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.
I mostly discuss this topic in relation to clock time and what the natural order of the universe might be in relationship to entropy physics theory
Also see this important qualifying post
All ‘things’ and associated events in the universe are subject to the process of change. Material things and events both change and decay. In both instances they change without time, because clocks change and decay too. * Thoughts, patterns of thoughts, intuition and alleged clairvoyance are everyday examples of phenomena without time. Protons in light have no rest energy (mass) and so they can also be seen to be without time (travel for ever) unless they somehow interact with ‘something’ along the way.
These words imply that all change and decay of things and events (all objects and associated influences and effects such as cutting and slicing an apple) in the universe are somehow related to some type of ‘hidden’ laws within it. By this I mean that the universe does have predictable ‘order’ within it and this is despite that all things and events are interacting with each other in ever-differing averages, densities and ratios with each other. This is in respect to not only each other but also the universe itself as a single reference frame. I suggest by this that the biggest objects (like Galaxies) and ‘bundles’ of various energy types in the universe seem to mostly get along quite well with the smallest objects in the universe such as quantum particles.
Because clocks are perpetually changing and decaying too this means that these differing averages, densities and ratios cannot be accurately observed or measured by an observer. This includes attempting to measure the speed of light with such clocks because of the process of change and decay with them as well. This is an implicit (mysterious) observable scientific paradox in science. This scientific paradox is further complicated (reduced to being chaotic) by the ever-changing condition of the universe wherein energy types and their associated, influences and effects are forever changing as well. It also should be kept in mind with these universal changes that observers similarly change and decay within the reference frame (system) of the universe too. These words then question as to how accurate can a changing and decaying observer, employing a changing and decaying clock accurately observe and measure changing and decaying things and events in the universe. I suggest that the best they can do so is to randomly do so as best they can.
I see this difficulty as being a significant failing in contemporary scientific research and discovery
In other words there appears to be no reliable mechanical mechanism that can indefinitely measure the process of decay and change of things and events in the universe unless the universe has a determinable (by clocks) some sort of end time. Unless scientists can determine a specific end time (a time reference frame) for the universe then this seems to raise a difficult question. which is:- what type of reference frame are all things and events in the universe changing and decaying in relationship to except to each other? You cannot successfully observe, analyze and count a two hundred-liter sealed barrel containing hundreds of different types and colors of small swimming fish let alone with no barrel at all.
Furthermore if a single proton is capable of traveling forever (unless it ‘hits’ something in its journey) then this suggests to me that the universe might simply be a without time, non-materialistic, nothing reference frame. In other words I am implying that nothing except perhaps an indeterminable (like the hidden rules of nature) stochastic** neural network type of ‘nothing’ reference frame that we could never observe and measure in the first place. This is although it might be mathematically demonstrated to be otherwise.
Could this nothing, however, be aware of itself as well as all things and events taking place within itself in this course of events in this process and does not need mechanical devices such as clocks in order to do so? I believe that this is the case.
*This notion of decay/change can be mathematically demonstrated by means of employing entropy theory in physics. Entropy theory in science explains Quote: “… the lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into disorder…”) Source
** Quote: “…Having a random probability distribution or pattern that may be analyzed statistically but may not be predicted precisely…” (ex Wikipedia).
John Raymond
10th April 2019
This is my theory
Also see this important qualifying post
You will find that I put a lot of effort into composing this document. I suggest that you might find it compatible with the information contained in the Introduction to Bohm’s Infinite Potential theory post.
In the link below you will find where I have compared three sub-quantum models of reality. These include my Awareness model. I originally composed this document so that I could demonstrate to my readers that my Awareness model has merit. By this I mean in comparison to the other two physics models as described. You may consider this to be the case as well.
Also see this important qualifying post
This is from a combined philosophical and physics perspective
Prologue
My message today is primarily centered upon understanding reality. This is through the intuition, skill and bravery of one man. The physicist’s name is David Bohm. Bohm is a British physicist that died in 1992.
I am a Bohm devotee. I refer to myself as being a Divergence Theorist. This means me thinking and writing about a given subject from a number of different approaches.
In these respects the three links that follow are provided for you to consider. They all incorporate themes of “combined” temporal and ontological lines of cosmological thinking. They all feed back to Bohm’s views about “cosmological reality” and the meaning of life. This is as they relate to his views about his Infinite Potential theory. My ideas are broadly similar to Bohm’s but with the emphasis on philosophy.
The three links:
1) The Life and Times of David Bohm
2) A short video trailer about David Bohm and his famous theory of the “Infinite-Potential”
3) Behind the scenes of the film
The contents of these might give you a reasonable idea as to what follows.
The manner in which the” Infinite-Potential” might be seen to “influence all things” in the universe.
I cite three examples. These are ones that I have conceptualized, worked with and previously posted.
These examples and the two supplements provide leads and ideas as to how I believe temporal and ontological things and systems might “work” within the wider world around us (our reality).
It can be shown that we do not live in isolated systems
Is this a sound manner in which to understand the mind and brain nexus?
Going backwards in time before your eyes
Supplement to the above, number 1
Illustratively demonstrating what might be the existence of the “Infinite Potential”
This is from a two dimensional perspective that follows. The illustration is demonstrated and supported by text further below.
A) The Planck line separates quantum (temporal) from sub-quantum (ontological) phenomena. It represents the smallest informational phenomena that physicists can observe, measure, anticipate and “adequately” describe. Mass-less fundamental particles exist in this area. One such example is an electron..
