Quantum Mechanics Debunked

[wildflower]

Just watching this video, can anyone clarify some things. While I agree with the main thesis, the panpsychist view, and myself have studied QM casually, there seems some inaccuracies:

Leo states that superposition apples to an elephant and that when no one looks it exists in an infinite number of possible states including all other animals. This isn't correct, the wave function exists a probability distribution, sure, but the size of the wave function is exponentially inversely related to the size of mass. So particles have a relatively huge wave function compared to their size, and highly volatile probability, where as a large mass has almost infinitesimally small wave function, and has a very very very certain probability of certain properties. Applying QM principals to large mass in this context isn't correct, while there might be a infinitesimally small change to a large object (much smaller than any tool we have to measure it), it wouldn't be anywhere near from an elephant to a mouse

[wildflower]

Also again he makes the following hardcore solipsistic claim - can someone confirm whether he still actually believes that none of us exist when hes looking or speaking to us, as he's mostly ignored or equivocated:

 

you're not looking at your child that

55:05

child exists as infinity as nothingness

55:08

when you're not looking at elephant it's

55:10

infinity its nothingness we're not

55:12

looking at your house it's infinity it's

55:13

nothingness

55:18

that's what it is that's also what you

55:22

 

[wildflower]

He also continually states you need to die to embody the truth he has discovered for himself and is teaching, but he is quite clearly alive, how does he explain this contradiction?

[wildflower]

Again, just want to say I agree with his main thesis, and I have directly become conscious of the multiverse superposition onto reality. It is actually explained by Jungs work synchronicity to a certain degree. 

[Inliytened1]

1 hour ago, wildflower said:

Just watching this video, can anyone clarify some things. While I agree with the main thesis, the panpsychist view, and myself have studied QM casually, there seems some inaccuracies:

Leo states that superposition apples to an elephant and that when no one looks it exists in an infinite number of possible states including all other animals. This isn't correct, the wave function exists a probability distribution, sure, but the size of the wave function is exponentially inversely related to the size of mass. So particles have a relatively huge wave function compared to their size, and highly volatile probability, where as a large mass has almost infinitesimally small wave function, and has a very very very certain probability of certain properties. Applying QM principals to large mass in this context isn't correct, while there might be a infinitesimally small change to a large object (much smaller than any tool we have to measure it), it wouldn't be anywhere near from an elephant to a mouse

You need to drop science to awaken dude.  

[wildflower]

9 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

You need to drop science to awaken dude.  

I just want to talk about science for a bit as I enjoy science, is that allowed?

Edited August 10, 2021 by wildflower

[Adamq8]

What is a wave?

What is a wave particle duality?

Is virtual photons real or is it a pure abstraction?

Does Light really have a speed?

[Adamq8]

7 hours ago, wildflower said:

He also continually states you need to die to embody the truth he has discovered for himself and is teaching, but he is quite clearly alive, how does he explain this contradiction?

, you dont have to physical die to die before you die.

The ego or the you has to die for reality to shine through exactly as it is in itself without prejudice and a veil of beliefs covering up reality as it is.

 

[Adamq8]

I would suggest you check out Theoria Apophasis on Youtube and why the likes of nikola tesla and Maxwell etc is true scientist and they did not in any way shape or form agree with the dualism created by Einstein, im just getting into this and it is very interesting, i can not say I understand anything of it, just a little perhaps,  but check out the channel and view the videos about the ether and magnetism etc ??@wildflower

[Corpus]

10 hours ago, wildflower said:

He also continually states you need to die to embody the truth he has discovered for himself and is teaching, but he is quite clearly alive, how does he explain this contradiction?

The contradictions arise as a consequence through, and as a function of, language;  if the comments were read out loud then with a little contemplation it becomes apparent that the sound of the words uttered are a means of representation of ideas whereby meaning is applied and conferred to what are simply sounds. What is probably meant by "die" refers to death of the ego; if one contemplates further then one may discern that the ego is not actually alive, and hence subject to dying so the whole notion is a linguistic quirk which comes with the use of language. Hence the only real way to grok this stuff is to understand how language creates and limits the transmission of ideas. Ways of knowing are accessible which can transcend language, and attempting to experience stuff through a linguistic mode only will hamper progress. 

