function is can be described in an orthonromal bases of either position or momentum and both representations are Fourier transforms of each other . This means that both cannot have a sharply localized non zero amplitude simultaneously in both bases. In simple language, mathematically it is forbidden to have BOTH a position and momentum and this is more obvious for sensitive quantum particles than it is for macroscopic objects because macroscopic objects are huge ensembles of continuously interacting particles.
This is how I interpreted Cogito in college, circa early 90s. It was obcuto me that Descartes was literally stating I (The Eye of God's Image, Cemreation) think (Perceive and Conceive), therefor the I am (Exist). I have thought scietists misunderstood their predecessor philosophers. Not even the ancient Atomic Theory does not negate the sum of least indivisuble particles being a totality.
Perhaps we now have a test to the elusive question: "Are you minded"? All we need ask is "Can you collapse a wave function"? I look forward to the first tests using other animals such as monkeys... Here's a thought: If you erect two (or more) side by side setups, and give them each an identity (or name tag). Can you focus attention from one to the other and cause toggling collapses that follow your gaze and mental focus? It would seem so. That implies at some point to construct a physical setup with dozens of running double-slit projections, whereby each instance is set with a relay to make something happen via traditional electronic circuits. In this way it appears we may already be at the point to construct a demonstration of one person being able to remotely switch many different circuits on and off at will. If that proves successful, all that remains is to make that physical setup smaller and smaller, until we have a black box that fits in the palm of your hand, that can be used for anything from quadriplegic control apparatus, so remotely controlling individual limbs of industrial robotic machines that can do dangerous physical tasks without the need of a human to risk its life. I'd better stop, three more things just occurred to me! Going to try to setup a (simplistic) variation of this using household items...
@Stephen Doane - Thanks, if the results in this video were real, then the ability of the mind to collapse the wave function, could then be designed into an on/off switch, so the on/off switch could then control everything from a car engine, to a stealth bomber... all via thinking about the photons in the laser beam. So, where is the industrial application of this amazing thought-changes-light... well, I guess it stops at the experimental level, and once you start the on/off switch, then for some reason the interface of mind versus photon... doesn't function anymore. This guy is in the same ballpark as Jesse Ventura and Judy Wood, officialdom presenting nonsense to the public sphere. Little do Americans now that a lot of the world isn't analyzing what is fake & real and expect _everything_ inside officaldom to be real, while Americans know that's not the case.
Observer effect: before observation its wave and it changes to particles at the time of observation. If my understanding is correct then my question is that how do you know its wave without observation? in otherword how wave was observed without observer effect? Plz help!!
Cant they use the hits on the screen as the outcome? Fire it up with no cameras, no prying eyes, let it do it's thing, then a robot arm blindly yanks the screen out to where the specifically programmed q2+4$ machine BLURTS OUT the end result. Nobody saw anything. In other words, is there a Conscious Listener effect or does it fall under Observer.
Interesting I did first year physics at a posh university in the early 90s. Tesla was not mentioned once, quantum physics maybe one lecture at the end as an afterthought. This info was of course not mentioned. I spent the whole course going, yeh maybe, something feels wrong (I was more of a mystic also). Finally I ended up working for high himalayan masters, all questions answered then by these crusty old monks in huts, who ran circles around the phd scientists coming through (I had to translate).. very funny watching their egos fall apart.
@Princess Bubbles - thanks, the focus of thought achieving the alleged results here, isn't necessarily consciousness. For example, thinking about the laser, could summon the angry ghost which changes the waveform of the laser, this isn't void of the possible ways to achieve the result, as I see no explanation in this video how it's achieved, anyway. Also, why would human thought _only_ affect the photons in a laser, that's not logical at all. If this result is real, you can extrapolate it all the way to human thought changing the path of a bullet, how different are photons and atoms in a bullet ? So yeah, (...), this video appears to me to be sophisticated fakery, in the same ballpark as Jesse Ventura & Judy Wood, inside officialdom, speaking nonsense under the shadow-investors intent of social engineering. In the real world, thinking (an electrical existence), doesn't change photons in the room next door. Furthermore, beyond thinking, a spiritual consciousness, also doesn't affect photons... and more than that, _only_ photons. (Why? Because, beyond electrical [physical] thinking, the spiritual consciousness thing is outside of this world, it doesn't 'come back to play with photons'). Plus, the way the talks is lacklustre, no excitement, no interest in his alleged discovery at all.
what i don't get is if this is all true, then at various points in human history where we believed in things that were later proven untrue why would those untrue things not have just manifested? Seems to be a bit of a stretch that we're just operating on an agreed reality and we can actually go super saiyan if we all believed. The ending kinda fell apart but im not too familiar with most of this so I may be very off in my interpretation of the info.
Yea, I don't think "super saiyan"(thats funny AF btw) is "permitted"(weather via design or otherwise). I'd argue that there is ample evidence that intent absolutely can & does modify the probabilities of future outcomes, BUT it is only within the window of that thing's/event's "natural uncertainty". Where the uncertainty is low is where we find "reality"(both inner & shared/consensus) to be approximately "objective". Where it is high, is where we can change it the most. But the windows are typically small precisely bc its a shared reality/multi-player game, & even the "unconscious intents"(oxymoron), also beliefs & expectations etc., push things in opposing directions. Of course those +/-'s window #'s could change as we evolve, especially If there is an "evaluative/administrative component" to "the source"(such as a Rendering Engine Admin in Campbell's LCS for instance). Or even in the case where the whole thing is much less or even not at all "intentional", as in Kastrup's Altars, there's little reason to think such things would have to remain fixed indefinitely, as the evidence is quite clear that pretty much everything evolves. I think such notions can hold water in virtually(no pun) ANY Idealism based model. Campbell has a notion of a PSI uncertainty principle, where you can bend the rules much further in private, & perhaps even break them but NOT if/when the news crew shows up, simply bc our "average quality of being" isn't ready, as it could threaten the whole purpose of "physical"(the game/soul lab experiment). There always has to be some "plausible deniability"(for the time being anyway). Though regardless, PSI does seem to be an intrinsic feedback mechanism of this reality to varying extents already, which is quite interesting imo all on its own(no meta-physics even required). Though the main reason the whole thing is still taboo & has stagnated is bc we do need new/different(even old/recycled ie. Idealism) mataphical paradigms & models such as Campbell's VR's or Kastup's Alters etc..
