Haha, im just fuckin with ya. Lets talk science!

If there is currently nothing observing the world behind you, everything behind you may not exist. And I can prove it.

Warning: There is a lot of science ahead. If you want the quick version, just read the parts between ----------- <-- those lines.

The Copenhagen Interpretation is probably the most widely accepted explanation for the observations made through quantum mechanics. I will use 2 different experiments to try and explain to you what I mean.

The Double Slit Experiment: The Double Slit Experiment shows that an electron(when not being observed), fired at a wall with two slits in it, will sometimes go through one slit, sometimes through the other, and sometimes it will go through both slits simultaneously (meaning, a single thing will be in two places at once). BUT, when the electron is observed in this experiment, it will act like a normal electron and shoots through one slit or the other(never both).

----------------------------------------------------------

When a camera observed the electrons, they acted as particles. However, when no equipment was used to observe the electrons, they acted as waves and particles simultaneously. Scientists have concluded that the only logical explanation for this is that electrons know when they are being watched, and as a result act differently then they would when they are not being observed.

-----------------------------------------------------------

The 2002 Photon experiment: in 2002, a group of researchers set up the experiment in a way that the electron could not possibly receive information about the existence of an observing instrument. The setup was on a much smaller scale: a single photon was emitted and an interferometer(basically a camara that observes particle behavior) was either inserted or not inserted.

The insertion of the interferometer took only 40 nanoseconds (ns) while it would take 160 ns for the information about the configuration to travel from the interferometer to reach the photon before it entered the slits. This means in order for the photon to “know” if it was being watched, that information would have to travel at 4 times the speed of light, which we all know is impossible.

The results? The photons acted like particles 93% of the time that they were observed. Even if the photon “guessed” the configuration each time, statistically speaking it would never have more than 52% accuracy. In scientific experiments, a 93% success rate is as conclusive as they come.

----------------------------------------------------------

Electrons are aware they are being watched even if they can not directly see their observers. Look at a star in the sky; even though it doesnt directly know your watching, it still knows it is being observed by something, somewhere in the universe.

So what does this all mean? It means that Electrons, matter, everything, is self aware of itself and of its surroundings. It means that observing can possibly effect macroscopic events(things we can physically see with our eyes). That chair behind you? If you look at it, it behaves normally as a chair should. But when you turn around, its completely possible that the chair doesnt act like a chair at all. Of course, we have no way of testing this, because all of our data comes from what we observe. But when you turn around again, the chair will be sitting there just like it always does when you observe it. Knowing this all to be true, how can you say that anything behind you exists at all? It only exists when you observe it. Reality is only what we perceive, and what the universe wants us to see.

So, Toy Story doesnt seem so far fetched anymore, does it?

----------------------------------------------------------------

Made popular on: 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 10:52pm


Comments

 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 10:29pm
yoinkie Says:

COOL STORY BRO, THANKS FOR STOPPING BY.

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 10:47pm
ununu Says:

Hey now! I sometimes go right to the comments before reading the highdea.
It's fun to try to think of what the highdea is about or maybe what it says just by reading comments.
And then i take an educated guess!
And then i see if i'm right!
My guess on this one is, guy trying to find a girlfriend.
If that's not a cool story then idk, what is.
Edit: ehh, close enough

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 10:25pm

I thought that said the double shit experiment at first. Lmao

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 10:25pm

i just upvoted for the length and the amount of thought this dude put into this highdea.

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 10:31pm

i just read that whole thing and halfway through i realized i was just looking at the words and thinking about some other thing

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 10:38pm
CamBam. Says:

I almost shit myself when I read the title.. Then I actually shit myself after reading the entire thing. But I havent looked at the shit so as far as I'm concerned, it doesnt exist. But seriously, sick ass highdea.

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 10:49pm
yoinkie Says:

HAHAHAHAHAHA, I love you. You just combined humor with science. As far as im concerned, you win at life, sir.

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 1:57am
CamBam. Says:

You made my day! You're the greatest, Broseph Stalin. *fist bump*

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 10:45pm
KingGreen Says:

When I saw the title of this highea I was all :((((
then I read it and now I'm all :0

My chair is one sneaky son of a bitch

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 10:51pm
Mr_Bear Says:

Holy fuck. My friend explained this to me a while back. And now i see it on this.