[wildflower]

7 minutes ago, Corpus said:

The contradictions arise as a consequence through, and as a function of, language;  if the comments were read out loud then with a little contemplation it becomes apparent that the sound of the words uttered are a means of representation of ideas whereby meaning is applied and conferred to what are simply sounds. What is probably meant by "die" refers to death of the ego; if one contemplates further then one may discern that the ego is not actually alive, and hence subject to dying so the whole notion is a linguistic quirk which comes with the use of language. Hence the only real way to grok this stuff is to understand how language creates and limits the transmission of ideas. Ways of knowing are accessible which can transcend language, and attempting to experience stuff through a linguistic mode only will hamper progress. 

Well no, it's not hard to say ego-death is it? It's just extremely poor communication. Thats not actually all of it, he says you die and all of reality is annhilated, so he isn't just referring to ego-death. You see how confusing this is, even you are confused, you just don't know it

[wildflower]

2 hours ago, Adamq8 said:

What is a wave?

What is a wave particle duality?

Is virtual photons real or is it a pure abstraction?

Does Light really have a speed?

None of these questions are addressed in the video. But let me just answer something that will help, all of science are just models or stories we overlay onto empirically reality, that have utility to do so. None are absolutely true, all are relative, and they all break at some level 

But I've asked specific questions regarding Leos video, can you answer those (not sure if you can), if not no worries

[Corpus]

18 minutes ago, wildflower said:

Well no, it's not hard to say ego-death is it? It's just extremely poor communication. Thats not actually all of it, he says you die and all of reality is annhilated, so he isn't just referring to ego-death. You see how confusing this is, even you are confused, you just don't know it

Again, see how hung-up you are on the words? You may be happier if "ego-death" as a descriptor were used but the ego is not alive so cannot die if we consider death and life as opposite counter-points. Ego-death means different things to different readers so the limits of language are not done away with. You appear to think language can transmit in an absolute fashion. That may be the source of the disquiet these communicative efforts are producing in you. 

Language clarifies, but only through the prism you receive or view it through. It is a canny invention. 

If you think reading some text will give a definitive "answer" to an issue then you are missing what is beyond language. You may well have read something in the past, say a text or an item of literature, and then read it again at a later time and gleaned something new or previously unrecognized from the very same "bunch of words". Your thought-stream is not wholly different as its a linguistic construct. Confusion does not have to be the enemy as without it newer perspectives will not be sought or realized. Embrace your confusion! 

[Breakingthewall]

3 hours ago, Adamq8 said:

Does Light really have a speed?

I read that also in a post by leo, that the light is instantaneous. what do you mean? The speed of light is something quite mysterious and strange but its speed is more than proven

[Adamq8]

14 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

I read that also in a post by leo, that the light is instantaneous. what do you mean? The speed of light is something quite mysterious and strange but its speed is more than proven

What proof?

It is the law of conservation of energy that light does not speed back up when entering a glass, it is completly non sensical, to a hammer everything looks like a nail,  to an atomist everything is matter.

Light is not matter, there is no virtual photons 

There has ever only been 2 "theories" about reality, either the Ether, infinite potential, non duality, or the cult of bumping particles, atomism, and ofcourse between these two one can take different aspects etc.

Light according to materialism is a wave particle duality, when has mother nature ever dealt with dualitys?

Mother nature is not a crack pot with a bag of magical particles. 

When has mother nature ever dealt with duality? It is the human mind who seperates everything, we have magnetism over here and electricity over here etc, there is no such distinction in nature

 

 

[wildflower]

56 minutes ago, Corpus said:

Again, see how hung-up you are on the words? You may be happier if "ego-death" as a descriptor were used but the ego is not alive so cannot die if we consider death and life as opposite counter-points. Ego-death means different things to different readers so the limits of language are not done away with. You appear to think language can transmit in an absolute fashion. That may be the source of the disquiet these communicative efforts are producing in you. 

Language clarifies, but only through the prism you receive or view it through. It is a canny invention. 

If you think reading some text will give a definitive "answer" to an issue then you are missing what is beyond language. You may well have read something in the past, say a text or an item of literature, and then read it again at a later time and gleaned something new or previously unrecognized from the very same "bunch of words". Your thought-stream is not wholly different as its a linguistic construct. Confusion does not have to be the enemy as without it newer perspectives will not be sought or realized. Embrace your confusion! 

I'm sorry you have no idea what I speak about when I'm referencing language, and clarification of language. If you take your own logic, no one would ever speak or say anything to anyone. I'm just pointing out your deluded hypocrisy, and how insane it is to communicate like this.

