Quantum Suicide and Immortality - General

[QUOTE=Neolk;16566265]They won't, because you exist in a universe, your conscious exists in a universe where he/she is immortal. Unable to die.[/QUOTE] But the organic material of your body has to cease to be in a human form anymore so what happens to your conciousness then? Are we saying the conciousness inhabits another body when it's orignal host eventually ceases to exist in any universe? Essentially reincarnation? [editline]09:24PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Kade;16566529]There will always be a (almost infinately small) probability that you would live another second, and another and so on and so on, forever. The probability would keep going down, but it would still be possible and - according to this interpretation of QM - does happen in some alternate realities.[/QUOTE] But how come we have never known of a person who has lived forever? Surely with the sheer amount of people who have been born since humans first came about there would be at least some universes where there is an "immortal" person. My god this topic is just mind bending

[quote]But how come we have never known of a person who has lived forever? Surely with the sheer amount of people who have been born since humans first came about there would be at least some universes where there is an "immortal" person. My god this topic is just mind bending[/quote] It is very improbable that this is a reality where it will happen. But with a near infinite amount of alternate realities it would have to happen somewhere. But we wouldn’t necessarily know about them, because we are stuck in this reality where most of the time the most probable thing does happen - though sometimes not (as with Quantum Tunnelling). The amount of realities is equal to the number of outcomes of a decoherent system multiplied by the amount of particle interactions which have ever taken place. That’s a huge number, ever increasing with time. All of this has been mentioned previously in this thread. [editline]09:36PM[/editline] [QUOTE=TurtlePower;16566725]But the organic material of your body has to cease to be in a human form anymore so what happens to your conciousness then? Are we saying the conciousness inhabits another body when it's orignal host eventually ceases to exist in any universe? Essentially reincarnation?[/QUOTE] It would never have to 100% cease to be in human form. There is always going to be a minute possibility of the body surviving the next instance. This has nothing to do with existentialist bullshit.

[QUOTE=TurtlePower;16566725]But the organic material of your body has to cease to be in a human form anymore so what happens to your conciousness then? Are we saying the conciousness inhabits another body when it's orignal host eventually ceases to exist in any universe? Essentially reincarnation? [editline]09:24PM[/editline] But how come we have never known of a person who has lived forever? Surely with the sheer amount of people who have been born since humans first came about there would be at least some universes where there is an "immortal" person. My god this topic is just mind bending[/QUOTE] The idea of things breaking down occurs to -others- in the universe that your consciousness exists. Perhaps when time comes, your organic material doesn't break down, because your consciousness creates you to be immortal. There likely is a universe with an immortal person, it just isn't in -our- universe. All the time people have died they rest in our universe. But in the world where they survive, well, they go to another universe.

[QUOTE=TurtlePower;16566725]But how come we have never known of a person who has lived forever? Surely with the sheer amount of people who have been born since humans first came about there would be at least some universes where there is an "immortal" person. My god this topic is just mind bending[/QUOTE] The chances of being immortal are mind-bendingly small. And yes, there would be universes with immortal people in them. There would be universes where everyone is immortal too. But the chances of it occuring to a person are tiny. Really, really tiny.

Holy crap. I think...I mean...No wait. Almost got it. Fuck me, this is too much.

this is all rather conceptual.