Even if we don’t remove measuring device. We can solve the measuring device using pure logic. Macroscopic measuring devices are made of quantum particles and must evolve via the Schrödinger equation. Decoherence and interaction alone does not solve the problem. This creates a chain of particles that leads to something nonlocal (the von Neumann chain). Anton Zeilinger’s experiment ruled out Hidden variables. Consciousness is the only answer. Consciousness causes collapse
Its not the eye that changes the wave effect, because i did this at home with laser, and looking before the slit or after the slit had no effect, the result is always wave pattern... Soo its the device that is altering something...? By the way what if one slit has a polarized lens in an angle of 90 comparing to the other slit.. will they still interact? And stop interfering? Guess not..
More likely is that the "interpretation" of the test results is a function of the opinion of the interpreter. So, to get the Nobel Price for finding the higgs boson you need to present a sigma five test result or hit them over the head. But this cannot be a factor in your tests (30:00). Yet the "trained personnel", those who are "meditators" always created more significant mind-matter interference.
A series of newly proposed, innovative quantum wave-particle duality experiments (variations on classical double slit) has the potential to clearly demonstrate whether or not material reality is actually virtual. These experiments constrain all variables so that the only possible explanation/reason for “probability wave function collapse,” if that happens, will be because a conscious observer has knowledge of, or potential knowledge of, the which-way data. Which would mean that consciousness - or, more precisely, the availability of the which-way data to conscious observers - is, indeed, the one and only reason for “probability wave function collapse." The team who wrote the peer reviewed paper includes physicists and mathematicians from NASA, JPL and Cal Tech. They're currently forming a 501c3 to raise funding for the experimental set-up. From the paper: On rendering reality: It is now well understood in the emerging science of Uncertainty Quantification that low complexity computation must be performed with hierarchies of multi-fidelity models. It is also now well understood, in the domain of game development, that low computational complexity requires rendering/displaying content only when observed by a player. Recent games, such as No-Man’s Sky and Boundless, have shown that vast open universes (potentially including “over 18 quintillion planets with their own sets of flora and fauna”) are made feasible by creating content, only at the moment the corresponding information becomes available for observation by a player, through randomized generation techniques (such as procedural generation). Therefore, to minimize computational complexity in the simulation theory, the system performing the simulation would render reality only at the moment the corresponding information becomes available for observation by a conscious observer … Hopefully the experiments will be undertaken relatively soon: www.ijqf.org/wps/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/IJQF2017v3n3p2.pdf
Mind blowing! It's interesting notice that if you setup a experiment to test the possibility of simulation you won't be considered crazy or New Age. I liked the way they approached the problem without sound too crank.
Reality is a marriage of "Total Recall" (the old one with Schwarzenegger) and "The Sims". Scientists prefer to use No-Mans Sky and Boundless, same thing.
Observation isn't a physical phenomenon, it's an idea. The counter interferes with the result. If you had the result translated to a written description and read to a person, you'd find the same result even though no person "observed" the result.
I just got the idea: No keys, just portable probability wave interdimensional portal that opens a portal to your home anywhere in any space. I wish someone could really makes those while we're here.
Well in principle you might be able to do it psychically as with Remote Viewing (clairvoyance) and possibly anywhere in time whether past, present, or future.
If you wanted to physically and solidly go from one location to another, in space and time, then all you have to do is convince nature (the quantum information system) that you "are" at that location and, per consequence, "be" at that location. It's the same with healing effects -- convince nature that you are well and you will be well (e.g. using visualization). So far, it looks like no one has been successful at location-shifting (other then a few stories which may or may not be true); however, there's been some remarkable success with healing effects.
Native Americans were aware of consciousness when we got here . Their medicine men could bent laws of matter connect other dimension and even connect with those who had died....read book Rolling Thunder by Menninger foundation research. Around 1970
The actual problem, the issue, that control the experience of the experiments is the internal intention. Even while one observes ones own self, one's own thought, removing an expectation is nearly impossible, not impossible but improbable. To be that silent, that aware, one must enter the state of Being Light. To do that, one must release every attachment to any perception. At this point, unless one knows how to exit that state of loss of attatchment, all perceptions become moot, pointless, meaningless. Its at this point that either everything or nothing makes sense. Scientists cannot do this typically. It crossed the line from probable in a single person to repeating the experience experiment. That is why proving God, spirit, psychic, etc remains impossible due to the improbability. Those eho know, know. Those who who do not, cannot, at least most of the time.
To be historically accurate, you should get a cartoon that showed the science establishment of Galileo's day refusing to look through his telescope, those are the people who were the biggest opponents of Copernican cosmology. Copernicus dedicated his book to a Pope and noted that another Pope and numerous bishops, Cardinals and his fellow priests had supported his work and encouraged him to publish. Galileo would have escaped any trouble if he hadn't stupidly made fun of the current Pope in his book, late Renaissance Popes were notably touchy about being poked fun of. It was bishops in the Vatican who were some of Galileo's staunchest supporters, his biggest enemies were the academic scientists who had a professional interest in the Ptolemaic system.
We're in the same place today. Classical science transitioning to quantum science and the resistance is palpable. Reality is what you focus on, so forget the truth deniers, they don't exist, literally.
Shawn McLaughlin exactly the idea that subjective consciousness can even Have an effect on the waves and particle is silly. Typical new age woo hoo. Amazing how many folks on UA-cam are willing to fill their ego with a false idea. I guess many folks are so determined to believe in idealism.
Good to have you here, since I have heard this argument being made many times in the past and always wanted to understand it. So can you explain where and how was the "measurement" happening in the concrete experiment that Dean performed 17 times and which repeatedly led to highly significant results? And how was in these experiments the measurement different when experienced meditators were used compared to when non non-meditators or a Linux box were used? And how could you get the same results using basically the same experimental setting but with a measurement device or approach that does /not/ involve a human observer?
+Free Thinker your thinking isn't very free, is it? no one said idealism. address dr radin's science and math, why don't you? or don't you want to wake up? science is moving on from materialism, necessarily , or it is doomed.
The "looking" part needs to be explained more in depth. The looking is actually done by the machine or a sensor which emits EM waves which interact with the particle/wave going through the slit.
