Philosophy with a difference and interesting stories too
Why recent physics experiments with respect to non-locality (entanglement) are likely to change the nature and style of scientific research forever
These two experiments demonstrate that all “things” in the universe act in a coordinated way even though no force passes through the space between them. These words strongly imply that the universe is aware of itself and furthermore the conditions at the time of the Big Bang were without time and non-local as well.
I believe that it is. A statement with respect to the 1887 Michelson and Morley Ether experiment seem to support these words. It remains a universally contentious debate to this day.
I believe that you will find that the information contained in the following document is challenging. It questions certain contemporary physics beliefs. As a layperson I have conducted a great deal of research in respect to this topic. As you would expect I have critics.
In physics quantum entanglement [ontological] suggests that phenomena are somehow connected to each other, and furthermore influence each other in multiple ways.
My purpose in writing this post is to attempt to more clearly identify and describe what quantum entanglement may be. In order to help kick start the following informational references I urge you to view this video link. You will see how the presenter is arguing that one object [like a bar of steel] can be two places at one. This is via ontological [quantum] entanglement theory.
2] An animated video explanation of quantum entanglement
3] Physics experiment demonstrates that entanglement a is valid hypothesis
4] My conceptual views about ontological [quantum] non-locality are as follows:
Ontological entanglement implies that information between particles [things] is “hidden-information”. This also means that communication between things causes observations of one thing to be correlated with observations of the other [as per the video link above].
Such correlations have been predicted and observed for many years, but it has been difficult to determine if the correlations were caused by information being shared such as through gravity.
Entanglement [in physics known as non-locality] implies the existence of direct connections between one point in space [thing] and another without going through intervening points. Such direct connections mean that communication between points in space occur faster than the speed of light. This means [without time] instantly.
As I suggested above there can be different manifestations of non-locality. One of these is Newton’s force of gravity is theoretically non-local because in theory it propagates at infinite speed.
It seems that it can. This is from a temporal to an ontological state.
In a breakthrough experiment an object has been created that is visible to the unaided eye, but has been shown to be in two places at the same time
If this is the case it seems to me that this is another good example as to how metaphysical/ontological science plays such an important role in understanding wider reality.
This is a dated comic strip [probably from sometime before the 1960’s] that I feel does a good job in explaining the effects of relativity
Readers should note that the cartoon was produced before the discovery of the lighting effects that occur near to the speed of light.
Quote:
“When Albert Einstein advanced his special theory of relativity in 1905, he turned upside down everything that common sense and science had established about time. He said that time is not absolute, but is a relative quantity that could show one value to one observer while seeming different to a second viewer. The whole thing seemed preposterous.”
References:
http://kvpy2005.blogspot.com.au/2006/09/great-relativity-bomb-plot.html
http://www.willemsplanet.com/2015/05/09/friday-the-relativity-express/
It is against this background that I recommend that you read the attached pdf file:
I urge you to not set aside ontological/implicit science. Reality is much more than that which is temporal!
“The common division of the world into subject and object, inner world and outer world, body and soul is no longer adequate.” This sentence quotes Ken Wilbur.
This is an older presentation that I have re structured and re-posted. I feel that its contents are timeless and as such they deserve contemporary interest.
These nine quotations below are a reminder to us all that non-local (metaphysical/ontological) physics remains alive and well in all epochs. In my opinion this situation will never change. For example when you think that the Standard model does not say what causes particles to have the properties that they do, or where mass and charge come from you know that there are still huge numbers of metaphysical/ontological ‘gaps’ for them yet to fill. This is with respect to them forming a unified theory of everything. Furthermore, and perhaps more significantly, physicists cannot yet accurately demonstrate that which is microscopic and macroscopic in physics. (Metaphysical/Ontological means ‘things’ that scientists have not yet discovered or been able to scientifically describe and test yet. It does not mean pseudoscience as is commonly believed in the wider community). This is although they mostly know such ‘things’ are real. Consciousness is a good example of this. I believe that one day scientists will be subtly driven to the conclusion that reality-physics is a process. It is a both a pre-geometric and geometric process relative only unto to itself. The original source of the following quotations can be found at the bottom of this blog. All scientists quoted remain highly respected in the science community.
Quote:
Scientists as Mystics
Max Planck
“…I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness. [I say awareness]”
The Observer, London, January 25, 1931 )
Werner Heisenberg
“The common division of the world into subject and object, inner world and outer world, body and soul is no longer adequate.”