[QUOTE=aVoN;16560612] Here is an example: The particles spin-wave-function is, as said before, a coherent superposition of all possible spin-directions. This means, it is a sum of the wavefunction with spin-up and spin-down. [img]http://math.daggeringcats.com/?|\Psi > = |Up> + |Down>[/img] This is the state of the particle's spin before you measure. It is neither [img]http://math.daggeringcats.com/?|Up >[/img] nor [img]http://math.daggeringcats.com/?|Down>[/img], it is both at once. Now you measure. With a chance of 1/2 you get either [img]http://math.daggeringcats.com/?|Up >[/img] or [img]http://math.daggeringcats.com/?|Down >[/img]. After measuring it, you know exactly in which state it is and measuring it infinite times more gives the same result. You might now say "this is all mathematical bullshit" and the reason why physicist write it as a "sum of all possible states" is because "we don't know in which state it is". But there are actually experiments which clearly have shown that the particle really is in all spin-configurations at once, as long as you don't measure. (Done with e.g. interference effects where two or more particles - states of both particles not measured yet - have been brought to interference which showed that actually the complete sum of all states interfered, not only that part which got measured later) Many-world-interpreatation now simply interprets this effect of "we only know the state of a particle after measuring and before it is totally unclear" with the other chances the particle could be in a different state will become true in a different "universe": A parrallele world.[/QUOTE] Couldn't the spin of the particle be caused by the instruments , and not it being "observed?" And whats to the the device wouldn't just randomly measure the spin as up, and that's that? How would it measure it a second time. Alternate universe I consider plausible, but what I really don't believe in is the concept that consciousness as special proprieties in this kind of thing, such as being persist ant through realities.

[QUOTE=lmaoboat;16568124]Couldn't the spin of the particle be caused by the instruments , and not it being "observed?" And whats to the the device wouldn't just randomly measure the spin as up, and that's that? How would it measure it a second time. Alternate universe I consider plausible, but what I really don't believe in is the concept that consciousness as special proprieties in this kind of thing, such as being persist ant through realities.[/QUOTE] Its not that consciousness has special properties, its just that when your time splits and in one you die, one you survive, you wouldn’t have been able to [i]perceive[/i] your death, because you would be dead. The only one you could still consciously perceive would be the one where your still alive. Its similar to how people often say how lucky we are to have the earth, coz all the conditions are right - whereas I'd say it isn’t luck, it’s just out of the billions of worlds out there there had to be at least a few, and if we weren’t here to perceive it then we wouldn’t be counting ourselves lucky in the first place. Also as for the device measuring thing, it’s not random its probabilistic. This has been proven in experiments where they prepare an electron in a magnetic field and then re-orientate the field and judging whether or not it emits a photon as it re-orientates itself. The less re-orientating it has to do, the lesser chance there was of said particle emitting the photon. Even when the electron had a miniscule amount of reorientation to do, in a very low percentage of tests it would still emit the photon - showing the low probability of its spin being in the opposite direction. This system proved that the spin of an electron has only two possible states, up or down.

I just wanted to drop by and say how awesome this thread is.

God did it. things all cleared up? (too bad it isn't this easy huh?)

[QUOTE=Kade;16568717]Its not that consciousness has special properties, its just that when your time splits and in one you die, one you survive, you wouldn’t have been able to [i]perceive[/i] your death, because you would be dead. The only one you could still consciously perceive would be the one where your still alive. Its similar to how people often say how lucky we are to have the earth, coz all the conditions are right - whereas I'd say it isn’t luck, it’s just out of the billions of worlds out there there had to be at least a few, and if we weren’t here to perceive it then we wouldn’t be counting ourselves lucky in the first place. .[/QUOTE] But if you shoot yourself, you're most likely going to die whether or not reality splits into universes where you live,

[QUOTE=lmaoboat;16568124]Couldn't the spin of the particle be caused by the instruments , and not it being "observed?" And whats to the the device wouldn't just randomly measure the spin as up, and that's that? How would it measure it a second time. Alternate universe I consider plausible, but what I really don't believe in is the concept that consciousness as special proprieties in this kind of thing, such as being persist ant through realities.[/QUOTE] The spin direction of the particle is unclear as long as you don't measure. Then the external magnetic field defines first of all the direction (e.g. in z-direction) but not the orientation (up/down) of the spin. And "observing" actually means "sending something to it and waiting for a response" of course, so yes. To the "measure it a second time": This is the collapse of the wave function. First of all, the particle is in a superposition of several states ("Schrödingers Cat is dead [b]and[/b] alive as long as you don't take it out the box with the death-device"). Then you measure in which of the several states the particle really is ("You take out the cat of the box and look if it lives and see, if it is dead [b]or[/b] alive"). If you measure once more, it will of course be still in this state ("Schrödingers Cat is still dead [b]or[/b] alive since it is not in the box with the death-device anymore"). Here is an example timeline Not measured Measured first Measured second time State A ----------------------| -------------------- | ------------------------- State B ----------------------| If you do the same experiment once more with another similar particle, you may get Not measured Measured first Measured second time State A ----------------------| State B ----------------------| -------------------- | ------------------------- But it won't change to B in a second measurement once it has been determined to be in A. That the particle really is in superposition (sum) of all states A [b]and[/b] B and not just only predefined as "A" [b]or[/b] "B" before measurement has been shown in experiments where several particles in such a "compound state" have been brought to interference.