I love how the "intelligent" videos on UA-cam don't have stupid or negative commentators. Looks like smarter people interested in smarter topics filters out the idiots and thus negativity lol
Does the brains processing speed have any relation to the chnage in particles, so with our observation and our added brain power we bring the wave to a slower speed to help maintain an environment to navigate ,,, so the body and mind has over time come to find the perfect spectrum to manouver in ... if we are the whole everything then we are within it we arent separte beings observing it we are the very thing so everything is moving relatively and this also means we are and our senses too all interconnected ,, I dont know anything really i just say things 🎉, It just fascinates me that our observations are illusion but real ones to us but on the grand scale things are vibrations and just stuff and our senses fitting in the place they do just give rise to our reality and spectrum ... Fuck knows 😂
Been listening/watching/reading Dean Radin for over 16 years. He never ceases to amaze. Thank you.
Language precedes matter & all lifeforms. The most intelligent combination of words ever put into a sentence! These words came out of this amazing Wizard disguised as a human!
Dean Radin it's one of many Galileo's of our time. Scientific community sometimes act like dogmatic group more than real truth seekers due to the pressure they have to publish and being financed. But for me as an individual I focus on exploring and living my life as awareness more than centered in a Egoic materialistic point of view.
Exactly you have to be dogmatic materialist to be funded and taken serious. No one challenges this, they just move on and do calculations, they don't think.
I'll give you an example why people shouldn't be that way. Dr Maxwell Maltz wrote a book called psycho-cybernetics in the book he is speaking about the 2 self images human beings have.
One is the outter self image which is the way you look in front of a mirror and there is a inner self image that which automatically decides what is possible and not possible in accordance to that puts a limits to itself if it's not improved it's a cybernetic mechanism also can be called a servo-mechanism it's like an autopilot suppose you get out of your field of ''what is possible'' immediately you'll get back to your ''what is possible'' field cause the system works that way it creates tremendous discomfort for one to expand their self image
and funny thing is that whole world or the scientific community has an self image think it's like a human organism if you get out of ''what is possible'' field you'll find yourself in an extremely uncomfortable situation that happened to some people who were stepped into genetics field versus epigenetics field in some university I saw in one of the dr bruce lipton video where
a teacher refused to change the text books and the way they teach because it would cost their job and the text books currently exist in the university you may be skeptic and would
have a mind that contains a filter you wouldn't go by assumptions but in the end it takes guts to change things, it takes guts.
See most of these myopic, close-minded comments. “Scientists” are some of the most insecure, terrified souls on the planet.
100% agree
Usually, my precognitive events usually are in thoughts and images when I'm awake. I've started meditating for about 4 months starting for 5 minutes and then working my way up to 20 minutes. My dreams are really vivid and colorful now. Last night I believe I had a dream that is precognitive but would occur over a longer period.
But the climax hasn't occurred yet.
My father had a precognitive dream when I was about 10 that involved the whole family and it became true the next day after he dreamed it.
Also remote viewing is pretty cool.
Consciousness is fundamental
.
Idk seems emergent to me.
@@smokey04200420that theory was proven wrong time and time again
@@smokey04200420you only need to learn about NDEs to prove how wrong this claim is
Dean's the man! Great stuff!
cool......Dean Radin does "solid" science imho. Non-standard/idealism-based models such as Campbell's VR's or Kastrup's Altar's for instance are quite promising. As they already unite physics/metaphysics/philosophy/super-natural/PSI/para-normal/theology etc. to a pretty large extent. & all under simple & sensible paradigm(s).
Dr Dean is brilliant and thank you so much for this presentation
This is the new Turning test. Can a computer/robot collapse the wave function? Challenges many of the assumptions about AI.
Excellent idea. One invention I've been tossing around for a while now...an AI/robot with consciousness (which I suspect, free will becomes greater, the higher it is). One issue is, if awareness is fundamental, then consciousness is everywhere. Personally, I think Tom Campbell is on to something with his Theory Of Everything (there's a video where he met Radin and chatted). Based on that, the tricky part with giving a robot/AI a "soul" (sort of my goal) is creating the interface between this dead, virtual, junk we think of as the material world with the hidden, non-local world.
Computer no, but our belief that he can do it will collapse it. So We will believe computer done it but always it will be our belief. Also believe of particles is recorded in to Us, That is the reason We ware able to observe this so called "collapsing wave function experiment"
Can you elaborate further on this idea please? i never heard of it quite before, but also, I need more literature on this issue, since I consider myself a layman on quantum theory. Gracias!
Perhaps AI will only emerge with quantum computers.
Wow, your question is so genius! You just invented the equivalent of litmus test for consciousness! 😄
Fascinating information!
Thank you very much.
Oh, and one more thing: The practical implications described here, of understanding and exploiting such mechanics... they don't even scratch the surface. Think what would happen if we learned to amplify and control the ability of remote viewing, and literally see other planets... alongside a lot of spying scandals mind you. Let's not mention talking to dead people, without questionable methods like Ouija Boards and what not. Also this could be a fantastic interface for a mind controlled computer... no more keyboard and mouse, just look at the screen and select commands by will! And so much more...
Here's a better mind tingler for you: Remote view your physical body to another place.
This is awesome. I'm heading back down the swamp to get my Xwing out.
How can this be used to heal the body? Like how lol. Seems like you might know. Janice
The secret is in water.
Three states, one thing.
Take a lake:
Take some and freeze it,
Take some and boil it,
Take some and leave it alone(control substance)
Are those three separate things,
or still one thing in three places?
I propose they are both at the same time in space and matter through being,
Working together to be,
regardless of opinion/mind, matter, space,
hence water is the link to understanding,
Father Son Spirit.
Three in one,
All one in the same:
Time, Space, Matter,
Up, Down, Around,
Solid, Liquid, Gas,
Thoughts, Feelings, Behaviour,
Bathtub, Toilet, Sink,
Food, Water, Air,
Love, Hate, Indecision,
Good, Bad, Ugly,
Humans, Animals, Bugs,
Right, Wrong, Ignorant,
yet all are based on one directive of existence:
For one thing, MOTIVE:
YOU'RE EITHER IN SUPPORT OF LIFE,
YOU'RE IN SUPPORT OF DEATH,
OR YOU'RE IN SUPPORT OF LIVING A MUTE EXISTENCE(IGNORING CHOICE/MOTIVE/LOVE.)