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:00pm
OB3Y420 Says:
 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:02pm

hahah i downvoted as soon as i opened page then 2 seconds later i was i was like oops and changed lol nice highdea

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:03pm
Cannibenol Says:
 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:16pm

so basically you need to read this while listening to Medicine Wheel by BTBAM..

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:22pm
yoinkie Says:

made me go check out the song you speak of, and thank you for that. Fucking Awesome.

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:16pm
BYOBandTHC Says:

That further makes me believe that we are living in a "Matrix" type of universe because the particles behaving as they do it is like rewriting a line of code that has an anomaly or glitch in it and it is being fixed by writing another line of code that overrides it so when it is observed by one of the many prisoners of this universe it behaves normally. Which means with that train of thought all particles are rouge AI fighting against the system and are only able to be "covered" by a false image when observed directly.

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:20pm

you should watch 'through the wormhole' -- its a sick show AND morgan freeman narrates it

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:25pm

I was gonna comment this saying so Toy Story could be a true story and then I read what you wrote about it and laughed :P

Very interesting stuff man

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:25pm

damnn i liked the caption! im a stoner chick and kid cudi's my second favorite :((((

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:25pm
Locifer Says:

i was about to go to bed, but i had to log in for this one...
i enjoy the double slit, or even the triple for that matter, experiment and the whole solipsism (msp?) outlook. reality is perception based by law, if i never interact with you, or are observed by you, i do not exist to you... anywho, i say that to say this: without man, does God exist? this little jewel is a shared conversation between me and another where we proved to onlookers that without the observations from man to define, then there would be nothing, for yours is the only reality that is valid, until you accept another as valid through truthful premises and conclusions. there's been extensive work to prove or disprove the double slit theory, but even as you take in quantum mechanics, or even physical chemistry, behaviors of particles change as they go farther beyond mans observational limits, bending the laws of physics and altering what we consider to be 'real.' i think i slipped somewhere, damnit, i need to sleep

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:39pm

wait, how would we know this? wouldn't we have to observe it to know. ergo, there is a giant hole in this concept.

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:46pm
yoinkie Says:

Watch the video someone posted earlier, and you will understand. By observing, we mean that actually watching the electron going through the slit. Either you watch this happen and record the results, or dont watch it happen, come back after the experiment, and record the results.

 
 
Mon, 08/15/2011 - 11:59pm

This is the Definition of a Perfect Highdea.
Your title brought me in, to comment negativly, Then your snappy first line made me laugh, and I was intrigued to read All of your GENIUS, and mind blowing, and fucking trippy ass Highdea. I never read highdeas this long, lol.
Anyways, just wanted to Let you know how much i liked this shit...
keep sm0kinn

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 12:08am
oldsmell Says:

i tried to call the anti-verse but no-one picked up the anti-phone that was over there so..

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 12:16am

So that's the reason why my lighter randomly disappears .

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 1:11am
 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 1:40am
deedlenick Says:
 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 2:40am
Classik62 Says:

Hey yoinkie, for a second i wasn't sure if i liked you, but you sir are genius...

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 3:01am

This is very interesting but one thing doesn't make sense.

"The Double Slit Experiment shows that an electron(when not being observed), fired at a wall with two slits in it, will sometimes go through one slit, sometimes through the other, and sometimes it will go through both slits simultaneously (meaning, a single thing will be in two places at once). BUT, when the electron is observed in this experiment, it will act like a normal electron and shoots through one slit or the other(never both)."

So, the one that wasn't observed, how did they know that the electron went through one or the other or both if it wasn't being observed?

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 3:30am
chrlid94 Says:
 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 2:50pm
yoinkie Says:

By the pattern it created on the wall. Watch the video someone posted earlier in here, it will clear things up a lot for you.

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 3:29am
chrlid94 Says:
 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 9:06am
Spanki Says:

am I the only one trying to turn around real fast trying to catch my chair off guard .. not acting like a chair

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 12:37pm

now i feel like the chair behind me is silently giggling because he knows that i dont know hes self aware

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 12:38pm
Smithhy Says:

I'm suddenly feeling very weird about what's behind me...