Erwin Schroedinger
“Subject and object are only one. The barrier between them cannot be said to have broken down as a result of recent experiments in the physical sciences, for this barrier does not exist”.
Schrodinger (1961) claims that the Vedic slogan “All in One and One in All” was an idea that led him to the creation of quantum mechanics.
“Consciousness is never experienced in the plural, only in the singular. How does the idea of plurality (emphatically opposed by the Upanishad writers) arise at all? … the only possible alternative is simply to keep the immediate experience that consciousness is a singular of which the plural is unknown; that there *is* only one thing and that what seems to be a plurality is merely a series of different aspects of this one thing produced by deception (the Indian maya) – in much the same way Gaurisankar and Mt. Everest turn out to be the same peak seen from different valleys.” (From: What is Life)
Sir James Jeans
“Mind no longer appears as an accidental intruder into the realm of matter; we are beginning to suspect that we ought rather to hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.”
J. Jeans, The Mysterious Universe (New York: Macmillan, 1932), 186.
Sir Arthur S. Eddington
“All through the physical world runs that unknown content, which must surely be the stuff of our consciousness. Here is a hint of aspects deep within the world of physics, and yet unattainable by the methods of physics. And, moreover, we have found that where science has progressed the farthest, the mind has but regained from nature that which the mind has put into nature.”
Sir Arthur S. Eddington, Space, Time and Gravitation: An Outline of the General Relativity Theory (1920)
Bernard d’Espagnat
“the doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment.”
Bernard d’Espagnat, “The Quantum Theory and Reality,” Scientific American, Vol. 241, No. 5 (November 1979), pp. 158-181.
Roger Penrose
“…the contemporary understanding of material is very different now from the way it used to be. If we consider what matter really is, we now understand it as much more of a mathematical thing…But I think that matter itself is now much more of a mental substance…”
Journal of Consciousness Studies 1:24
Freeman Dyson
“[Is mind] primary or an accidental consequence of something else? The prevailing view among biologists seems to be that the mind arose accidentally out of molecules of DNA or something. I find that very unlikely. It seems more reasonable to think that mind was a primary part of nature from the beginning and we are simply manifestations of it at the present stage of history. It’s not so much that mind has a life of its own but that mind is inherent in the way the universe is built.”
Interview with Freeman Dyson in U.S.News and World Report, April 18, 1988, 72.
How did we get here?
The following video argues that reflective equations postulated by Turing predicted the underlying chaotic nature. It also states how nature self organizes itself into beautiful patterns which seem to come from nowhere. I wonder if fractal patterns are also a manifestation of Turing’s predictions? [Although Benoit Mandelbrot discovered fractals.] I will introduce you to this fascinating video by quoting the words of Edward N. Lorenz.
Lorenz wrote:
“At one point I decided to repeat some of the computations in order to examine what was happening in greater detail. I stopped the computer, typed in a line of numbers that it had printed out a while earlier, and set it running again. I went down the hall for a cup of coffee and returned after about an hour, during which time the computer had simulated about two months of weather. The numbers being printed were nothing like the old ones. I immediately suspected a weak vacuum tube or some other computer trouble, which was not uncommon, but before calling for service I decided to see just where the mistake had occurred, knowing that this could speed up the servicing process. Instead of a sudden break, I found that the new values at first repeated the old ones, but soon afterward differed by one and then several units in the last decimal place, and then began to differ in the next to the last place and then in the place before that. In fact, the differences more or less steadily doubled in size every four days or so, until all resemblance with the original output disappeared somewhere in the second month. This was enough to tell me what had happened: the numbers that I had typed in were not the exact original numbers, but were the rounded-off values that had appeared in the original printout. The initial round-off errors were the culprits; they were steadily amplifying until they dominated the solution.” (E. N. Lorenz, The Essence of Chaos, U. Washington Press, Seattle (1993), page 134)
I guess this depends on who you speak with
You may find this video presents an interesting argument.
If this is the case it could help solve a long standing physics mystery.
See the story here
If the words in this presentation seem to you to have a degree of validity I introduce you to this David Bohm documentary trailer to the full Infinite Potential video. In doing this try to understand the philosophical commentary thereto rather than the physics debate therein. Some of the science is complicated and not designed to be fully understood by lay persons, including me. The information herein can also be linked to this Infinite Potential post.
Australian researchers are saying they have opened the path to a new generation of batteries that could allow an electric vehicle to drive from Melbourne to Sydney [880km] on a single charge.