What The Bleep Do We Know?

[Jazza]

for those who enjoy pondering about reality i recomend watching this

for those who have no idea what i'm talking about, it's a movie (http://www.whatthebleep.com/), it seems it's only showing in a few places

IMO although the ideas in the movie are grounded in physics, they are a little quick to jump to conclusions

but these conclusions are more logical and interesting that the conclusions most people jump to

anyone else seen it? i'd like to hear others opinions

[waffle]

I thought this movie was terrible. The unnammed dudes w/ no credentials were using .5 second explanations of quantum physics to justify some positive-feeling new age BS.

"the key to life is not to be in the know, but to be in the mystery"

hahahah. come on.

[Jazza]

some of them are dodgey, but John Hagelin at least has serious credentials

[shant]

I watched this movie against my will. I thought it was very boring as I wasn't engaged by the deaf chick, the black kid on the playground, or any of the other actors.

A few of the "experts" had some really interesting things to say though. Also, I enjoyed the part where they were showing how people can affect the reality around them like with the different parts of the brain and how people act in social situations.

Overall though, I would've rather watched something else.

[thatpfunk]

I liked it, started a thread a while ago that got ignored more or less.

I thought some aspects were incredibly interesting.

[Jazza]

woops, i should have searched first /images/graemlins/blush.gif

i appreciate you not using the pile of poo pic

[thatpfunk]

Oh, I didn't mean that in a mean way or anything, just showing the lack of interest people had in the thread. I don;t blame you for not seeing it, it wasn't on the front page long at all.

Aspects I liked/thought were interesting/wanted more opinions on: the highly intensified water photos, the where is matter when it isn't "here", and the way things are percieved by our brains since everything is "filtered". Very interesting stuff.

[shant]

Oh yea, I forgot about those water photos. That was pretty amazing and I was wondering if anyone has found a link to more information/pictures from that expirement.

[Yobz]

I saw it and I didn't enjoy it. It started off well enough but then it got preachy instead of more science. The acting was terrible, too.

[Jazza]

IMO the water photos are very dodgy untill proven otherwise. this (http://www.masaru-emoto.net/english/eprofile.html) guy's website doesn't show much, this guy doesn't strike me as one who would be scientific about this water stuff

but yeah i too am very interested about quantum mechanics, and exactly how do things exist, and how does observing affect the existence of things and so forth

[Chaostracize]

This movie was nothing short of abysmal. I was forced into seeing this movie and I left about 10 minutes before it was over (person I went with had seen it).

There are one or two interesting things, but it's wrapped in a fine coat of crap. Unbearable. And I hope you all know that one of the women who was being interviewed claims to have some sort of holy being speaking through her. Something I found out after the movie.

I think they should have taken the interesting bits (ie the water) and made a PBS documentary, otherwise, this was an enormous waste of time and money.

[thatpfunk]

[ QUOTE ]

There are one or two interesting things, but it's wrapped in a fine coat of crap. Unbearable. And I hope you all know that one of the women who was being interviewed claims to have some sort of holy being speaking through her. Something I found out after the movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you go to the website the explain everyones "credentials." Two of the people are simply spiritualists. The majority are scientists.

[Jazza]

i forgot to mention a few things:

this movie is more a documentary than anything else

it would help if you knew some quantum mechanics, as i reckon in an effort to Jazz it up hollywood style they have added in some crap, and if you know your quantum mechanics it's easier to know what the crap is and what the interesting stuff is

[TimTimSalabim]

Liked it a lot. Would make a good double feature with I Heart Huckabees, for those who like to ponder the nature of existence.

We need a Movies forum!

[ethan]

The ideas in the movie are not grounded in good science. Physics doesn't predict the results they claim it does. (Quantum physics won't somehow make your positive thoughts manifest themselves, for one.) The producers mix footage of respectable scientists with propaganda for "Ramtha's School of Enlightenment" (a Washington-based cult) and hope you'll think that the science legitimizes the rest of it.

I could rant about this for awhile. This Salon article (http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2004/09/16/bleep/) is worth reading.

[ QUOTE ]

David Albert, a professor at the Columbia University physics department, has accused the filmmakers of warping his ideas to fit a spiritual agenda. "I don't think it's quite right to say I was 'tricked' into appearing," he said in a statement reposted by a critic on "What the Bleep's" Internet forum, "but it is certainly the case that I was edited in such a way as to completely suppress my actual views about the matters the movie discusses. I am, indeed, profoundly unsympathetic to attempts at linking quantum mechanics with consciousness. Moreover, I explained all that, at great length, on camera, to the producers of the film ... Had I known that I would have been so radically misrepresented in the movie, I would certainly not have agreed to be filmed."


