If nobody is watching a chair, does the chair still exist?

This has some relation with the "if a tree falls in the forest, does it makes a sound?"


But things exist tho no1 is watching at them?

I mean, maybe a chair is not a chair, and a table is not a table, but thru the human eye it is a chair and it is a table. I don't know if you get me.

I mean, things might exist when some1 is watching at it, but still it doesn't mean you are watching what it really exists. Maybe you are watching a tree but in the most objective reality it's not a tree but something else, but thru human's eye it's a tree. When nobody is watching that tree, how do u know the tree is still there? or the chair is still there? you can put camera but the camera would only act as the human eye. So im speaking about those things which are not watched by any1 or anything, do they still exist?

It's a deep conecpt but wat u guys think

There are 2 'exists' in my mind

The first one is where 2 people can confirm they are the same and talk about it, then we know the chair exists in reality, assuming that reality actually exists.

The 2nd one is where it only exists exacly in one imagination. God falls into this category. It can be talked about but they will be different... As does the future and past, which is everything for the present is impossible.

There is only energy, physical, or 'thought/life/origin energy'. It is not a chair it is physical energy which is seen through our origin within 'time'. Quite cool how you can see thought energy within the chair... it is both... it has evolved... the whole universe appears to be the same. Amazing really.

Have you been watching "What the #$*! [Bleep] Do We Know?"

LVGambler, check the wiki on that movie, namely 4.2.

OP, how about this question:
If I am not directly observing a chair, is it still affecting me? Can it be indirectly observed?

If "the chair" is an arbitrary human construct applied to a collection of particles, then why would "the chair" specifically cease to exist when not seen by a human? What about "the floor"? What if only part of "the chair" is seen, does the rest of it cease to exist?

I do not think there is any way for us to know whether objects not directly or indirectly observed by humans exist while they are not observed. That does not mean that they cease to exist, just that we cannot know for sure. But then you would need some actual reason to believe they ceased to exist and that the laws of physics, or the universe itself, was somehow centered on human observation. I am sure you are capable of coming up with a fairly simple reason for believing that, but I highly doubt it will stand up to the level of scrutiny needed to write it into any physics books.

Peek a boo.

I know. I saw it twice and then ran to the Internet to research it. 5 minutes later I was like Ah ha! I knew this was edited [heavily] to convey some wishywashy ideas. It was still a cool watch though imo.

- From Wiki -

The film's central theme—that quantum mechanics suggests that a conscious observer can affect physical reality—has also been refuted by Bernie Hobbs, a science writer with ABC Science Online. Hobbs explains, "The observer effect of quantum physics isn't about people or reality. It comes from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, and it's about the limitations of trying to measure the position and momentum of subatomic particles... this only applies to sub-atomic particles - a rock doesn't need you to bump into it to exist. It's there. The sub-atomic particles that make up the atoms that make up the rock are there too." Hobbs also discusses Hagelin's experiment with Transcendental Meditation and the Washington DC rate of violent crime, saying that "the number of murders actually went up." Hobbs also disputed the film's use of the ten percent myth.

when your senses decieve, it's completely inaccurate to say that since you can touch and lift a chair you be sure it's just as you touch it. Your senses might not be observing reality as it is, but somekind of distortion of it.

Yes, otherwise it would not be a chair that no one was watching.

You can sense a chair without seeing it. If everything we weren't looking at didn't exist, it would have drastic consequences on gravity, for example. Now I feel dumb for writing that, because I so wanted to just write "The Langoliers get it."

hmmm this is a tough one... hmmmm..... yes? sigh

why dont you try buying a video camera. turn it on press record face it towards the chair then leave the room. come back 20 min later and see what you find. but most importantly...

the camera would have no effect on this since you will actually see what the camera recorded but thru your eye so the distortion is still taking effect.

Reality is just input, regardless of how it is perceived.

Well then I guess I am not here right now because you are not looking at me. This sux being a figment of your imagination but w/e ill get over it.

If you think you exist. U know that theory right?

How high were you when you made this thread?

And have you heard of Schroedinger's cat?

nice first post...