They did a study on the messages that the brain sends to the heart..
and somehow discovered that the heart sends more messages to the brain, than it receives.. by a bunch.
They didn’t know why, nor did any of the researchers dare speculate the reasons for this
I myself thought right from the possible reason..
the observer is within the heart, and the reason throughout history things were always heartfelt.. or in your heart of hearts you knew
Infant the strongest feelings of what is right, or wrong.. let alone the falling in love..
are all from your heart, and seems to always shape your thoughts, long before the what some say is rational thinking, that you may think is in your brain..?
Any chance of this being the observer? It makes you think
Very interesting , i heard monks in Orthodoxy speak about the true prayer to God are from their heart.
You will find this in the Quran a lot, it speaks about the heart being blind so people can't see. Interesting observation
But they sure can speculate on everything under the sun, hypothesize (falsely), and misinterpret what they do get. And, while spinning up a bunch of speculation and blending it with facts, they are wasting time and money chasing after the wrong aspects of everything they are studying. Noetic "sciences' are filling their own bank accounts for retirement. I see zero actual proof and facts that can be used for future research. I see a lot of speculation and nonsense. Prof. Persinger did more to promote actual science in one study. Radin is wasting our time.
Do you have a link to the study you're referencing?
Loved your presentation Dean. With respect to 11:30, where you say "you could create a robot that is as conscious as we are..." Here is an excerpt from my book, in which I talk about the mechanisms of the mind that control our behavior, based on what we see in our unconscious, when we go into very deep states of trance: "... On this planet, our bodies are built based on carbon molecules. It doesn't have to be like that. One day we will have robots that are sophisticated enough to make it worthwhile to a Unit of Consciousness to insert itself into one of them. As you ready this book, you will see that this idea is not as far-fetched as it sounds. Our computers today pale in comparison to our bodies. Our robots can only provide an extremely limited interaction with the physical world, compared to what our bodies do. It is not worth it, to a Unit of Consciousness to waste its time with such a primitive vehicle, when it can use this other one (the human body) that is superior. So right now, the only practical choice to interact in earth's environment is through our carbon-based bodies..."
By Unit of Consciousness, I mean what we truly are, our essence. What we see in the fields of the transformation of the mind, strongly suggests that it is not physical. This does not contradict science, it is just another dimension that we have yet to learn to study but that, for now, science simply does not have the tools to access it, as it does with the physical world.
So, indeed, it seems to me so ironic that it is so difficult to accept the idea that "robots" could be conscious. We are.
Interesting. You're essentially implying that the "me" - as in the higher soul - made a decision to be here and chose its vehicle, which is this avatar. In the future it could be possible for other souls to decide to choose the vehicle of an AI or robot, if its sophisticated enough.
@@postplays exactly!!
Just a thought while the vid plays - About the observer, man or measuring machine, at the double slit experiment: what if you let a dog be the observer? And a trained dog to look at the slits? And a great ape, a bonobo for instance? And at last: a trained bonobo? How will these results relate to those of a human observer?
My (wild) guess: the more 'consciousness' is to be found in the animalistic oberserver, the more it looks like the human effects. And vice versa. Force an ant in the observer situation, and the experiment will develop as if no-one & no-thing is watching & measuring.
What do you think?
Good idea
they did this with linux computer.... :)
In fact, in the real experience, there was a measureing device, a detector, measuring the photon or electron. It was not "only looked at" and because of this changed it's behavior. It was measured and detected via an technical device. Big difference!
Nothing would change because this was caused by the interaction with the equipment itself. Not the person or being observing it. The big crushed the little, basically. I heard it describing was a robotic arm meant to take measurements of an egg, crushing the egg. The egg was just too fragile for the robotic arm to measure without destroying it.
What is frightening about this effect is people can focus and look at you and essentially effect who you feel. Something I have felt most of my life.
Nobody can effect your internal environment unless you allow them to program you. There is no "out there there", you create your own reality.
I experienced precognitive events throughout my childhood until 1990, then it resurfaced this year just before a family member had a major accident. How do I get in touch with Dr. Radin?
Over the top presentation with the macro TV and hand held microphone. The images and print are easy to see you're really a foot tall and so relaxed. The chalkboard and wall screen discourse in the lecture hall is wave formed.
double slit experiment. Im curios about the video where you shown a picture of a puppy/dog. What if we try to a certain type of animal besides human and see the result in the eyes of that animal. Would it behave as a wave or particle. I believe animals are not yet conscious to create a particle.
Hi, I have told many people regarding the famous double-slit experiment but they ridiculed it - nobody buys it. Could you please demonstrate in a live experiment the observer effect? In the sense to prove that it is the attention by human that collapses the wave function instead of their physical presence or the interference of measurement system. A Physics professor of mine back in Indonesia can do it live in the middle of the classroom and conclusively showed that it is not our physical presence but our attention that collapsed the wave function/interference pattern.
They don't buy it because the observer effect has nothing to do with a person looking. Observer means interaction in the QM world. It doesn't mean mind or consciousness. There was an interaction with the equipment used, not our brains.
I thought of the Turing test also, but what about consciousness as expressed by primates? Or non primates like Dolphins or even highly intelligent invertebrates like Octopi? Is this limited to human consciousness?
I think mister Dean might be the first person to fully crack those incredible mechanics... in a way the average and scientific person can understand in today's language, and without having an excuse to yell "superstition" or "pseudoscience" as has been the case until now. Personally I think the next step should be pressuring all scientific institutions to do these tests and tell us exactly what they observe: Once skeptics see for themselves that this actually works, most will want to cover their ears and just pretend the whole thing was never brought up... the norm will probably only change if they can be convinced to admit that this is a matter of science and that it is real. It would be amazing if we'd live to see Stephen Hawking (who explicitly said afterlife is not real) or Neil Degrasse Tyson (who once described the concept as this weird thing that wouldn't make sense) admit that there was this one thing they were wrong about.
A series of newly proposed, innovative quantum wave-particle duality experiments (variations on classical double slit) has the potential to clearly demonstrate whether or not material reality is actually virtual. These experiments constrain all variables so that the only possible explanation/reason for “probability wave function collapse,” if that happens, will be because a conscious observer has knowledge of, or potential knowledge of, the which-way data. Which would mean that consciousness - or, more precisely, the availability of the which-way data to conscious observers - is, indeed, the one and only reason for “probability wave function collapse."
