Talk:Observer effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Socrates
Philosophy Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Not sure about the parapsychology bit. The sentence was just clunky before, but now I'm not sure I matched the intent of the original poster. Does anyone have specifics on what the term really means in parapsychology? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.108.101.72 (talk • contribs) .

Contents

[edit] physics? i think not

do not confuse the observer effect with the uncertainty principle. the uncertainty principle has nothing to do with "observing", it has to do with measuring. the observer effect is a supposed effect of observing an event and the influence of your presence on the event. no one would ever have to actually observe a particle's position to obfuscate its momentum, the mere act of using the photons to measure its position, even if nobody ever observed it, would suffice.

don't you have to observe in order to measure?

[edit] Can anyone expand on this fascinating quantum issue?

For some reason this article is more focused on what the observer effect is not. --Nathanael Bar-Aur L. 20:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

From what I understood from other sources, the observer effect is basically the collapsing of a quantum system's wavefunction that happens the moment a measurement in made upon it (by an "observer"), therefore cancelling any superposition that may have existed beforehand, and giving specific definition to the renderings. Is this correct? --Nathanael Bar-Aur L. 20:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


There is a collapse in many interpretations of quantum mechanics. (Not many worlds). Apart from consciousness causes collapse, most interpretations do not put special emphasis on human observers.1Z 22:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

But isn't the term "observer effect" inclusive of mechanical "observation", as seen in the double-slit experiment by the detectors? --Nathanael Bar-Aur L. 00:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
That is a confusing usage. (As a rule, if you have to put scare quotes around a word, its the wrong word...)

1Z 01:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

See Measurement problem 1Z 01:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Then why does the Observer effect in physics link suggest that? --Nathanael Bar-Aur L. 01:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

There is no shortage of people saying that QM is about "observers".1Z 02:17, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


I agree, this article is in need of a clearer explanation or current state of theory. Just saying that the 'photon' causes 'interaction' is not really an explanation. Preroll 23:21, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I too would like to see this section expanded, but I'm not an expert on the subject. Cazort (talk) 18:50, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] please, explain who is Wheeler, I dont see references

The text is the following:

...From this point of view, there is no 'observer effect', only one vastly entangled quantum system. A significant minority still find the equations point to an observer; Wheeler, who probably worked more deeply on this subject than any physicist thus far, devised a graphic in which the universe was represented by a "U" with an eye on one end, turned around and viewing itself, to describe his understanding...

Who is Wheeler?

J.A. Wheeler??????

Yes. I don't know when you wrote this but (at least now) there is a link to John Archibald Wheeler in the article. Speaking of this article's references, I wish I could see more in general. 70.59.146.224 (talk) 13:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Use in Pseudoscience

How about a use in pseudoscience section. People interpret the meaning of the double-slit experiment to be "thoughts influence reality" like in The Secret. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.219.81.194 (talk) 04:31, 13 January 2008 (UTC)