Demonstrating that in my opinion the words explicit and implicit describe all that ‘IS’.
You will see from other posts that new physics experiments show us different ways in which to think about holistic reality and our relationship with it. This is more especially so with Bohm’s physics theories.
I originally wrote this story as a first draft. This was around six years ago. I never intended for it to be made public. Today, however, I am of the opinion that some ideas contained within it are worthy of wider consideration. This includes by laypersons of which I am a learner-member too. If I were to re write it I would assemble and describe its contents differently. This includes by me employing Bohm’s last Infinite Potential ideas. This is before before he died in 1992. These Infinite Potential considerations are also included in other posts through out my website.
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.
In Australia I have established the Infinite-Potential Movement around this Bohm theory
If you view this short introduction and like what you have seen I recommend you take the time to view this full length presentation. It is one hour and fifty minutes in length. I suggest you break the presentation into roughly three parts. This is because there is a significant degree of unusual science information entwined within it.
This topic seems to sit within and around every aspect of our lives
The article looks at these questions. I present it knowing that much of the text sits outside of my comprehension. For example, part of the article talks about the possibility of there being a new way to measure intelligence. The debate is complex. I am presenting it for the benefit of readers interested in this area of science and the sophisticated arguments related thereto. I believe that this subject takes readers into the realm of the David Bohm’s Infinite Potential theory.
“…This dual nature of reality isn’t just restricted to light, either, but has been observed to apply to all quantum particles: electrons, protons, neutrons, even significantly large collections of atoms. In fact, if we can define it, we can quantify just how “wave-like” a particle or set of particles is. Even an entire human being, under the right conditions, can act like a quantum wave.”
I believe that if we are to ever fully understand reality then we must also incorporate unknowable [indivisible] information
My regular readers know that I believe all phenomena, including thought construction are both implicit and explicit. My word implicit means information that we all know is real [such as consciousness] but which at the same time it cannot be tested. This is the reason why I have classified metaphysical phenomena such as consciousness as being indivisible information. We can describe indivisible information like consciousness, but physics science generally cannot incorporate consciousness in its modelling. This is because consciousness cannot be defined or measured. I think this is a shame because this means that science models do not seriously incorporate our whole of life experiences, which also means reality.
I recently read an article written by George F. R. Ellis, who talks about this same dilemma in science and I feel you should be aware of Ellis’s ideas as I strongly identify with them. Below you will find the conclusions of Ellis’s essay entitled “On the Nature of Emergent Reality”. I have emboldened sections of the conclusion from the document that I feel are most pertinent to my argument and you might like to know about them as well. If you have the opportunity to read much of Ellis’s ideas about reality I think that you will feel richly rewarded.
Quote:
“…Conclusion
Reprise: I have given above a view of emergent complex systems where there are structuring relations, triggering relations as well as environmental influences and internal variables, summarised in Figure 9.
Figure 9: The system and its situation: contextual and triggering influences
Function takes place in the context of a social and physical situation that, together with the values of internal variables, is the current operating environment. Structure is constant on the relevant timescale, enabling the input (triggering events that operate in the given situation – they are varying causal quantities) to have a predictable result. Thus function follows structure. The environment sets the boundary conditions and the internal variables (memory and learnt behaviour patterns) result from past experience. Noise or chance represents the effects of detailed features that we do not know because they are subsumed in the coarse graining leading to higher level descriptions of either the system or the environment. The system structure is determined by developmental processes that use genetic information, read in the context of the system-environment interaction occurring in the organism’s history, to determine its structure. For example, genes develop a brain capacity to learn language that then results in adaptation of the brain to that specific language. The genetic heritage leading to this result is comes into being through evolutionary adaptation over very long timescales to the past environment. This language then forms the basis of complex symbolic modelling and associated understanding, taking place in a social context, that guides future actions. Thus human understanding of events and their meanings govern their actions, which then change the situation around them. Symbolic systems are causally effective.
Strong reductionist claims, usually characterised by the phrase `nothing but’ and focusing only on physical existence, simply do not take into account the depth of causation in the real world as indicated above, and the inability of physics on its own to comprehend these interactions and effects. These claims represent a typical fundamentalist position, claiming a partial truth (based on some subset of causation) to be the whole truth and ignoring the overall rich causal matrix while usually focusing on purely physical elements of causation. They do not and cannot be an adequate basis of explanation or understanding in the real world. Consequently they do not represent an adequate basis for making ontological claims.
This paper has outlined a view of emergent reality in which it is clear that non-physical quantities such as information and goals can have physical effect in the world of particles and forces, and hence must be recognised as having a real existence (Ellis 2003). Associated with this there is a richer ontology than simple physicalism, which omits important causal agencies from its vision. That view does not deal adequately with the real world…”
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.
It seems that the eminent physicist David Bohm was profoundly affected by his association with both Albert Einstein and the internationally respected philosopher Jiddu Krishnamurti
I feel that this is interesting. In this short thirteen minute video presentation Bohm talks about his implicate order theory in physics as it relates to all things [including ontologically]. This includes both the universe as well as wider reality as well. You will notice that the Dalai Lama was present at different times during this discussion. Bohm died in 1992.
This paper by R. Pizzi from the University of Milan seems to have long term important implications for us all. It seems to fit with Bohm’s Infinite Potential Theory. If Bohm’stheory interests you might see my post of some worth. It is very detailed. It incorporates some of Albert Einsteins views about science and its relationship with religion (Bohm and Einstein were great friends)
The implications of the attachment seem to be scientifically significant. I present to you both the abstract as well as a section of the conclusions of this document. What they seem to mean is that our consciousness [awareness] rests outside of our bodies and this in turn opens the door for the possibility that paranormal/metaphysical/cosmic-entangled phenomena can be explained. The original on line document is well dated but when you read it in conjunction with Bohms theory I do not believe that this matters.
Quotes:
“Abstract:
Evidence presented by R. Pizzi from the University of Milan Italy in papers[1,2,3] and derived from personal correspondence [4] suggest that neural network colonies grown from a single cell with identical DNA are able to communicate when they are electromagnetically isolated from each other. If true, the implications of this discovery for brain research, cognitive science, the role of DNA medical applications, and the development of quantum computers are highly significant. This report presents the evidence I have been able to gather to support the veracity of this discovery. Our intention is to determine whether sufficient evidence supports the reality of this effect and whether or not verification experiments and further exploration of these phenomena is warranted.”
Quote drawn from the conclusion of this document:
“…3) What is the correct explanation? If the signals are related and electromagnetic communication can be ruled out what then is the mechanism that connects the two living neurons?
ANSWER: Some form of [metaphysical/ontological] quantum entanglement appear likely candidates however we recommend treating this experiment as an empirical phenomena for which a theory is still to be evolved.
In conclusion we feel the implications of this discovery for brain research, cognitive science, the role of DNA in medical applications, and the development of quantum physics is extremely significant. Furthermore the evidence outlined in this report is compelling enough to justify both further investigation and efforts for organizing verification experiments in an independent laboratory.”
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.