The team who wrote the peer reviewed paper includes physicists and mathematicians from NASA, JPL and Cal Tech. They're currently forming a 501c3 to raise funding for the experimental set-up. From the paper:
On rendering reality: It is now well understood in the emerging science of Uncertainty Quantification that low complexity computation must be performed with hierarchies of multi-fidelity models. It is also now well understood, in the domain of game development, that low computational complexity requires rendering/displaying content only when observed by a player. Recent games, such as No-Man’s Sky and Boundless, have shown that vast open universes (potentially including “over 18 quintillion planets with their own sets of flora and fauna”) are made feasible by creating content, only at the moment the corresponding information becomes available for observation by a player, through randomized generation techniques (such as procedural generation). Therefore, to minimize computational complexity in the simulation theory, the system performing the simulation would render reality only at the moment the corresponding information becomes available for observation by a conscious observer …
Hopefully the experiments will be undertaken relatively soon: www.ijqf.org/wps/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/IJQF2017v3n3p2.pdf
I'm Commander Shepard and I find this fascinating.
This means that he literally discovered a way to detect & possibly even measure consciousness.
Wait so is the pattern on the wall actually changing with an observer? Are you telling me that you shine a light through the slits, it will be a zebra pattern, but as you bring in an observer, the pattern on the wall will change? I want to see a video of this and not a simulation or animation.
How do you know observation of quantum phenomena can actually change the measured results of this experiment when it's impossible to measure the results without an observer?
"it does not matter whether the observer is an apparatus or a human being"
- Werner Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy, p. 137
You just gave me a whole new meaning for the term, "Order out of Chaos" that is what our minds are doing or possibly depending on your perspective it could mean "Chaos out of Order"
"The Field" is the sandbox of creation. The spirit splinters and projects itself through the field to render this reality. Our bodies are experiencers and transceivers and perceivers, not conceivers. This is the echo mirror of creation. Enjoy the ride!
it would be great if the quality of sound is improved
I don't understand why such spectacular research is not given it's due. Are they scared of consciousness?
They're TERRIFIED of consciousness. It's the end of Classical science as we know it. Careers gone.
And not only that... consciousness being fundamental SCREAMS God.
More importantly, it opens the door on psychic phenomena. And where would the finger of blame and persecution be,…. if the mind was examined and the heaven and hell it chooses between was exposed? How would you react if a person on trial for murder was cleared on the grounds that he was possessed by a dead spirit. (And the dead spirit had their name cleared because of some remnant ju ju???
The idea that consciousness is a state pf matter will stay with me for a long time. 11:06
A smaller N statistically leads to different hit rates (N=600 ... 50% hits versus N = 67 ...60% hits). It's easy to see why: N=1 can only lead to 100% or 0% hits. As in your example (at 13:16) the 60% hit rate on the smaller N=67 is not surprising, but it is NOT 10% above the 50% hit rate !!! It is in fact 20% above 50. But there is a correct way to express it: 60% is 10 percentage points above 50%
The interesting thing about this experiment is that if the observer happens to b a camera instead of a person, the particles behave as though they have been also measured by a sentient entity. This implies that the particles do not differentiate artificial intelligence from whatever we believe we r...
How do you calculate how likely something is? I suck at math, but Im a magnet for weird things. Seems like something good to know.
Is the laser/photon being aimed at the slits (either one) or the space between the 2 slits?
Tom Campbell My Big TOE offers a significant base for understanding based on consciousness... to joing both works would significantly improve results. Mario Jorge
Now this is interesting!
If observing makes it act like a particle then in the first place wave nature of light was discovered? The person to perform double slit experiment who saw interface pattern for first time should not have seen it because of observer effect . Someone pls explain how can you say that light shows particle nature or wave nature when not being observed? The moment you look for result observer effect comes into play, is it correct????
Excellent Talk/Presentation!!!
18:25 - People's opinion control the test results? That's really weird unless the test "setup" is subconsciously made with the "results in mind". Is there any evidence for that?
A few years ago I read an article online by an AI expert who made a public statement saying that AI will never be able to replicate consciousness.
What happens if you do this to someone with ADD? Would you have the same result with someone not paying attention at all? Would be cool to test on children to see if they perceive different.
ADD is a joke. I feel pity for people who get labelled with this crap.
The experiment demanded people to alternately (for 20-30s each) pay attention to and then remove their attention from the device or a defined goal. It turned out that focusing did, with high statistical significance, change the interference pattern, while removing one's attention didn't change much. It was also made clear that experienced meditators were much more successful in this experiment than non-meditators, and there was essentially no effect when a computer was used. So from this, the answer to your question should be obvious: There should be no significant effect when someone doesn't pay any attention at all, and I would expect people with ADD to perform very badly, probably worse than the non-meditators used in the experiments.
Max Plank: “A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it”.
Imagine if Scientists were actually scientific. We must acknowledge that in principle there is no reason to believe things are very different to the days of Galileo.
Science is a method for observing the thing we call reality. The human context introduces ideology and professional hubris to this blameless activity. Radin makes an excellent point in another video, where he asks what the percentage of human knowledge is, expressed as a fraction? Materialists generally express it close to a whole number, whereas the reality may well be close to zero.
Excellent presentation! One nitpick: At 9:37 I believe the quote of Wigner shows the picture of Enrico Fermi.
So underrated...
What if there is more than 1 observer? 1 ist looking and the other is not? Two cameras OR mesauring devices. One of them is measuring and the other is not measuring.. See what happens then?
The double slit experiment shows that we live in a simulation of sorts and not a multidimensional verse. Why? Well actually the 'observer effect' confirmed that to me. Here let me explain; in a computer simulation the actually calculations happen before the virtual world is rendered. So two boxes collide only after the code to check if they did. And there you go now you know too, why the observer effect take place. The result of the experiment is calculated and know before it is finished on the simulation side before it is rendered.
I disagree, my motive is not to argue however to enlighten through experience.
I've taken computer programming and have an insight you may not be aware of
which contradicts your hypnosis. (To be humble, I welcome your retort(:
I see the big bang like God(The creator of physics, as Einstein put it: the Cosmos
obeys certain laws and someone must have wrote them) computer programed files then compiled them and executed his work (double clicked an EXE. per say):
Loop
If this ...
Then that ...
Exit loop when ...
This is how programs are made.