[QUOTE=lmaoboat;16569405]But if you shoot yourself, you're most likely going to die whether or not reality splits into universes where you live,[/QUOTE] Yeah that’s true. But it is still theoretically possible that it could be this reality - just very improbable. The thing about consciousness is that we cannot comprehend having alternate versions of ourselves being created in every instant, and every one of these selves believing (quite accurately) that they are the [i]'real'[/i] person. Its confusing because we only observe our conscious development as a linear path from past to future, whereas according to this theory, the amount of realities (and thus versions of you consciousness) pan out over time, essentially creating new time paths. It's much easier to envisage this whole thing if you think of humans as inanimate objects rather than humans. This way it removes the complications that arise from our own personal perception. [editline]12:39AM[/editline] [QUOTE=aVoN;16569564]The spin direction of the particle is unclear as long as you don't measure. Then the external magnetic field defines first of all the direction (e.g. in z-direction) but not the orientation (up/down) of the spin. And "observing" actually means "sending something to it and waiting for a response" of course, so yes. To the "measure it a second time": This is the collapse of the wave function. First of all, the particle is in a superposition of several states ("Schrödingers Cat is dead [b]and[/b] alive as long as you don't take it out the box with the death-device"). Then you measure in which of the several states the particle really is ("You take out the cat of the box and look if it lives and see, if it is dead [b]or[/b] alive"). If you measure once more, it will of course be still in this state ("Schrödingers Cat is still dead [b]or[/b] alive since it is not in the box with the death-device anymore"). Here is an example timeline Not measured Measured first Measured second time State A ----------------------| -------------------- | ------------------------- State B ----------------------| If you do the same experiment once more with another similar particle, you may get Not measured Measured first Measured second time State A ----------------------| State B ----------------------| -------------------- | ------------------------- But it won't change to B in a second measurement once it has been determined to be in A. That the particle really is in superposition (sum) of all states A [b]and[/b] B and not just only predefined as "A" [b]or[/b] "B" before measurement has been shown in experiments where several particles in such a "compound state" have been brought to interference.[/QUOTE] Agreed, though the timeline thing only works for Qparticles held in place by a magnetic field. When you're talking about Schrödingers cat, when we get to the second measurement it could change state from alive to dead - as it is a new wavefunction which is collapsing with the measurement. The reverse is also possible, though totaly mind-blowing. The cat [i]could[/i] change from a dead state to an alive state, as it is merely a collection of particles. If these were found to be in the right orientation when the box was opened the second time then the cat [i]could[/i] be alive again - though this is very very improbable.

I wonder if we ever get to travel between different dimensions, I mean time travel might be possible and this would be like the next step. I seriously doubt it, but it would be awesome.

[QUOTE=ZomBuster;16570366]I wonder if we ever get to travel between different dimensions, I mean time travel might be possible and this would be like the next step. I seriously doubt it, but it would be awesome.[/QUOTE] Hope it doesn't turn out like "The Mist". That movies ending is freaking mean. I don't think dimensional shifting would be a next step, I do not understand the science behind it, but time travel is knowing where things where (going back) but going forward is just a matter of speed. Where shifting dimensions could be more dangerous and a lot harder, as a simple change in the orbit speed of the earth in the destination dimension would cause you to end up in space, then your dead.

my brain exploded and it imploded in a parallel universe

Somewhere in another universe a rock materializes above my head and kills me

[QUOTE=ZomBuster;16570366]I wonder if we ever get to travel between different dimensions, I mean time travel might be possible and this would be like the next step. I seriously doubt it, but it would be awesome.[/QUOTE] That would mean The Combine exist, and they would notice our tunneling and invade us.