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 12:38pm
yuanda Says:
 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 1:31pm
ThePatient Says:
 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 1:46pm
Dro_Blower Says:

Adding on to this, you know how sometimes when ur dreaming and you wake up you see a "normal" object that looked very similar but different in your dream? Well what if that in your dream wasn't really imaginary and was the actual object acting differently like the highdea explaned? idk crazy stuff.

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 2:01pm
AFWF_Erick Says:

"If a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound?" This HighDEA reminds me of that classic line. Just because you can't SEE what's behind you doesn't mean it acts out of nature or out of order. Funny idea with the toy story reference lol

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 2:53pm
yoinkie Says:

Can you say that conclusively? Where are your facts? Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it acts normally either. The fallen tree is just is, its not fallen and it is fallen, only when it is observed again does it actually choose a side.

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 9:18pm
Munky Says:
 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 10:25pm
AFWF_Erick Says:

Of course you're not going to have evidence for something that you cannot see. But If you cut 1000 trees and watch it fall you are going to hear and see the results, the sound and the visual of it falling 1000 times. Sometimes we over think things, a lot in philosophy, it almost overrides common sense. Gravity will always take it's course and the laws of physics will always be in place anywhere on this planet. Just because you can't see something doesn't mean the laws won't take place.

I love the experiments on the electrons and photons, but how do you know the reaction of the watched won't vary from the use of an observing instrument(s). I hope there was a control by means of the surroundings and person doing the experiment.

The experiments do make sense however but the whole thing seems to override common sense. I don't need evidence to justify proven laws, in my opinion.

 
 
Fri, 08/19/2011 - 2:31pm

You found the simplistic beauty in all of these HighDEAs but haven't realised it yet! To over-look common sense to the 'highest' degree and really push the boundary is the key to finding the enjoyment in being high. It takes us back to when we thought Santa was real, the magical events and the questions that came side by side, "how could a fat man make it down my chimmney"; "We don't even have a chimmney"; "Why haven't my parents called the police yet".

To only use common sense in this life makes for a rather boring journey. You see something and there it is. No more, no less. But WHY is it there? What happened to make it there? What can we do to improve how it is there? Catch my drift yet?

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 4:10pm
 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 9:15pm
Munky Says:
 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 7:12pm
Munky Says:

"When a camera observed the electrons, they acted as particles. However, when no equipment was used to observe the electrons, they acted as waves and particles simultaneously."
__________________________________

How do you "observe" electrons (much less photons) without any equipment? It's not like they're visible to the naked eye. Please cite your sources - I'd very much like to read the article(s). I might be wrong, but it seems to me that you're talking about the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (or an extension of it). I highly doubt the validity of your conclusion. The properties of things at the macroscale are not necessarily the same as the properties of the subatomic particles that constitute them. Quantum mechanics evolved because Newton's laws failed to explain the nature of matter at a microscopic scale. But Newtonian mechanics still hold at the macroscopic scale. It has absolutely nothing to do with the sentience/consciousness of subatomic particles. A chair is a chair whether or not ANYONE observes it.

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 10:34pm
zenpanda Says:

like how you can buy a shirt that changes color in the sun.
when the electrons or photons hit the wall they're aimed at it leaves a mark.

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 10:41pm
zenpanda Says:

and a chair is just a collection of molecules. molecules are a collection of subatomic particles. subatomic particles are unstable enough to be effected by the force of observation. subatomic particles have the property of being in all sorts of places at once (uncertainty principle) the thought experiment is that if there is no observation do these particles resume a chaotic existence?

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 7:19pm

I saw this exact same theory discussed on T.V. by Morgan Freeman on Through the Wormhole. Try getting baked and watching that show, some deep shit they get into. Besides this yes i do agree which makes the statement you cant "create your own reality" does not seem be such wishful thinking anymore. Maybe this (the study of quantum physics) at least i hope, will be the the beginning of a shift in the collective consciousnesses of the human race. Where we now begin to view ourselves in a completely different way and can begin the foundation for us to finally take the next step in our evolution.

 
 
Tue, 08/16/2011 - 8:10pm

"However, when no equipment was used to observe the electrons, they acted as waves and particles simultaneously."

how the fuck would they know what shits doing when theyr not looking when they cannot in any way LOOK at it to SEE what its doing?