Author
|
Topic: Something to Dissect (Read 858 times) |
|
Fox
Archon
Gender: 
Posts: 122
Reputation: 8.01
Rate Fox
Never underestimate the odds.
|
 |
Something to Dissect
« on: 2006-08-21 12:22:03 » |
 |
Greetings CoV.
In this thread I will try introducing, and attempting, a hypothesis (of my own design) on reality and how this applies to the physical world, which I would like to test and evaluate on your own minds just to see where I may have gone wrong, or just horribly incorrect.
I dont claim this to be a scientific hypothesis, but more a philosophical hypothesis based around metaphysics.
There may indeed be something(s) vital here which I have not taken into consideration, so please if you have the time I would appreciate your positive criticisms.
Also, I in no way cliam that this is correct (or perhaps, anywhere near correct), its just an idea based on multiple fields of study...actually its more likely to be horribly wrong, but hey its just an idea.
If there is something that you cannot understand (which I have written incorrectly or otherwise) or cannot quite grasp, due to how I have written about it, just say and I'll correct myself, or try and explain the confusion.
Regards,
Fox
Quantum-Relativity
(and how this applies to the general/macroscopic world)
The Quantum Isolation of this hypothesis ineluctably results in a “Quantum-Gap” of particle separation.
The Quantum-Gap here would equal, Material relativity (Material relativity would be a state of complete individualism and self-relativity where matter is unique to the point of individual, and never comes into contact with another physical property while at the same time being able to interact and influence another physical property; where all physical and material entities are separate and isolated from each other via the quantum gap, which itself would be a shell of energy which encases the given particle of matter and which prevents it from direct "physical contact" with other particles of matter), in the sense, and through which all physical interactions are illusionary, and that the "real" interactions between particles and all physical entities are little more then feelings and emotions (which, where individual particles are concerned, could not be directly interpretated as we know them since they would lack the degree and level of consciousness needed and a working and functioning brain equiped with an amygdala) which work only by way of energy through bonds, links and connections which everything has through experience, and its own inevitable choices.
This claims that physical entities never “touch” directly, but interact through the quantum-gap by way of energy around the said entity (a quantum-wrap of feeling and emotion which would be inevitable on all scales and based around the physics of a set matrix and natural evolution with respect of the physics involved) over experience and choice (either choice by way of free-will or determinism, thus producing the probabilistic, and potentially chaotic nature of the Quantum world). All physical and material entities are inevitably self-contained within a "quantum-wrap" of zero-point-energy which acts as the entities interaction with other entities. Because zero-point-energy is the lowest possible energy a system can have, as well as being an inherent and inextricable part of a set matrix, then this energy can not be removed from the system. Thus can zero-point-energy never be directly exploited and used in the traditional means.
To elucidate on how the quantum-gap functions with a little more clarity I will use a metaphor here: Imagine two sweets that are each contained within sweet "wrappers". Now these "wrappers" are a perfect analogy to the "quantum wrap" energy which embraces all particles. The sweets contained within the wrappers would be the particles of nature, while the wrappers themselves would equal the quantum wrap. Now, when these two sweets "touch" note that no matter how hard or close they come to each other the two "sweets" never actually, or technically "touch" at all they are constantly and inevitable separated by the quantum-gap; you see the "touching" is done by way of interaction which can only occur through the "wrappers" of the quantum-gap; thus is interpretation a relative and individual quality and state based on and around the interaction.
Now, with respect of the Wavefunction collapse, collapse of the state vector, or reduction of the wave packet, is just an epiphenomenon of another process (e.g. quantum decoherence) and thus the quantum-gap.
Where Quantum superposition is concerned, interference would be the outcome and result of two or more waves of interaction via the quantum-gap, thus creating a new type of interaction and thus a new wave pattern; where this hypothesis is concerned you could call this state “Quantum evolution”. There is also suggestive macroscopic evidence for this which (in suggestive states of observation over evolutionary progression) can be found in certain mathematical models, such as Dynamical systems, Chaos theory, Deterministic models, Stochastic models, or (where microscopic systems are concerned) Quantum chaos. Taking this into account gives us a brilliant and plausible mathematical suggestion, with Dynamical systems and Chaos theory, of macroscopic Evolution; and the same applies with the microscopic scale of Evolution with Dynamical systems and Quantum Chaos.
