there is a quantum slit experiment, that when an observer watched the electron, it will change its path. So could this mean that coincious, alters Matter?

do you guys know the jump rooms to mars? hiden ^"top secret" govs. few now about it.

Either G. the Lord straightens our paths to ultimate salvation, or religion all was a foggy concept for those who fear being on their own. I fear not, I care little about that. So I do not need religion to support me on that. Now I can't be sure if the path of God leads to eternal freedom, so why should I just choose this path anyway?

This is sadly not the stuff that keeps me awake at night. Tiny useless social issues do that already.

Nope
As far as entanglement is concerned we are just " passive observers "

Suppose you have two entangled electrons A and B

A goes through an electrical field while B is far away
You can control the movement of A via the intensity and the polarity of the elctrical field but this will not affect the movement of B

now, A goes through a magnetic field and B is still far away
A gets the spin " up " ( " down ") while B , at the same time, gets the spin "down" ("up")

The point is that there is no way to control the spin of A via , for example, the intensity and / or the polarity of the magnetic field
it is a mere random event

For this reason entanglement can not be used as a sort of high sophisticated remote controller

Despite its popularity and even though it has been proposed by a great scientist , the scientific value of "the schrödingers cat " paradox, is null

Many popular scientific books claim that :

A quantum entity ( a photon of light, an electron, an atom etc ) can exist in several states but if you observe it than it "collapse"
in one only state
This is false
The quantum entity collapse just in case you have the possibility to "observe" it regardless of the fact that you really do it

In other words a quantum entity behave as a " wave " just in case it is fully " isolated "
It is hard to think that the bilion and bilions atoms of a cat can be cosidered as "isolated" items

Hmm I see. However, entangled parts have not just two phases, right? One can spin "up" and the other "down", and one can spin "down" while the other spins "up". But they can also remain blurry. If we just hypotetically assume for a second that by thinking, we send out tiny magnetic flows around, just like the earth does in quite bigger proportions. This magnetic flow hits natural entangled particles, and you cause an effect, triggering either scenario A or B. If you did not think, you did not send the magnetic flow, and the particles remain blurry, leaving you in scenario C.



That's an interesting fact (yeah I take your knowledge as facts :P). But what do you exactly mean by "behave as a wave"? A blurry state, or a wave that passes through isolation?

In the latter case, if we are talking about a cat in a box well out of my range (like, I observe a box (with oxygen and all) on mars with a potential cat in it through a recorded tape with a delay of 10 minutes) then the quadrillion atoms of a cat can be considered isolated I guess?

And in the former case, can we assume that our sun is in a wave state right now? By no means can we ever observe what it does right now. It might be burning as it always did, or it might have been exploded. But we do know that it is very unlikely for it to explode right now, as there is no aparent reason whatsoever. But I can safely say quantum entanglement do not need reason for changing in state A or B, correct? So how come the sun isn't likely to explode?
If we all suddenly start thinking that the sun actually IS exploding, if all observers expect it to explode, will it more likely explode?

For a complete and exhaustive description of a particle you just need to define 3 spatial coord , x,y,z, and 3 speeds Vx,Vy,Vz
You may want to add also some angles but generally speaking a finite number of variables is enough
For an electron ( or a photon or an atom or a small molecule ) it is not sufficient

You must define a function in term of x,y,z and the time t
Something like

atom = f(x,y,z,t)

Dont worry about the physical meaning of the above function( nobody actually knows it )

The key point is that the atom looks like something diffused in the space, regardless of physical meaning of the value assigned to the spatial coords
In other words our atom is a sort of wave rather than a particle but do not assume that it is a real wave, it behaves like a wave
That's different

Ok, now let's consider a group of atoms , for example , our cat
How would you describe the cat in the mathematical language
Well the cat is made of atoms , so

Cat = f1(x1,y1,z1,t) + f2(x2,y2,z2,t) .....fn(xn,yn,zn,t)

with n = 1.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000.........000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
False
Our cat is described by one only function with 3n + 1 variables rather than by n functions with 4 variable
Something like

Cat = f(X1,X2,...............X3n,t)

If you study this function you get the behaviour of our cat

Well if you do it you will find out that a cat behaves like .......a cat

In other words, all the amazing properties of quantum physics are valid only for a small number of isolated atomic entities



No, it will not explode
As I said we are just passive observers as far as entanglement is concerned

So then , why when they measure and observe it, it will behave like a particle, and when not observing like a wave, in the double slit video experiment..

So what does observing actually does? is the though, the concioness of expecting something, limited by our "limits" that will create the reality??

if quantum is not real in the real outside, why care about it? only if one can control or make it real , than thats worth it.

OK, just to throw a spanner in the works here, but can anyone explain this,
or point out a flaw in my logic...

All the atoms that make up my brain, or heart, or whatever, are INSIDE me,
so all the quantum particles that they are made of should be un-observable
and therefore un-collapsed "wave" state correct?
And I live.....
But if you stick me in a MRI or X-Ray machine, or even cut me open and look inside,
the particles are being observed, so shouldnt they all collapse into "single state' particles?
And seeing as the particles that make up my mind or heart have changed in a
pretty fundamental way, why dont I just die on the spot?

There has to be some behavioural difference between "wave" and "single state" particles
otherwise why would "they" feel the need to change when being watched?
And how could we spot the difference....
(and NO Im not looking for a way to hit a radiographer with a malpractice suit)

The " observing " by itself, actually does nothing
It is a popular belief that :

If you leave an electron alone than it is a wave but if you measure (observe) it, for example by placing some sensors near the slits, than the wave " collapses " into a particle
Same as a sort of " condensation reaction " due to a mechanical interaction wave / measuring instrument
If so, the duality wave / particle would not be that mistery, some fluids behave like that

I would not even comment the " the concioness of expecting something..." a ridicoulus interpretation proposed by some phylospher

The situation is different
First of all, real systems do not behave either as a waves or as a particles
It is alwayes an hybrid behaviour

apart from that, in the double slit experiment the wave collapses whenever you can potentially get some information out of the system even though you are a passive observer

If the system is completely " closed" than you have to deal with waves
If the system is completely " open " than you have to deal with particles
Some thing in between for semi open / close system

Nobody can provide an intuitive explanation

I always thought, but that's my humble explanation, that you can't observe small entities like an electron without affecting it.
You need some sort of tool to measure its position or energy, and the tool can't be smaller or more "detailed" than an electron.
It needs energy and positions which are influencing position and energy of the observed electron.
This means that the influence of the observer to the observed is because of his cumbersome observation tools, right?