The OBSERVER EFFECT
Science of the nineteenth century was dominated by the belief that the universe and everything in it could be reduced to elementary components (particles and forces), and universal laws (such as Newton’s Laws of Motion).
This thinking defined events and processes as local, limited physical interactions.
Consciousness itself was attributed to a series of predictable physical and chemical interactions within the brain.
Quantum theory has since demonstrated that the universe (and everything in it) is characterized only by probabilities that can be interpreted as purely subjective — that is, they refer to what we observe.
– Kelly Neil (abridged)
The act of observing seems to denote a consciousness unique to each observer, regardless of whether that observer is (in this case) an artist, the subject (animate or inanimate) being observed, or a viewer in a gallery.
Is the observer essential to the existence of the physical universe?
How much influence do observers exert on events?
And regardless of scientific and/or philosophical theories, aren’t frozen moments marvelous?
Three photographers explore the concept of the ‘Observer Effect’ as it applies to their work:
Scott MacEachern – (bio & portfolio)
James Clare – (bio & portfolio)
David Barbour – (bio & portfolio)