B) Below the Planck line is where Quantum Mechanics theory steps in (all the weird things that are known to happen in physics such as that all things and events are somehow connected to each other. Furthermore it acts as though the Universe has its own consciousness and can think). It is information immediately around the Planck Line that I conceptualize as being the two dimensional “zone” of the “Infinite Potential”. This is neither firmly ontological or temporal. This is represented by our whole of life experiences. This includes being alive.
C) The dotted lines below Quantum Mechanics (B as illustrated above) are representational of things and events that are more weird than other things happening in the universe (as represented by Quantum Mechanics). This lower level physics is the deepest level of physics and is sometimes referred to by Physicists as being informational physics. Human consciousness, intuition and the rules of nature might be seen as examples of phenomena at this level.
D) Above the Planck line (A) is the quantum levels of physics (temporal) where things and events can be observed and measured. These levels embrace materialist (meaning observable and testable) objects and movement. For example these include various effects of movement as described in Einstein’s relativity theories.
E) E in the illustration symbolizes all that “IS” in the universe. It also symbolizes how things might “fit” in relationship to it. I will explain this in the following paragraphs:
Connections in physics is known as entanglement theory. Entanglement theory is also linked to the concept of universal non-locality (something like a universal “without time” ether in the universe).
Quantum theory includes phenomena entitled non-locality (entanglement theory). Non-locality embraces and influences and effects all things and events in both the quantum (D level in the above diagram) as well as those at the B and C levels in the same diagram. (The C level might be considered to be the “home” of non-locality).
The “home” of non-locality might also be seen as the home of Bohm’s “Infinite-Potential”. This was broadly discussed in section B above.
From a temporal perspective non-locality can be demonstrated via the famous double slit experiment in physics. Conversely the laminar flow experiment demonstrates the temporal nature (“the wider practical”) world around us of reality. The following quotation relating to entropy further illustrates how this relationship might work in the manner that it does. It is complicated to understand. I do not fully understand it either.
Quote:
“The second law of thermodynamics which ultimately states that the entropy (lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into disorder) of the universe is always increasing. That means that in any process that takes place the end result is that the entropy of the universe increases (like through the ontological laws of nature). In fact a better definition of what entropy is not just that it’s disorder but a better idea of what entropy is the amount of energy that cannot be converted back into work (like subtle influences such as consciousness). So basically as entropy increases the availability of energy to do (temporal) work decreases.”
Source of quote from transcript
Supplement to the above, number 2
In considering these points you might care to know what Einstein feels about religiosity. You might agree that they seem to concur with Bohm’s ideas. This is pertinent to his Infinite Potential theory.
Quote:
“The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion that stands at the cradle of true art and true science. Whoever does not know it and can no longer wonder, no longer marvel, is as good as dead, and his eyes are dimmed. It was the experience of mystery — even if mixed with fear — that engendered religion. A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, our perceptions of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which only in their most primitive forms are accessible to our minds: it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute true religiosity. In this sense, and only this sense, I am a deeply religious man… I am satisfied with the mystery of life’s eternity and with a knowledge, a sense, of the marvelous structure of existence — as well as the humble attempt to understand even a tiny portion of the Reason that manifests itself in nature.”
Einstein seems to be saying that in order to “practically” introduce his sense of religiosity one should consider:
Quote:
My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds…”. [I suggest that this is in order for us to attain a greater appreciation of the ontological and temporal features of the wider universe (reality). I also say Bohm’s Infinite Potential].
Within the contemporary international physics community there seems to becoming the realization that there are difficulties with the mostly accepted Standard Model of Physics. This is as demonstrated by links one and two (Nature Magazine and Oxford University respectively).
If this proves to be the case this might raise the question as to whether Bohm’s Infinite Potential theory might “fill” this type of “mysterious” gap. This includes its origins, intent and meaning.
I have ideas about this area of debate. This is my philosophical position:
The Awareness Model of Cosmological Reality1
1] At its deepest level, reality consists of awareness and everything that we can perceive and observe consists of patterns of information in that awareness.
2] In the beginning, the awareness may have contained no patterns of information, but if so, we can suppose it had a capacity to create random patterns.
3] As random patterns were created, a proportion would have had structures that would allow them to be linked into more complex patterns. We can suppose that the awareness allowed this to occur and that complex patterns could better persist than the simpler ones.
4] Then over time patterns could emerge and evolve of increasing complexity.
5] We suppose this eventually led to a set of patterns with the right features to produce the universe in which we find ourselves. Eg. replication of patterns responsible for creating 3 dimensional space could produce the phenomenon of a universe expanding from a big bang.
6] We cannot perceive or observe anything outside our universe, however if physical objects consist of patterns of information within a deeper level of awareness, then that awareness might constitute a kind concurrent fourth dimension.
7] After dying the patterns of information corresponding to our physical body must fade away. But how about the patterns of information corresponding to our mental activity? Could they continue to persist within the deeper level awareness even after our physical body no longer exists?
8] Is our personal awareness linked to or produced by the deeper awareness?
9] Is this deeper awareness akin to David Bohm’s Quantum “Infinite Potential” model?
© for items 1 to 9 above John Raymond 2015
For greater physics detail also see this link.
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.
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.
I guess this depends on who you speak with
You may find this video presents an interesting argument.