Quantum Suicide and Immortality - General

Heres something, If I had a machine which shot in my general area randomly I would be in billions of consciousnesses at once by this theory. This theory can only sustain itself in flawless environments with only two outcomes which anyone can make. I could say "When you aren't observed a non solid apparition of a demon appears on the back of your head and controls your thoughts. Disprove me."

[QUOTE=Thlis;16541367]You explode from your body decompressing rapidly. It has nothing to do with the perfect chances that you could phase through a wall.[/QUOTE] Atoms exist as probability waves. The central point of that wave is where the atom is usualy found, as its most likely. BUT it is possible to find it anywhere else within that wave, gradualy becoming less and less likey as the wave goes. Because of this, there is a possibility that you woulden't explode at all. It's the same scenario as the nuke. You could be standing right next to a warhead as it goes off and still have a possibility of it destroying everything around you but missing you - the reason being that the atoms from the explosion all miss your atoms - probability VERY VERY low - but still possible. [editline]05:26PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Thlis;16541429]Heres something, If I had a machine which shot in my general area randomly I would be in billions of consciousnesses at once by this theory. This theory can only sustain itself in flawless environments with only two outcomes which anyone can make. I could say "When you aren't observed a demon appears on the back of your head and controls your thoughts. Disprove me."[/QUOTE] Your first sentence is correct, only to add that its not really about conciousness. Conciousness is irrellevent. Its about alternate realities created by the wave properties of quantum particles. Its nothing to do with flawless environments either. In fact this happens every instance in nature, every time wavefunction collapses - ie two particles interacting. Your final sentence - as long as it didn't break the laws of physics, it could happen. Though there is no scientific foundation for the whole devil thing, and the whole concept is unfalsifiable - and hense not worth talking about. THIS theory however HAS been backed up. It is something which the greatest scientists in the world have been working on for over a century. Einstein died still trying to understand the true nature of QM.

Try being in space without life support, there is no chance of survival.

[QUOTE=Thlis;16541560]Try being in space without life support, there is no chance of survival.[/QUOTE] Yes there is. Its almost infintely small, but the chance still exists. Its hard to comprehend. But it doesnt violate any physical laws.

[QUOTE=Kade;16541598]Yes there is. Its almost infintely small, but the chance still exists. Its hard to comprehend. But it doesnt violate any physical laws.[/QUOTE] No there isn't, You're blood would look as if it was boiling, you would die of extreme heat or cold or radiation, you would have no oxygen to breath nor any food to eat or drink. A theory which disregards probability in favour of 50 50 is as good as a flask made from dung and serves no real world purpose.

[QUOTE=Thlis;16541560]Try being in space without life support, there is no chance of survival.[/QUOTE] NO THERE IS AN INFINITELY SMALL POSSIBILITY THAT YOU TURN INTO A MASSIVE ROBOT AND SURVIVEl!

If quantum mechanics is a correct theory, then a universe must exist where my fingers are made of sausages.

[QUOTE=Sh33p;16541677]If quantum mechanics is a correct theory, then a universe must exist where my fingers are made of sausages.[/QUOTE] You forgot "When not observed"

[QUOTE=Thlis;16541635]No there isn't, You're blood would look as if it was boiling, you would die of extreme heat or cold or radiation, you would have no oxygen to breath nor any food to eat or drink. A theory which disregards probability in favour of 50 50 is as good as a flask made from dung and serves no real world purpose.[/QUOTE] A perfect example of someone who doesn't understand the thread topic. You could survive in space but the chance is probably smaller than one in a billion billion billion billion etc. That's why it doesn't happen, but there is a universe where it does happen, even if the person only lived for a nanosecond.

[QUOTE=Kade;16541598]Yes there is. Its almost infintely small, but the chance still exists. Its hard to comprehend. But it doesnt violate any physical laws.[/QUOTE] No, no no no. You die after 15 seconds, which is the time it takes for the oxygen-deprived blood to reach your brain.

[QUOTE=Thlis;16541560]Try being in space without life support, there is no chance of survival.[/QUOTE] If you were recompressed within a few minutes, there's still a fairly good chance you'd live. Who knows, maybe you'll be lucky enough to be rescued.

[QUOTE=halflife_123;16541712]A perfect example of someone who doesn't understand the thread topic. You could survive in space but the chance is probably smaller than one in a billion billion billion billion etc. That's why it doesn't happen, but there is a universe where it does happen, even if the person only lived for a nanosecond.[/QUOTE] I think he understands the topic fine, but the chance isn't even 1 in a billion billion etc, it is 0%. Death in a condition like the vaccuum of space is not derived by chance, but by your own biological body, if you stay in space for more than 20 seconds, you will die. It's not a 50/50 chance every millisecond that you will die, it is literally 0%. Death isn't governed by chance. Actually, I searched around for a bit. READ THIS:[url]http://www.damninteresting.com/outer-space-exposure[/url] You can survive about 2 minutes without irreversible damage. YOU WILL STILL DIE WITHOUT OUTER HELP.

I think people need to stop thinking of ways to spoil the theory, all you really need to understand is that in our universe the improbable things such as surviving in space or being shot in the head and living won't happen, but there is a universe where those things do happen.