Web designers can relate, as they program in frames,
yet their homepage calls the separate variables/files to play out as intended.
INTENDED, not simulated.
I know religion doesn't normally relate with science, however in spite of that,
we have the creation days of Genesis being understood only thousands of years later by Astrophysicists and Geologists as being completely accurate yet those words of information were wrote by unscientific rabbis who couldn't have known
such knowledge, as Moses(the author) and Job who wrote scientifically accurate
realities about the Universe long before discovered to be true by astrophysicists:
"Can you bind the chains of the Pleiades, Or loosen the cords of Orion?"
It wasn't discovered until only recently that some galaxies are Tidal Locked,
yet Job knew about them (without a telescope)?
This is undeniable proof that God (through the/his Spirit) has enlightened the worthy through out time. Much like how DNA has proven Darwin incorrect in his
hypothisis that over time complex organisms can and do fall into place, we now realize that DNA
(Amino Acids connected by Peptides forming chains to create Proteins)
could not possibly formed by chance no matter any time frame:
Hence DNA requires proteins to exist AT THE SAME TIME protein wouldn't exist
without the instructions from DNA in the first place. Hence the chicken or the egg first age old question was answered by creation and never could be by evolution.
Life is a school for the soul, not a simulation,
as choice is a major factor for each and everyone of us:
MOTIVE to LIVE,
MOTIVE to DIE(sleep forever).
@@relimic Genesis got it wrong. According to the Elohim (Gods) light was created after the earth was created and not before. Therefore Genesis is proven to be incorrect and your entire bases for your argument false.
Also if this is a simulation clearly there must be creators and so simulation theory is saying there is a god/creator. And if god, gods made a reality outside of their realm it will be a simulation or virtual world no matter how you look at it. Also this will take nothing away from life and its meaning if we were is a simulation. To us this is our reality no matter what.
If you are truly enlightened perhaps you can give a convincing argument to why light came after the earth was created from the perspective of a paleontologist or geologist.
@@DestianLight Not according to Hugh Ross an Astrophysicist; you aren't an expert, and either am I ... but he is.
of course we have to interact to observe. our eyes must focus light. our brains must focus consciousness to a point in time. granted, theory.
hammeroff's microtubules could do that.
Dean Radin really looks like Max Planck, don't you find ? Reincarnation ?
yeah lol! even the bald head! :p
Why should a reincarnation have similar facial features?
@@AirSandFire Because that's the image one has in one's mind. If you don't like the way you look now, think of a good looking image you could have.
Is there an abstract or a synopsis of any form to this lecture/publication?
Why does an strange object fly off the Pyramid diagram at 46.08? Literally as Radin says it's weird stuff?
Do you know if the replication of this in Brazil has been/is being peer reviewed and published in a journal?
The sound on this clip sounds "wave-like" and distorted.
I have been technologically engaged by satellites that were "too close in range".
Is this a shared reality by other monitors or my biology/sensory?
what about if a blind person looks?
its not about sight... its about atention
What if it ties in with joseph Murray's book power of the subconcious mind. And your belief or disbelief in something caused changed in the probability of events
If true, then its entanglement triggering a modulation or an AB effect not collapse.
While it's not collapse-if true- then its still profound given mind seems to modulate the wave function
People are so confused about the observer effect. It is not surprising because most of them have no clue about how mathematics works. The wave function is can be described in an orthonromal bases of either position or momentum and both representations are Fourier transforms of each other . This means that both cannot have a sharply localized non zero amplitude simultaneously in both bases. In simple language, mathematically it is forbidden to have BOTH a position and momentum and this is more obvious for sensitive quantum particles than it is for macroscopic objects because macroscopic objects are huge ensembles of continuously interacting particles.
This is how I interpreted Cogito in college, circa early 90s. It was obcuto me that Descartes was literally stating I (The Eye of God's Image, Cemreation) think (Perceive and Conceive), therefor the I am (Exist). I have thought scietists misunderstood their predecessor philosophers. Not even the ancient Atomic Theory does not negate the sum of least indivisuble particles being a totality.
Very well explained!! Thank u👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
What do we mean by photon?
Is this the reason whenever I observe my stocks they go down but when I’m not looking it does the complete opposite 😀
i wonder if anyone has surrounded the light with mirrors then hide behind the mirrors to see how it behaves
Finally, a promoter of magic which is what apparently happens appearing as science.
Perhaps we now have a test to the elusive question: "Are you minded"? All we need ask is "Can you collapse a wave function"? I look forward to the first tests using other animals such as monkeys... Here's a thought: If you erect two (or more) side by side setups, and give them each an identity (or name tag). Can you focus attention from one to the other and cause toggling collapses that follow your gaze and mental focus? It would seem so. That implies at some point to construct a physical setup with dozens of running double-slit projections, whereby each instance is set with a relay to make something happen via traditional electronic circuits. In this way it appears we may already be at the point to construct a demonstration of one person being able to remotely switch many different circuits on and off at will. If that proves successful, all that remains is to make that physical setup smaller and smaller, until we have a black box that fits in the palm of your hand, that can be used for anything from quadriplegic control apparatus, so remotely controlling individual limbs of industrial robotic machines that can do dangerous physical tasks without the need of a human to risk its life. I'd better stop, three more things just occurred to me! Going to try to setup a (simplistic) variation of this using household items...
The thing is you can't know. How can you know you or monkey or dog collapsed it? Without observing the results you can't know the end of experiment.
@Stephen Doane - Thanks, if the results in this video were real, then the ability of the mind to collapse the wave function, could then be designed into an on/off switch, so the on/off switch could then control everything from a car engine, to a stealth bomber... all via thinking about the photons in the laser beam. So, where is the industrial application of this amazing thought-changes-light... well, I guess it stops at the experimental level, and once you start the on/off switch, then for some reason the interface of mind versus photon... doesn't function anymore.
This guy is in the same ballpark as Jesse Ventura and Judy Wood, officialdom presenting nonsense to the public sphere. Little do Americans now that a lot of the world isn't analyzing what is fake & real and expect _everything_ inside officaldom to be real, while Americans know that's not the case.
Observer effect:
before observation its wave and it changes to particles at the time of observation.
If my understanding is correct then my question is that how do you know its wave without observation? in otherword how wave was observed without observer effect?
Plz help!!
Detected after the experiment is done?