As things grow, evolve and become “bigger”, and more predictable (consciousness is a candidate for this, and driving force based on information over experience) and begin to “take shape” based on the information they have individually, yet reletivly obtained (and thus are constructed from) by way of energy, and so begin to obay alternate laws over evolution in this way. Note that all laws do indeed stem from one prime and “universal law/constant”, but given the complex and truly diverse way in which things have progressed and evolved, this law has “naturally” split based on Material relativity and its evolution; the fundamental physical constants are an example of this as we currently understand them.
This hypothesis says that no matter how similar or alike two things are with respect for each other, that they are never completely the same or identical, and that a nuance of some degree will always be present, which may offer some deeper insight in respect with the uncertainty principle .
It also states that two "physical" properties can never directly contact each other in anyway, but that they can indirectly influence and interact ("Physically") with each other through the quantum-gap; and that this is the illusion that we call and identify as "reality".
The quantum-gap “organizes” (in a quantum evolutionary sense, based on the given physics involved) particles, waves, energy into atoms and molecules, and the collection of molecules like our brains and bodies, and even the universe. Quantum mechanics tells us it is an illusion that particles (photons/waves) can organize each other, or control each other in a direct "physical" sense, but where the quantum gap is concerned "material relativity" comes into play.
Each and every individual particle in the universe is individually separate from all others, the way which these particles interact are through the "shells of energy" which encase the entity from other entities, this is the quantum-gap. All particles are self-contained, each within its own "bubble" of energy (zero-point-energy). Only through this energy can interactions occur based upon the particles nature, but the particles never physically touch, instead the differentiating energies around the particles “interact” thus generating causality; the type of energy around the particle and its effect depend on the particles individual nature and evolution. Since all material is relative and individual in evolution and nature, yet vastly similar to others like itself based on and in similar circumstances of "reality" and existence, all particles have varying, individual and relative degrees of consciousness and subconsciousness.
Based on circumstance, evolution and experience these "individual" conscious particles may gather and accumulate in number, shape and interactive order over time, slowly evolving from conscious entities into living organisms. Note that as evolution in this way progresses consciousness becomes greater, thus advancing (the entity in question) in shape and interactive order; evolution would be based on conscious experience, or memes, by way of collective information which would be gathered and subconsciously (and genetically) stored for future use and future evolution; genetic storage in this sense would apply to (and perhaps explain) "junk DNA".
Here consciousness would equal free-will over awareness, whereas subconsciouness would equal determinism over instinct (note here on how people will do something and then come to some degree of realization and ask themselves, "why did I just do that?"); The latter (subconsciousness) would be the first to evolve since it is vastly quicker to develop, logically speaking, and thus more applicable to evolutionary survival.
Determinism, or, will by natural/genetic instinct (based on evolution) is analogous of putting something’s choices on "auto-pilot", it simply puts nature (based on genetic evolution) in control. Whereas free-will would be like turning the auto-pilot off, but this is much harder then it simply sounds. As far as my current observations and experiments take me, human beings are the only species capable of realizing, using, and even understanding the concept of free-will; but even in humanity this appears to be both infrequent and uncommon.
"Mother Nature" (Nature as the personification of natural and genetic determinism and instincts over ones surroundings,environment and evolution) it would seem prefers to be in control...a bit like a mother who just can't seem to let go.
You may question as for why free-will has been included in this hypothesis; taking it with respect to the Copenhagen interpretation, the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics predictions cannot be explained in terms of a purely deterministic theory, and does not simply reflect our limited knowledge. Quantum mechanics provides probabilistic results because the "physical" universe is fundamentally probabilistic rather than deterministic.
You may also be wondering what is literally and actually meant when you see "free-will", so here is my semantic interpretation, which I will try basing as generally and applicably as possible, instead of having it reflect just my own individual perspective and interpretation, based on my own make-up.
Free-will: The power and ability to make one's own choice (out of probability) without suffering subjection, temptation, or, being manipulated and controlled by genetic deterministic factors such as impulses, instincts, genetics, nature and surroundings/environment.
Now to some this may sound, and look like an impossibility to achieve, and thus justify one's "belief", or weykening, in determinism. There is no doubt that determinism (in our current stage of evolution) does indeed deeply overshadow free-will, but in denying such genetic factors, as those listed above, what else is there for us to suffer subjection, temptation, control or manipulation by?... probability perhaps?... no, because probability offers multiple choice, in-place of determining that choice like determinism does. Everything that we are "generally" based on and genetically driven by is in someway derived from the genetic factors listed above. In short, free-will (as I put it) is acting out, or choosing against ones own deterministic nature, or simply denying one's self with respect to the material/physical/natural world.
