how could it not?

An observation is defined as something that collapses a wave function. For example, in the Schrodinger's Cat paradox, the thing making the observation isn't the person that looks inside the box. It's the Geiger counter that does or does not detect the radiation.

Think about what it would mean for the opposite to be true. If a sentient being were required for a quantum mechanical observation to occur, then that would have to mean that quantum mechanics did not apply to anything earlier than ~200,000 years ago (when homo sapiens first appeared on Earth), and it continues to not apply anywhere mankind has not "observed."

oh i was assuming you meant human observation doesn't require human interaction

ok technically no, but if a HUMAN observes it, it requires human interaction

/e



didn't see this post lol

This post was edited by Casey on Feb 28 2011 07:22am

Obviously, if I were talking about something human-specific then it would require human interaction.


Err, duh?

speed of light is constant.
gravity is instantaneous, and may not be constrained to just THIS universe
tachyons move faster than light
a human cannot OBSERVE anything moving faster than light
Einstein's "spooky interaction at a distance" is faster than light
as for thought...you have to better define what you mean by thought..measurements of stimulus and response have nerve impulses at approx. 88 Mph

...and everyone knows that the answer to Life the Universe and Everything is.....42 :/

This post was edited by ghot on Feb 28 2011 12:01pm

i think you mean to just our 3 observable dimensions

obviously other universes could and probably do contain the same fundamental forces

The big bang was pretty fast, from a show I watched last night it expanded from the size of a baseball to the solar system in a short time. Idk if that's really relevant as it is a theory.

but i dont believe in the big bang theory

what part or portion of the theory do you believe is false?