[QUOTE=halflife_123;16541806]I think people need to stop thinking of ways to spoil the theory, all you really need to understand is that in our universe the improbable things such as surviving in space or being shot in the head and living won't happen, but there is a universe where those things do happen.[/QUOTE] That is a great way to maintain a scientific theory, Don't criticize or discuss, just accept it.

[QUOTE=SeRo-;16541762]I think he understands the topic fine, but the chance isn't even 1 in a billion billion etc, it is 0%. Death in a condition like the vaccuum of space is not derived by chance, but by your own biological body, if you stay in space for more than 20 seconds, you will die. It's not a 50/50 chance every millisecond that you will die, it is literally 0%. Death isn't governed by chance.[/QUOTE] Exactly, death is governed by natural laws, and if you just so happen to be in a Universe where the natural laws allow it, you will live. [editline]12:45PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Thlis;16541848]That is a great way to maintain a scientific theory, Don't criticize or discuss, just accept it.[/QUOTE] Hey, it beats String Theory.

as long as you aren't being observed.

[QUOTE=halflife_123;16541806]I think people need to stop thinking of ways to spoil the theory, all you really need to understand is that in our universe the improbable things such as surviving in space or being shot in the head and living won't happen, but there is a universe where those things do happen.[/QUOTE] There is no evidence that a universe like that exists, so do NOT state as fact, that "there is a universe where those things do happen."

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;16541860] Hey, it beats String Theory.[/QUOTE] Well... I don't think that... ... [img]http://img30.imageshack.us/img30/6654/gmdc20touche.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=SeRo-;16541874]There is no evidence that a universe like that exists, so do NOT state as fact, that "there is a universe where those things do happen."[/QUOTE] You cannot also state that there isn't. However, using this hypothesis it can suggested that it might.

You can't make an argument based on the fact that it can't be disproven. I can say that a giant holographic dong appears behind everyones head as long as they aren't being observed. You can't disprove it.

[QUOTE=CamundongoV2;16541905]You cannot also state that there isn't. However, using this hypothesis it can suggested that it might.[/QUOTE] Who should provide the evidence? The one that says there is a magical alternate universe where people can survive being shot in the head with a minigun/shotgun combo, or the one that says there isn't. "Might" isn't good enough to say "there is" [editline]04:51PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Thlis;16541924]You can't make an argument based on the fact that it can't be disproven. I can say that a giant holographic dong appears behind everyones head as long as they aren't being observed. You can't disprove it.[/QUOTE] I used to think that demons appeared everywhere a conciousness couldn't see them.

[QUOTE=Thlis;16541924]You can't make an argument based on the fact that it can't be disproven. I can say that a giant holographic dong appears behind everyones head as long as they aren't being observed. You can't disprove it.[/QUOTE] However, with our knowledge of quantum physics we can hypothesise that the alternate universe theory is true, due to the randomness of quantum particles. What scientific knowledge can lead us to suggest that giant holographic dongs appear behind everyone's head when they aren't being observed.

[QUOTE=professional;16536162]It's bullshit. It completely contradicts anything we've learned and proven about physics and such up to this point. By this Quantum Immortality theory, if a guy jumps off a fucking skyscraper building, he creates split universe where he somehow survives, despite it being IMPOSSIBLE that he survives the fall.[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesna_Vulovic[/url] [editline]12:57PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Canuhearme?;16541860]Hey, it beats String Theory.[/QUOTE] "I don't know much about string theory so I'm going to act like scientists take it on faith."

[QUOTE=CamundongoV2;16541979]However, with our knowledge of quantum physics we can hypothesise that the alternate universe theory is true, due to the randomness of quantum particles.[/QUOTE] Can it be proven though? When not observed the Disney land castle is molested by the holographic apparition of Walt Disney.

I like how people are just thinking of stupid scenarios and asking how they can be proven/disproven.

But when a theory depends on not being observed, how do you prove or disprove it? When not observed, /b/ is sophisticated.

i like how some people in this thread think this theory applies just to immortality and the use of a gun. it applies to everything, every single outcome of every possible aspect of everything. the gun and suicide is just an interesting way of explaining it. that said, it's pretty far fetched for me to actually beleive, but it's easy enough to understand. What's with all the retarded comebacks? Right, bit of a subject change but still regarding quantum physics. The dual slot test mentioned earlier in the thread, does anyone have a simple explination for it? I have a mate who saw that and said the particals responded differently when observed. I said this was probably photons altering the behaviour but he seemed to think that the particals were actually conscious, which brought him to the conclusion that they're 'god'. please bear in mind that i'm fucking useless at explaining what i mean, so if that made no sense then ask.

[QUOTE=Thlis;16542073]Can it be proven though? When not observed the Disney land castle is molested by the holographic apparition of Walt Disney.[/QUOTE] You don't quite understand modern science. Yes, it's not a good thing to have non-testable hypotheses, but our ability to formulate new theories and models far outstrips the rate at which the technology to test these hypotheses is created. Science is less rigorous than you seem to think it is. Most theories in physics aren't proven. Observations of nature may support these theories, but that doesn't mean they're correct. Another explanation that would show similar physical effects could be true. But don't worry. These are scientists. They wouldn't say shit if they weren't fairly sure it accounts for all the data we have so far and follow rationally from the laws of physics we have verified.

How close do these universes diverge off from the point of death?

[QUOTE=Thlis;16542350]How close do these universes diverge off from the point of death?[/QUOTE] Depends on when the change happens that saves the person.