The real question here is that if Mother Nature allows the evolution of free-will to occur, thus allowing us to potentially free ourselves from our natural constraints, then why does Mother Nature allow its evolution, or even its existence, at all? Does this suggest that freedom and liberation are powers beyond those of nature?
The quantum-gap would exclude an individual particle from all others. This exclusion can only happen if particles cannot interact directly (physically) with each other and the quantum-gap is the absolute guarantee.
When Modern Physics tells us that ("doing") something is an illusion it's not telling us anything new. The illusion of doing is the same in fiction, like stories in books, movies, even computers. Physics is thus no exception.
A book is made up of words. Words can have a profound impact on people and their emotions thus creating an interaction which will result in causality, but other than this, books cannot do "things" anymore than particles can. This is interaction, and the closer, or more applicable, two things are with respect unto each other the greater the energy, causality and "reality" will be; and so thus, the interaction will be.
Letters and words do not organize each other and become a novel because the gaps between them do the organizing by way of deterministic interaction (natural/genetic/evolutionary will), or sometimes the interaction of free-will which are both derived initially from the quantum-gap unto the "physical" objects in question and vary between objects by way of evolution, circumstance and individual experience. Without the gaps between letters and words there would be chaos where no interaction would be possible since nothing would make any coherent or understandable sense, only if you separate the words and construct some form of order does interaction occur and evolve. The true power behind all books, letters and written works are the spaces which separate the words from each other, analogous with respect of the quantum-gap. The space between words in a book prevents the words from physically interacting with each other exactly like the quantum-gap prevents particles from interacting with each other. The only "real" interaction factor in all of this is energy, which is the connecting and driving interacting force behind everything.
Energy would be the bond, link and connection between all physical things; so really all things "physical", in this sense, are completely individual and non-tactile, never really "touching" (physically) at all; instead they are just constantly bound, linked and connected. Of course the closer two entities come to each other the stronger the energy reaction, by way of feeling and emotion, becomes; but a feeling or emotion of some kind, to some degree is always present upon the realization of another entity, even subconsciously when we are not directly, or consciously aware of it. In short a connection or link of some kind is always there for interaction to occur; it’s just that the degree and strength of it depends on the level of awareness and realization involved.
A great way to grasp this concept of "reality" is to go to the movies. In a movie there are no "physical" interactions on the movie-screen. The doing or actions are pure illusion - fiction. All of the doing, acting and organizing is initially being done by the gaps between the “moving-pictures” (analogous to the nature of the quantum-gap's), which do not move even though the movie appears to move, and the interaction again takes place via the energy which embraces the "moving-pictures" (like the quantum gap does with individual particles) such as the power, the way it makes you feel, your attention towards it; the electrical signals emitted by photons from the screen which travel through your eyes along your retina and across the optic chiasma, entering the visual centre which are then interpreted by your brain; or the energy which vibrates and becomes sound, travelling through your ears around your cochlea which are then converted into nerve signals which then travel up within your cochlear nerve and enter the temporal lobe where it is interpreted by your brain.
This is a chain interaction (which we call and identify as "reality"), its operates and functions by way of energy momentum (which would make it applicable for mass less particles). The interpretation is completely relative and individualistic, but the interaction itself is inescapable, which would also lead to things being irrevocably what and how they are.
Apropos, the same concept applies to sleep/dreams and hallucinations. There are no "doers" in dreams only imaginary ones, thoughts acting through neural electrical interactions (energy) based on "information energy" such as memory, memes and genetic mental cognition, which is basically what makes up the dream.
TV here would work in the same way.
The binary-code of computers tells us the exact same story of fiction: the binary-code cannot do things - the illusion of doing is organized by the gaps in/between the binary-code; this also applies to CD's and how they run and work with respect to the laser. The gap/s between CD's and the binary-code in computers works analogous with respect of the space between words in books work, and thus, the way in which the quantum-gap(s) between particles work(s).
The quantum-gap is thus the objective-absolute and the particles it organizes are so subjective that "reality" could therefore be deemed illusionary or fictional.
There can be no observer within the quantum-gap since an observer is made up of particles which by definition are only embraced by the quantum-gap and can never exist directly within it, only "surrounded" by it.
Of course how one would apply this with something like the initiation of the big bang is still open for suggestion which I may try and include at a latter date providing that the above is logically sound.
Taking all of the above into account (providing that it is accurate) may help suggest that the universe and it's "reality" are little more than a grand cosmic stage, or virtual simulation, analogous to that of the Matrix trilogy, but without all the computers, A.I, and of course the breaking of the second law of thermodynamics (unverified), which the film displayed.