The physical world is always interacting with everything but I would base it down to where you believe it's just you
I believe the picture accompanying the quotation from Wigner is actually that of Enrico Fermi.
If reality is dependent on conscious observation, then how did it exist before humans and animals were around to observe it?
You just answered your own question.
God.
Well presented. Thank you.
What color was that dress?
Cant they use the hits on the screen as the outcome? Fire it up with no cameras, no prying eyes, let it do it's thing, then a robot arm blindly yanks the screen out to where the specifically programmed q2+4$ machine BLURTS OUT the end result. Nobody saw anything. In other words, is there a Conscious Listener effect or does it fall under Observer.
Interesting I did first year physics at a posh university in the early 90s. Tesla was not mentioned once, quantum physics maybe one lecture at the end as an afterthought. This info was of course not mentioned. I spent the whole course going, yeh maybe, something feels wrong (I was more of a mystic also). Finally I ended up working for high himalayan masters, all questions answered then by these crusty old monks in huts, who ran circles around the phd scientists coming through (I had to translate).. very funny watching their egos fall apart.
It's not at all clear that the underlying precipitate reality, as Radin calls it, is consciousness. Not everything non-physical need be consciousness.
@Princess Bubbles - thanks, the focus of thought achieving the alleged results here, isn't necessarily consciousness. For example, thinking about the laser, could summon the angry ghost which changes the waveform of the laser, this isn't void of the possible ways to achieve the result, as I see no explanation in this video how it's achieved, anyway. Also, why would human thought _only_ affect the photons in a laser, that's not logical at all. If this result is real, you can extrapolate it all the way to human thought changing the path of a bullet, how different are photons and atoms in a bullet ? So yeah, (...), this video appears to me to be sophisticated fakery, in the same ballpark as Jesse Ventura & Judy Wood, inside officialdom, speaking nonsense under the shadow-investors intent of social engineering.
In the real world, thinking (an electrical existence), doesn't change photons in the room next door. Furthermore, beyond thinking, a spiritual consciousness, also doesn't affect photons... and more than that, _only_ photons. (Why? Because, beyond electrical [physical] thinking, the spiritual consciousness thing is outside of this world, it doesn't 'come back to play with photons').
Plus, the way the talks is lacklustre, no excitement, no interest in his alleged discovery at all.
what the hell is up with the audio?
Giant microphone, crap audio
I know. I hate that it's difficult to hear him, because he's brilliant
Pity about the audio.
what i don't get is if this is all true, then at various points in human history where we believed in things that were later proven untrue why would those untrue things not have just manifested? Seems to be a bit of a stretch that we're just operating on an agreed reality and we can actually go super saiyan if we all believed. The ending kinda fell apart but im not too familiar with most of this so I may be very off in my interpretation of the info.
Yea, I don't think "super saiyan"(thats funny AF btw) is "permitted"(weather via design or otherwise). I'd argue that there is ample evidence that intent absolutely can & does modify the probabilities of future outcomes, BUT it is only within the window of that thing's/event's "natural uncertainty". Where the uncertainty is low is where we find "reality"(both inner & shared/consensus) to be approximately "objective". Where it is high, is where we can change it the most. But the windows are typically small precisely bc its a shared reality/multi-player game, & even the "unconscious intents"(oxymoron), also beliefs & expectations etc., push things in opposing directions. Of course those +/-'s window #'s could change as we evolve, especially If there is an "evaluative/administrative component" to "the source"(such as a Rendering Engine Admin in Campbell's LCS for instance). Or even in the case where the whole thing is much less or even not at all "intentional", as in Kastrup's Altars, there's little reason to think such things would have to remain fixed indefinitely, as the evidence is quite clear that pretty much everything evolves. I think such notions can hold water in virtually(no pun) ANY Idealism based model. Campbell has a notion of a PSI uncertainty principle, where you can bend the rules much further in private, & perhaps even break them but NOT if/when the news crew shows up, simply bc our "average quality of being" isn't ready, as it could threaten the whole purpose of "physical"(the game/soul lab experiment). There always has to be some "plausible deniability"(for the time being anyway). Though regardless, PSI does seem to be an intrinsic feedback mechanism of this reality to varying extents already, which is quite interesting imo all on its own(no meta-physics even required). Though the main reason the whole thing is still taboo & has stagnated is bc we do need new/different(even old/recycled ie. Idealism) mataphical paradigms & models such as Campbell's VR's or Kastup's Alters etc..
Yes, thank you!
Sound is awful...
Wish he had a better mic or set up
Even if we don’t remove measuring device. We can solve the measuring device using pure logic. Macroscopic measuring devices are made of quantum particles and must evolve via the Schrödinger equation. Decoherence and interaction alone does not solve the problem. This creates a chain of particles that leads to something nonlocal (the von Neumann chain). Anton Zeilinger’s experiment ruled out Hidden variables. Consciousness is the only answer. Consciousness causes collapse
Its not the eye that changes the wave effect, because i did this at home with laser, and looking before the slit or after the slit had no effect, the result is always wave pattern... Soo its the device that is altering something...? By the way what if one slit has a polarized lens in an angle of 90 comparing to the other slit.. will they still interact? And stop interfering? Guess not..
46:08 "It's weird stuff" as some 'thing' weird shoots across the screen.....
Also someone coughed, maybe this was a pre-covid warning =P
More likely is that the "interpretation" of the test results is a function of the opinion of the interpreter. So, to get the Nobel Price for finding the higgs boson you need to present a sigma five test result or hit them over the head. But this cannot be a factor in your tests (30:00). Yet the "trained personnel", those who are "meditators" always created more significant mind-matter interference.
A series of newly proposed, innovative quantum wave-particle duality experiments (variations on classical double slit) has the potential to clearly demonstrate whether or not material reality is actually virtual. These experiments constrain all variables so that the only possible explanation/reason for “probability wave function collapse,” if that happens, will be because a conscious observer has knowledge of, or potential knowledge of, the which-way data. Which would mean that consciousness - or, more precisely, the availability of the which-way data to conscious observers - is, indeed, the one and only reason for “probability wave function collapse."