[/ QUOTE ]

[ethan]

[ QUOTE ]
it would help if you knew some quantum mechanics, as i reckon in an effort to Jazz it up hollywood style they have added in some crap, and if you know your quantum mechanics it's easier to know what the crap is and what the interesting stuff is

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that if you know your quantum mechanics, it becomes pretty apparent that it's _all_ crap. I'd have no problem with the film if the people who made it said "Here's our new-agey philosophy. You might find it interesting." But they end up too close to "Here's our new-agey philosophy and science says we're right." I dislike this movie for the same reasons I dislike the Intelligent Design/Creation Science movement.

[thatpfunk]

That was a pretty worthless article in regards to the movie... It focused on the 1 person and cult/whatever that I didn't even pay attention to.

[thatpfunk]

[ QUOTE ]
"Here's our new-agey philosophy. You might find it interesting." But they end up too close to "Here's our new-agey philosophy and science says we're right."

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you get this from the movie at all? All I got were a bunch of interesting "What-ifs?" to think about. I don't remember anyone every saying "This is 100% truth." It kept being repeated "We don't know, so what if it is _____."

[Jazza]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it would help if you knew some quantum mechanics, as i reckon in an effort to Jazz it up hollywood style they have added in some crap, and if you know your quantum mechanics it's easier to know what the crap is and what the interesting stuff is

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that if you know your quantum mechanics, it becomes pretty apparent that it's _all_ crap. I'd have no problem with the film if the people who made it said "Here's our new-agey philosophy. You might find it interesting." But they end up too close to "Here's our new-agey philosophy and science says we're right." I dislike this movie for the same reasons I dislike the Intelligent Design/Creation Science movement.

[/ QUOTE ]

i do agree with the way they seem to use quantum mechanics to 'prove' they are right

but i don't think it's necessarilly all crap, the way i see it, they have presented that view that i think is possible, it doesn't seem to contradict quantum mechanics, where as the way many people view the world does contradict quantum mechanics

edit: i guess what i'm trying to say is that they have shown a possible theory, and it can resolve the schrodinger's cat paradox

[MelchyBeau]

I'm curious to know what your physics background is. I didn't watch the movie, but from reading the crap on the website, I think it is fake science. They might as well be trying to create cold fusion in a jar.

Melch

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought this movie was terrible. The unnammed dudes w/ no credentials were using .5 second explanations of quantum physics to justify some positive-feeling new age BS.

[/ QUOTE ]

[stabn]

I left halfway through.

Edit:

But props to them for showing the MAXX station under the zoo in portland.

[Jazza]

my physics backround is i just finished an honours degree in physics

maybe the reason why i give these guys more credit that i should is that my physics professors have all discussed the possibility that the moon doesn't exist in a particular state unless some one is looking at it

basically, if you read up on schrodinger's cat, the view presented in this movie is the most extreme view that resolves the paradox

they claim not only is it that the only observers that cause things to exist in a certain state are our minds, but our minds even can influence how things exist

[thatpfunk]

Or perhaps you have an imagination and ability to think about possibilities and have fun with things like this...

[AEKDBet]

You beat me to it Jazza. I watched this last night. Pretty cool stuff. Along the lines of the theory of everything.

[MelchyBeau]

I think your physics professors are insane, but then again I think you have to be partially insane to be one. I have a degree in physics myself. I have to deal with the headache that is quantum mechanics on a daily basis. I don't see how it is possible for observer influence to change the state of the moon.

Anyways, I haven't seen the movie, and probably won't. I find this idea to be kinda silly to begin with.

Melch

[Jazza]

[ QUOTE ]
I think your physics professors are insane, but then again I think you have to be partially insane to be one. I have a degree in physics myself. I have to deal with the headache that is quantum mechanics on a daily basis. I don't see how it is possible for observer influence to change the state of the moon.

Anyways, I haven't seen the movie, and probably won't. I find this idea to be kinda silly to begin with.

Melch

[/ QUOTE ]

fair nuff, so where do you stand on schrodinger's cat?

[contentless]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Here's our new-agey philosophy. You might find it interesting." But they end up too close to "Here's our new-agey philosophy and science says we're right."

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you get this from the movie at all? All I got were a bunch of interesting "What-ifs?" to think about. I don't remember anyone every saying "This is 100% truth." It kept being repeated "We don't know, so what if it is _____."

[/ QUOTE ]

Interestingly enough, this pretty much the question and answer that occurred in one of Ebert's Answer Man columns.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041114/ANSWERMAN/411140312

And his thoughts on this describe mine:

[ QUOTE ]
The film is what it is, a group of people trying to explain the nature of reality. The confusion comes if you think they are discussing physics, when in fact they are discussing metaphysics. There is nothing wrong with having a belief system and using it to fashion your worldview; the error comes in ascribing scientific truth to what is by definition a matter of faith.

The argument between Darwinians and Creationists is similar: Darwinians use science, Creationists use faith. "Creationist science" is laughed at by reputable scientists because it tries to use its easily refuted "science" to explain a belief that grows from and depends entirely on faith. By the same token, although the Ramtha School may indeed have valuable insights into the nature of reality, it is misleading to present them as science.

[/ QUOTE ]

[MelchyBeau]

[ QUOTE ]

fair nuff, so where do you stand on schrodinger's cat?