Taking this hypothesis even further in suggestion, by way of Corroboration, from what I can tell, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle even acts, within our "reality", in the same way we would expect to find a simulation in a virtual system to act.
The only "things" which could be called "real" (for lack of a better word) are experience and free-will in the form of energy over choice. Everything else would just be a fleeting illusionary material action for the purpose of attaining experience and using free-will.
So the only "real" source, from which one could argue or even deem "reality”, is experience (the information of gained awareness) and free-will (the ability of choice without reliance on determinism or genetic factors). Determinism would just be a fixed construct, a natural constant and omni-evolving control factor locked within a physical illusion, compelling us in our actions for the purpose of complying with the "reality" we have evolved to embrace.
In a final irony to this it could very well be that the less one actually feels and sees something the more "real" it actually is, but in a way which is not yet fully understood. This is only a suggestion that this hypothesis offers, abit like the suggestion of parallel worlds in quantum mechanics.
All in all, it looks (as far as this goes) like Guillaume due Bartas could have been right when he said "I take the world to be but as a stage, where net-maskt men do play their personage".
© Fox 2006.
|
I've never expected a miracle. I will get things done myself. - Gatsu
|
|
|
Hermit
Archon
Posts: 4287
Reputation: 8.94
Rate Hermit
Prime example of a practically perfect person
|
|
Re:Something to Dissect
« Reply #1 on: 2006-08-21 14:46:16 » |
|
This is not even a review, never mind a dissection, as I haven't even read the article, rather I just skimmed through it after realizing that I'd need to take notes. Nonetheless, the skimming did raise a few thoughts that I thought I'd try to share.
Physics is about what is. Metaphysics is about what we think about what isn't. This means that "metaphysics" is usually based upon "metaphores", and never more so than when appealing to physics for models. In other words, the cartographer's, here, where the map is not the territory, be dragons.
What we think is not particularly tangible either. I'd go so far as to suggest that it takes remarkable clarity of thought and speech to begin to communicate such nebulous concepts in a way which anyone other than the author can comprehend. Sometimes, it seems to me, not even the authors can untangle the cluttered skeins once the first rush of authorship is passed. On the whole though, the lack of a tangible subject is, I think, what makes so many metaphysical texts drearily woolly and remarkably similar. Unfortunately, this one does not seem to break the mold.
One issue with the dissection of the woolly non-existent is that like a brain dissection taken too far, it usually seems to result in altogether too much gray paste, all completely indistinguishable, rather than anything which can be pointed to and characterized. Still, I will try to come back to it when I have some time. Perhaps in a few weeks.
Regards
Hermit
PS, While nature may indeed be a mother (and delightful events like Hurricanes, Earthquakes and Tsunami only emphasize this, but not as much as syphilis, pancreatic cancers, leukemia and so forth), she is not aware of anything - so in my opinion, to attempt to project intention onto this nasty mother is probably an indication that something has gone wrong with one's comprehension, or with one's underlying thought, or with one's attempted communication. You might like to chew on that thought - or perform a little research and revision - in the meantime.
|
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg, 1999
|
|
|
Fox
Archon
Gender:
Posts: 122
Reputation: 8.01
Rate Fox
Never underestimate the odds.
|
|
Re:Something to Dissect
« Reply #2 on: 2006-08-23 19:30:48 » |
|
Quote from: Hermit on 2006-08-21 14:46:16
PS, While nature may indeed be a mother (and delightful events like Hurricanes, Earthquakes and Tsunami only emphasize this, but not as much as syphilis, pancreatic cancers, leukemia and so forth), she is not aware of anything - so in my opinion, to attempt to project intention onto this nasty mother is probably an indication that something has gone wrong with one's comprehension, or with one's underlying thought, or with one's attempted communication. You might like to chew on that thought - or perform a little research and revision - in the meantime.
|
Thanks for your reply and imput Hermit.
I concur with your logic here. Of course I dont really see mother nature as a consciousness entity in itself which "acts" out against us in some of the nasty (or "vengeful"?) ways in which you point out.
Mother nature (within my above post) is simply an easier, and articulate way via clarity, for me to identify nature, determinism, instincts, genetics and environment via evolution into one simple term of phrase which is applicable unto us all; a personification if you will to which subconsciousness would be directly applied.
Maybe if free-will really is present within our existence we could eventually overthrow the restraints of this "nasty mother" and enter a higher state of being.
Sorry for this confusion.
I'll try to elucidate some other points in my post with alittle more clarity also.
Thanks again.
Regards,
Fox
|
I've never expected a miracle. I will get things done myself. - Gatsu
|
|
|
|
Logged