[QUOTE=Fishyfish vz. 4;16572189]Somewhere in another universe a rock materializes above my head and kills me[/QUOTE] as long as the 'materialization' process didnt break any of the laws of physics :smile:

[QUOTE=Kade;16572481]as long as the 'materialization' process didnt break any of the laws of physics :smile:[/QUOTE] You do realize that in another universe, the laws of physics are probably different?

[QUOTE=Doriol;16572576]You do realize that in another universe, the laws of physics are probably different?[/QUOTE] Yeah, but those universes aren’t really part of this theory. This is mainly directed at 'alternate realities' - parallel universes congruent in physical laws to our own, yet slightly different in terms of development. This theory only really works on those. Other universes with other physical properties may exist - string theory talks a lot about this, but as of yet string theory is still highly experimental and practically un-falsifiable (I read somewhere that they would need a particle accelerator the size of the solar system to test it). Other universes may have physics which don’t rely on QM, so from their perspective, we wouldn't exist at all... 0.o

This is implausible, is you keep on trying to kill yourself but keep on failing, you will eventually die of dehydration.

[QUOTE=mix999;16572889]This is implausible, is you keep on trying to kill yourself but keep on failing, you will eventually die of dehydration.[/QUOTE] [b]Read the damn thread.[/b] I'm not repeating myself again.

[QUOTE=Kizilbash;16569044]God did it. things all cleared up? (too bad it isn't this easy huh?)[/QUOTE] Yea, the universe did it. That's such a better explanation isn't it. I still don't see the difference between "God did it" and "The Universe Always existed"

[QUOTE=Kade;16573076][b]Read the damn thread.[/b] I'm not repeating myself again.[/QUOTE] You're just mad because quantum mechanics is the magic section of science.

[QUOTE=Sams Brume;16580043]You're just mad because quantum mechanics is the magic section of science.[/QUOTE] HAHAHAHAHAAHA. Burn. I lol'd. Hard.

[QUOTE=Sams Brume;16580043]You're just mad because quantum mechanics is the magic section of science.[/QUOTE] lol. Define 'magic'. I mean its very unintuitive yeah, but there isn’t anything mystical about it. Without it we wouldn’t have most of our modern day appliances. I’m just agitated from doing this :bang: each time someone asks a menial question without reading the actual thread. [editline]03:00PM[/editline] [quote]Much of modern technology operates at a scale where quantum effects are significant. Examples include the laser, the transistor, the electron microscope, and magnetic resonance imaging. The study of semiconductors led to the invention of the diode and the transistor, which are indispensable for modern electronics. Researchers are currently seeking robust methods of directly manipulating quantum states. Efforts are being made to develop quantum cryptography, which will allow guaranteed secure transmission of information. A more distant goal is the development of quantum computers, which are expected to perform certain computational tasks exponentially faster than classical computers. Another active research topic is quantum teleportation, which deals with techniques to transmit quantum states over arbitrary distances. In many devices, even the simple light switch, quantum tunneling is vital, as otherwise the electrons in the electric current could not penetrate the potential barrier made up, in the case of the light switch, of a layer of oxide. Flash memory chips found in USB drives also use quantum tunneling to erase their memory cells.[/quote] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics[/url]

If it's true, people who try to commit suicide must be frustrated of never dying.

[QUOTE=mix999;16572889]This is implausible, is you keep on trying to kill yourself but keep on failing, you will eventually die of dehydration.[/QUOTE] Ah, but in one of these universes, an ample quantity of fresh water will quantum tunnel its way into your stomach.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16581195]Ah, but in one of these universes, an ample quantity of fresh water will quantum tunnel its way into your stomach.[/QUOTE] Which makes absolutely [sp]no[/sp] a lot of sense.