[/ QUOTE ]

I stand on top of it.

The schrodinger cat problem is not something you can take sides on. It attempts to explain both how a particle can have 2 states at the same time, and how a particles state is independent of the observer.

Melch

[Jazza]

hmm, the way i remember it was that it was a paradox (the opposite of trying to explain anything), according to quantum mechanics the cat be in a superposition of both live and dead states, but according to classical physics it's one or the other

however once something is measured, it is now in one state, but what counts as being measured? couldn't the device used to measure something also be in a quantum state of having two different results?

[brassnuts]

From what I've heard about this movie and what I've seen from the trailer it seems pretty stupid. It's one of those things that appeals to greater masses because most don't have any idea what they're talking about. They can use tricky wording and manipulate confusing facts to make blatant mysticism seem plausible.

As far as Schrodinger's cat, I always like to state that the cat knows if it's dead or alive, and it's definitely one of them. I've never understood the point in applying a quantum principle to something that only has relevance in our macro world.

[Jazza]

about the cat:

what if you took the cat out? would there then be a superposition of poison released and poison not released states? if not why not? if so why/how is it the cat 'collapses' the wavefunction?

[brassnuts]

What I really think about that experiment is this. If it helps with calculations or for whatever purpose, if you want to assume the cat is both dead and alive or any superposition of the macro world, fine, go ahead and make that assumption. The fact is, in reality, only one of the states is true.

However, in the world of quantum mechanics, these very strange occurances of superposition actually do take place (as far as we can measure or in any way observe them). Maybe, in some way that we as simple humans can't comprehend, a particle can actually act in two states simultaneously. Or, maybe our observations are just in error. But, the fact is we barely understand quantum physics at all. But, I have a lot of experience with things on a much larger scale. All of my intuition tells me that the cat is either dead or alive or that the poison is released or not. I just think the cat experiment is a stretch. These are just my thoughts, I am in no way any sort of expert on the subject. I'm not even sure what you mean by the cat collapsing the wave function. Edit: I know what a probability wave is, I just don't see how the cat collapses this. As I said, I don't think the probability wave really applies here.

[whiskeytown]

the guys who made this movie and the producers/financers are members of a quasi-cult in Oregon that believes J.Z. Knight channels an 35000 yr. old spirit called Ramtha.

It's a sales pitch for their stuff (and I mean sales - a seminiar runs for $800)

not as bad as Scientology, but not much better - I say read a book and skip the movie.

RB

[Jazza]

[ QUOTE ]
I say read a book and skip the movie.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm gonna have to agree with this

but remember, just because wackos believe something it doesn't prove it's false, i think the people involved in this film are a mix of wackos and credible thinkers, with the wackos in charge of editing and producing from the sounds of it

[PokerMike]

Jazza, this movie is trash recruitment for some scientology-like cult.

I'm very very suprised you enjoyed it. All throughout this thing they make the error of jumping to rash rash conclusions from very specific facts about QM. They mix ideas that have no bussiness being mixed together. I actually couldn't sit through it all. I was so excited because i thought it'd be great(kinda like "The Elegant Universe"). Instead of taking you on a journey about the wonders of modern physics they use it as a launching pad for various ideals and constantly destroy the is/aught distinction to portray some kind of whack message.

So yeah, yuck.

[Jazza]

i'm not arguing it wasn't a trash recruitment for a cult, i reckon that's irrelevent

what i got from the movie was that these people believe anything not observed by a human can live in a superposition of states, and only observation by a human mind will actually cause things to exist in one state or another

are you saying this is impossbile? or are you just saying that this theory is ad hoc? i reckon it's the later

but even so i think there view is more likely to be right that those who believe in a strictly 'classical' reality

[PokerMike]

I think extrapolating superpositions to macroscopic objects isn't wise without going through the details carefully. They've recently run experiments on macromolecules(like C60 balls) and have been able to get them into superpositions, but what the movie suggests is another thing all together. Part of the reason Schodinger's thought experiment seems so paradoxical is because he goes from the quantum scale(particle in superposition) to macro(cat) in one leap, and as of yet we don't have a way to adequately tackle problems that merge QM + general relativity.

Soooo yeah i guess its kinda interesting musing about people being in superpositions, buts its without any real content. And i agree that the fact that they are recruiting for a cult is irrelevent, but judge it as trash solely on its physics/philosophy content /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

EDIT : oh and i checked the date/time for the satellite, its on wednesday night, not tonight, so i guess i'll see ya at APA tomorrow.

[Alobar]

I thought the movie was very interesting, and definatel recomend it to people.

However, the phsycics they talk about isnt quite the way it really works. They just like to throw out the term "quatum mechanics" because 95% of people have no clue what that entails, but it sounds really good

Also the bit about the water crystals, really intrigued me. So I went and bought the guys books. He's a total quack. Anyone who buys into Homeopathy is about as smart as the people who believe in creationism. i.e. not very.