Originally posted by: Comdrpopnfresh
Originally posted by: KIAman
To the OP, yes, the observer does not have to be conscious.
To everyone else, take a look at Bell's theorem and forget true "reality."
IMO, the true issue of quantum mechanics is our lack of understanding and how to describe it. We are so closed-box around mathematics and "perfection" and "symmetry" that we attempt to describe reality around these concepts. We continue to think of particle, or point based, descriptors. This is convenient because it applies mathematically but it introduces too many paradoxes.
It is beyond me and everyone else (obviously) but until we re-think how to describe interactions at the quantum level, we will never surpass our current obstacles. How about wave and distance based effects? Is it possible quantum effects are just distance effects from the quantum source. Maybe it isn't even a distance effect, maybe it is direct effect given another dimension of interaction.
Quantum states are a result of statistical probability related to quantum mechanics. As such, they exist in relation to a conscious observer.
Take Schrödinger's cat...
If a particle of dust lands on the box, it may kill the cat, or it may not- the state still cannot be determined but by an observer, and their observation collapses the state.
Throw a second cat in the box- it complicates the representative math of the quantum state, but the second cat is now immersed in the state- one cannot know if the second cat ended up killing the first (get's more complicated if the cats are indistinguishable haha).
The point is this- a quantum state is a 'flux' between more than one state. Any non conscious entity that interacts with what is in the state becomes an extension of it (either directly immersed, or to a 2nd degree). Therefore, if you observe the second object, it is an extension of you, the observer, and collapses the state just as you would. If you did not observe the second object's interaction with the first, you can't say anything further about the first object, and for all intents and purposes, the 1st+2nd is equivalent to the first. It's kind of like a system and surroundings in thermodynamics- If you're not in the surroundings, you're in the system.