Indeed. Measurement is a physical process, not metaphysical one. To measure something, you necessarily need to interact with it (and at this point it's worth remembering that photons bouncing off an object and hitting your retinas absolutely count as interaction, so you can't e.g. put a ruler next to the dog and read out the results, and say you weren't interacting with it, not in the sense physicists use this word).
How does that explain the quantum eraser experiment?
a photon that has been "marked" and then "unmarked" will interfere with itself and produce the fringes characteristic of Young's experiment.
Did you mean to reply https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23221433? I don't see how QEE is incompatible with the notion that measuring something necessitates interacting with it. Photons are usually measured by absorbing them and turning into electricity.
Re:Electrons May Well Be Conscious
by lambdatronics on Monday May 18, 2020 @11:46AM
(#23223875)
Absolutely! I wish this were more commonly understood. And, if you take that train of though one step further, it implies that quantum mechanics exhibits non-local causality.
Re:Electrons May Well Be Conscious
by mensetmanusman on Tuesday May 19, 2020 @01:52PM
(#23237914)
The electrons in ambient air are interacting but not measuring.
People get hung up on this semantic concept of 'measurement' when that's not what it's about at all. It's not "if you measure a property of a particle then you change that property", it's "if you interact with a property of a particle then you change it, and that it's impossible to measure without interacting".
The electron doesn't care whether you're conscious and certainly not whether you're writing anything down. Its momentum or whatever is still going to change regardless.