Edited August 10, 2021 by wildflower

[Nahm]

13 hours ago, wildflower said:

Just watching this video, can anyone clarify some things. While I agree with the main thesis, the panpsychist view, and myself have studied QM casually, there seems some inaccuracies:

Leo states that superposition apples to an elephant and that when no one looks it exists in an infinite number of possible states including all other animals. This isn't correct, the wave function exists a probability distribution, sure, but the size of the wave function is exponentially inversely related to the size of mass. So particles have a relatively huge wave function compared to their size, and highly volatile probability, where as a large mass has almost infinitesimally small wave function, and has a very very very certain probability of certain properties. Applying QM principals to large mass in this context isn't correct, while there might be a infinitesimally small change to a large object (much smaller than any tool we have to measure it), it wouldn't be anywhere near from an elephant to a mouse

The wave function appears, or manifests as an appearance. The ‘exponentially inversely related to the size of the mass’ is contingent on ‘size’ of ‘mass’, while ‘size’ is a thought, only relative to another mass, which there is not, which is what e=mc2 reveals. Think of that equation as having been widely misunderstood to be about light, while the insight is really about no mass, or the illusory nature of mass. 

Applying QM to ‘large mass’ in this context is of course perfectly correct. QM reveals there is no “mass” at all. Don’t forget to include “yourself” as non-mass / not-a-separate thing or observer… subject to - really… manifest via. 

13 hours ago, wildflower said:

He also continually states you need to die to embody the truth he has discovered for himself and is teaching, but he is quite clearly alive, how does he explain this contradiction?

He, and me, and you, are as ‘alive’ as Schrödinger's cat. Approaching a black hole, there’s inevitably not he, me, you & a cat, but a singularity. What’s forgotten, is the reverse of that has already transpired, more specifically, is already apparent. That a you must die for anything or situation to be, is as incorrect as saying Schrödinger's cat must die (or be dead, or be alive) for some contingent situation to be, or not be. (* there is no opposite which is correct). 

[Breakingthewall]

@Adamq8 light is an electromagnetic wave that moves at 299 thousand km per second in the void regardless of the observer's movement (something most strange). this has been measured countless times. everything that does not have matter, including gravity, moves at that speed, and what has matter can never reach that speed ... the theory of relativity, thanks to which the gps system works and many other things. Totally proved.

[wildflower]

31 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

@Adamq8 light is an electromagnetic wave that moves at 299 thousand km per second in the void regardless of the observer's movement (something most strange). this has been measured countless times. everything that does not have matter, including gravity, moves at that speed, and what has matter can never reach that speed ... the theory of relativity, thanks to which the gps system works and many other things. Totally proved.

No you can't actually measure light

 

38 minutes ago, Nahm said:

The wave function appears, or manifests as an appearance. The ‘exponentially inversely related to the size of the mass’ is contingent on ‘size’ of ‘mass’, while ‘size’ is a thought, only relative to another mass, which there is not, which is what e=mc2 reveals. Think of that equation as having been widely misunderstood to be about light, while the insight is really about no mass, or the illusory nature of mass. 

Applying QM to ‘large mass’ in this context is of course perfectly correct. QM reveals there is no “mass” at all. Don’t forget to include “yourself” as non-mass / not-a-separate thing or observer… subject to - really… manifest via. 

He, and me, and you, are as ‘alive’ as Schrödinger's cat. Approaching a black hole, there’s inevitably not he, me, you & a cat, but a singularity. What’s forgotten, is the reverse of that has already transpired, more specifically, is already apparent. That a you must die for anything or situation to be, is as incorrect as saying Schrödinger's cat must die (or be dead, or be alive) for some contingent situation to be, or not be. (* there is no opposite which is correct). 

I disagree, the wave function is a abstract object that describes probabilities. The problem is if you apply this to abstract notion to large objects you end up with errors, or thinking things like an elephant is existing in a superposition of an ant when you are not looking. This isnt true actuality. Becuase QM shows us things are relational, that is to say the thing that comes into existence, comes into existence in relation to what already exists.

 

Let me explain further, the beginning of universe was a wave function that contained an infinite^infnite amount of possibilites, but as reality manifests, the amount of possibilities is negated, all the way until the end of the universe

But right now, not everthing in the material world is existing in an infinite superposition, form is negating possibilities., this eventually becomes the infinitiy of infinities containing the negation of infinities.

This is obviously abstract, but I can explain further if it's not clear. But it should be clear by the consistency of form at size you can see, it isn't every time you look again at the world a complete infinitely different form. When you look at an elephant, look away, look back, it's almost identical to you. It isn't now some strange esoteric possible form

Edited August 10, 2021 by wildflower

[Adamq8]

@Breakingthewall https://youtu.be/PM7nA4TP4Y0

Better explained ?