The team who wrote the peer reviewed paper includes physicists and mathematicians from NASA, JPL and Cal Tech. They're currently forming a 501c3 to raise funding for the experimental set-up. From the paper:
On rendering reality: It is now well understood in the emerging science of Uncertainty Quantification that low complexity computation must be performed with hierarchies of multi-fidelity models. It is also now well understood, in the domain of game development, that low computational complexity requires rendering/displaying content only when observed by a player. Recent games, such as No-Man’s Sky and Boundless, have shown that vast open universes (potentially including “over 18 quintillion planets with their own sets of flora and fauna”) are made feasible by creating content, only at the moment the corresponding information becomes available for observation by a player, through randomized generation techniques (such as procedural generation). Therefore, to minimize computational complexity in the simulation theory, the system performing the simulation would render reality only at the moment the corresponding information becomes available for observation by a conscious observer …
Hopefully the experiments will be undertaken relatively soon: www.ijqf.org/wps/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/IJQF2017v3n3p2.pdf
Mind blowing! It's interesting notice that if you setup a experiment to test the possibility of simulation you won't be considered crazy or New Age. I liked the way they approached the problem without sound too crank.
Reality is a marriage of "Total Recall" (the old one with Schwarzenegger) and "The Sims". Scientists prefer to use No-Mans Sky and Boundless, same thing.
hmm.. yeah i might have a guess about it.. but its pretty wierd and im no scientist.. and im not expanding on it. hehe. gotta learn more first
It does not work because the mind in not conscious. It just intervenes consciousness which is present.
Observation isn't a physical phenomenon, it's an idea. The counter interferes with the result. If you had the result translated to a written description and read to a person, you'd find the same result even though no person "observed" the result.
I just got the idea:
No keys, just portable probability wave interdimensional portal that opens a portal to your home anywhere in any space.
I wish someone could really makes those while we're here.
Well in principle you might be able to do it psychically as with Remote Viewing (clairvoyance) and possibly anywhere in time whether past, present, or future.
With the device housed in a classic British, blue police box, even better.
@RodCornholio
Hmm, for some reason that sounds familiar... a companion here and there so you don't go home alone?
@Lawshorizon O.K. but you go first.
If you wanted to physically and solidly go from one location to another, in space and time, then all you have to do is convince nature (the quantum information system) that you "are" at that location and, per consequence, "be" at that location. It's the same with healing effects -- convince nature that you are well and you will be well (e.g. using visualization). So far, it looks like no one has been successful at location-shifting (other then a few stories which may or may not be true); however, there's been some remarkable success with healing effects.
Native Americans were aware of consciousness when we got here . Their medicine men could bent laws of matter connect other dimension and even connect with those who had died....read book Rolling Thunder by Menninger foundation research. Around 1970
94valeRa01 bending different realities. Physical plane compared to spiritual/astral/dream realm.
The actual problem, the issue, that control the experience of the experiments is the internal intention. Even while one observes ones own self, one's own thought, removing an expectation is nearly impossible, not impossible but improbable. To be that silent, that aware, one must enter the state of Being Light. To do that, one must release every attachment to any perception. At this point, unless one knows how to exit that state of loss of attatchment, all perceptions become moot, pointless, meaningless. Its at this point that either everything or nothing makes sense. Scientists cannot do this typically. It crossed the line from probable in a single person to repeating the experience experiment. That is why proving God, spirit, psychic, etc remains impossible due to the improbability. Those eho know, know. Those who who do not, cannot, at least most of the time.
To be historically accurate, you should get a cartoon that showed the science establishment of Galileo's day refusing to look through his telescope, those are the people who were the biggest opponents of Copernican cosmology. Copernicus dedicated his book to a Pope and noted that another Pope and numerous bishops, Cardinals and his fellow priests had supported his work and encouraged him to publish.
Galileo would have escaped any trouble if he hadn't stupidly made fun of the current Pope in his book, late Renaissance Popes were notably touchy about being poked fun of. It was bishops in the Vatican who were some of Galileo's staunchest supporters, his biggest enemies were the academic scientists who had a professional interest in the Ptolemaic system.
We're in the same place today. Classical science transitioning to quantum science and the resistance is palpable. Reality is what you focus on, so forget the truth deniers, they don't exist, literally.
Observation doesn't change the behaviour. Measurement does. It has nothing to do with consciousness or the "observer" as a person.
Shawn McLaughlin exactly the idea that subjective consciousness can even Have an effect on the waves and particle is silly. Typical new age woo hoo. Amazing how many folks on UA-cam are willing to fill their ego with a false idea. I guess many folks are so determined to believe in idealism.
Free Thinker what is it about the measurement itself that collapses the function then?
Good to have you here, since I have heard this argument being made many times in the past and always wanted to understand it. So can you explain where and how was the "measurement" happening in the concrete experiment that Dean performed 17 times and which repeatedly led to highly significant results? And how was in these experiments the measurement different when experienced meditators were used compared to when non non-meditators or a Linux box were used? And how could you get the same results using basically the same experimental setting but with a measurement device or approach that does /not/ involve a human observer?
+Shawn McLaughlin what science do you base that on? you're assuming it, aren't you? science-ism, isn't it?
+Free Thinker your thinking isn't very free, is it? no one said idealism. address dr radin's science and math, why don't you?
or don't you want to wake up? science is moving on from materialism, necessarily , or it is doomed.
The "looking" part needs to be explained more in depth.
The looking is actually done by the machine or a sensor which emits EM waves which interact with the particle/wave going through the slit.
awesome
Is it possible that these results could be from faith? Many religions would say faith has the power to affect the world around us.
dean deserves better sound
Sibilance is apparently teaching for real.
You should look into a person called the Holy Spirit
I love how the "intelligent" videos on UA-cam don't have stupid or negative commentators. Looks like smarter people interested in smarter topics filters out the idiots and thus negativity lol
Have you seen the comments here? The resistance to truth is astounding, from the religious scientists themselves (a.k.a. classical "scientists")
Does the brains processing speed have any relation to the chnage in particles, so with our observation and our added brain power we bring the wave to a slower speed to help maintain an environment to navigate ,,, so the body and mind has over time come to find the perfect spectrum to manouver in ... if we are the whole everything then we are within it we arent separte beings observing it we are the very thing so everything is moving relatively and this also means we are and our senses too all interconnected ,,
I dont know anything really i just say things 🎉,
It just fascinates me that our observations are illusion but real ones to us but on the grand scale things are vibrations and just stuff and our senses fitting in the place they do just give rise to our reality and spectrum ...
Fuck knows 😂