Physicists like Einstein, Bors, Pauli and others, have and continue to wrestle with the concept of reality. Aristotle was the instigator of this question (formally), when he looked at the question of potentiality which asks: "What potential does something have to become something else". Aristotle's view was that each 'thing' has a certain power to become something that it is not already...ie. A sleeping man to become awake. Quantum physicists took this a step further in proposing that the man is both asleep and awake as the potential exists for both states. The "Copenhagen interpretation" of Quantum Theory developed by Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg, Wolfgang Pauli, and others says two basic things:
1. Reality is identical with the totality of observed phenomena (which means reality does not exist in the absence of observation), and
2. Quantum mechanics is a complete description of reality; no deeper understanding is possible. (1)
The Theory basically states that a phenomenon exists only when it is observed, and becaused it is observed. The man exists in both potentially sleeping and awake states and is only one or the other once someone else observes the man that way.
Alex Patterson has this to say about the Observer Effect:
"Fundamental to contemporary Quantum Theory is the notion that there is no phenomenon until it is observed. This effect is known as the 'Observer Effect'...".
So what constitutes a phenomenon?...
Some definitions:
1. An observable fact or occurrence or a kind of observable fact or occurrence. For example: Hurricanes are a meteorological phenomenon.
2. Appearance; a perceptible aspect of something that is mutable.
3. A fact or event considered very unusual, curious, or astonishing by those who witness it.
4. A wonderful or very remarkable person or thing.
5. An experienced object whose constitution reflects the order and conceptual structure imposed upon it by the human mind (especially by the powers of perception and understanding).
It would seem that the very definitions of 'phenomenon' are in themselves 'Observable Effects'.
Let's break down September 11, 2001 a little bit. Let's suppose that only one person in the world was in New York that morning and saw only one plane hit one tower and later saw that tower fall. The collapse of that tower as it appeared to that one observer would be considered a unique phenomenon and it's "truth" would be found to be unique and unshakable. That person could travel the world telling of his or her experience and all who heard it would also accept that as their "truth". Now if we add another observer, say two blocks away in the other direction from the first, what that observer saw happen would be an entirely different phenomenon, due to the difference in angle of view.
Now, lets add a second plane hitting the other tower and observers who saw this from their offices on various floors of office buildings around the plaza. As well, we can add people who did not see anything, but heard loud explosions, and other people describing what they saw or heard. These too are unique phenomena.
Now we add another interesting element, which is the media, that supplies us, on say, four or five different channels, different footage from the ground and by helicopter of the two towers. (For those of us who were nowhere near the events of that day, we had only our television sets to shape our observations.) The observations, however, are not enough on their own to constitute the truth of what really happened.
"All credibility, all good conscience, all evidence of truth come only from the senses.
-NeitzscheButressed against these is "the official story", which has also proved to be as variable as the observations themselves. For each person who was a "witness", they will contrast their version of what they saw, heard, etc... with "the official story" and decide if it agrees or does not. When the official story begins to show inconsistencies and holes, people still tend to cling to their observation as the absolute truth and discard the official story as a pack of lies. The more that the media clings to the official story and rebroadcasts it, the more the official story begins to stink. What's more people begin to question all the other official stories they've ever been told whether they were observers to the phenomenon or not.
The truth is not really out there, but within each person, based on their personal experience and their perception checking of the facts of the official story and the facts as they see them. The number of truths about 9/11 probably reach in the billions and will never find agreement until all the facts come out.
Footnotes
(1) From Alex Patterson's Website: http://www.vision.net.au/~apaterson/science/observer_effect.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment