Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the whtp domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home/jojo1437/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6131

Notice: Trying to get property 'geoplugin_countryCode' of non-object in /home/jojo1437/public_html/wp-content/plugins/page-visit-counter/public/class-page-visit-counter-public.php on line 227
Cosmology – Page 2 – John Hartley

Introduction to Bohm’s Infinite Potential story

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.

About ontological entanglement of all “things”

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.

1] Wikipedia definition

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.

A new approach to understanding and describing reality physics

This story relates to my Awareness Model of Physics

Note: I am a sub quantum physicist. I present this post as I wrote it in 2015. It is now May 2025. I have elected not to rewrite or modify this post. Therefore readers should see it as being an indicative line of thinking. I would not write it this way today.

The Awareness Model of Physics [Primordial-Awareness, (PA)] considers the concept of physical reality at its deepest level. It presents ideas that are considered mostly without merit in the wider physics community. This is because such ideas cannot be tested by conventional scientific experiments. I focus my attention by looking at reality science as being one that is informational because it removes the need for me to be unduly prescriptive and descriptive with my use of language. Furthermore I think that by doing so my readers are likely to better follow my line of thinking. This is even though they may not fully understand the wider message that I am attempting to convey.

I have written numerous articles with respect to my beliefs about informational science. Because of this I will not go into undue informational detail in this post today. My position is that I have firm ideas about what scientific reality may look and feel like and so it can be described and discussed as such. The following chart provides sub-quantum scientific insight into the deepest levels of my thinking with respect to holistic Awareness physics. It provides a platform for the short and more informative discussion that follows it.

My discussion about this chart is in two parts. These are:

1] Informational matters that relate to the pre Big Bang epoch

2] Informational matters that relate to the post Big Bang epoch

Part 1: Informational matters that relate to the pre Big Bang epoch

The sub-quantum level of informational reality is Primordial-Awareness (PA). PA is without time. PA has a self organising property that lead to a neural-network type of structure. This organising property was influenced by means of the effect of a thought. [Thought] Thoughts are influences that are not bound by the laws of quantum theory. For purposes of descriptive simplicity they can be best described as being an undetectable effect emanating from a neutral charge that informationally means something. This something might be the symbol of i that science commonly recognises as being the “something” [matrix] within all “things” that might exist. It is from this thought that the condition of patterns of thoughts emerged that became both effects [something that exists] and the effects of thoughts.

These affects and effects were also influenced by the self organising properties of PA. Both single thoughts and patterns of thoughts mean something in with relation to PA. This is because each thought has a short-term memory that causes them to have a minimal intuitive sense of self-awareness and self-guidance. This is in respect to themselves as well as PA. This also means self meaning, relevance and embryonic self-importance. In other words the PA and thought nexus became an ever increasingly semantic process of self referential informational construction.

In this process weaker thoughts that the system itself did not feel were conducive to the well being and further development of the wider system were discarded and allowed to die. This includes branches emanating from such weak thoughts. This is more particularly so because such weak thoughts had no further meaning to the system as a whole. As the thought neural network system began to further evolve and grow the system began to intuitively sense that it was not only just a condition that could effect itself but it also had its own influences [energy] type. When the system realised this it then morphologically [relating to the form or structure of things] learned to not only understand itself by means of its own energy but also adapt itself to speculate about its own sense of purpose and wider ability to do “things”. The word speculate here means to test new and safer growth enhancement opportunities and potential on behalf of itself. It remains intuitive as it had been all along since it separated from the effect of the neutral charge. Each wider system-effect of speculation became a junction-point [node] of new opportunities and growth to do something.

These new opportunities and growth became not only new nodes of informational action relating to growth and the stunting and destruction of existing growth in order to keep itself “healthy”. This is in line with what I said earlier. This is as though it were a human neural network system. Each node can be seen as though it were a neuron maintaining and expanding its own infinitesimally small ‘patch’ of the wider reality PA system. These nodes can also be seen as cells. These cells are influenced by means of the wider inherent energy within the system itself. These cells also have their own meaning of some type. They also have meaning with respect to their being differing energy types, influences and effects. This means that the PA neural network system is informationally dynamic. This means it has the capacity to influence a great number of types of structure and also the diverse range of ever-growing energy types that helps it to be innovative and informationally constructive. This also means becoming ever more aware of its own holistic self as a single matrix of informational something.

This countless number of energy types (together with these same allied processes) morphologically manifested themselves as patterns of pixels but not observable ones. In other words the original node junctions I talked about are embryonic sub-quantum elementary particles. Each pixel, together with their own short lived memory also began self organisation themselves into patterns. These patterns in turn organise themselves into clusters and packages of self referential information that mean something with respect to the wider PA neural network system itself. This information, together with its inherent energy derived from within itself influences the employment of its own new wide range of energy types to influence the emergence of electrons of energy. These new electrons of energy became separately referential to the clusters and packages of pixels. In other words electrons became entangled with the pixels from which they were influenced and conditioned by in the first place.

It is this entangled relationship between pixels and electrons that became an ever growing and meaningful field of information with respect to PA that had become the continuum for the reality system. This new and ever growing entangled information system became more adventurous and creative with itself. This is to the extent that the combined natural energy of the system, together with the unknowable diversity of energy types that emerged from the primary energy condition in the first place, became entangled into a single system of a matrix of informational oneness. This informational oneness embraces all the inherent informational experiential knowledge that I have talked about within the wider PA system thus far.

You will notice that I have included the energy type of electrons as being a central player in my description of the ever expanding and ever greater diversity of the condition of informational reality. This is the reality that I have entangled with PA in order to give informational reality a descriptive meaning, purpose and some type of a without time future. It is this entangled relationship between PA and my description of informational reality that is the fundamental ether relating to all that ‘IS’ within the wider matrix of entangled reality. This matrix is motionless. All things and events are relational to the ether. This includes our 3D dimension. Our Earth moves through this same “sea” just as Einstein believed it would need to do in order to validate his theory of General Relativity. It is this same ether type, but not necessarily the same type of condition, that is the inherent ether of our 3D universe. For purposes of convenience I have chosen to avoid widening the scope of this reality ether effect to include other universes and dimensions. However, it is because of this unknowable and monumental concentration of energy types and associated diversity of informational processes and event related thereto that influenced the wider condition of PA informational reality to be as randomly explosively as it is bound to be. By this I mean by means of influencing the conditions and effects for the evolution and creation of universes and dimensions.

Part 2: Informational matters that relate to the post Big Bang epoch

In the post Big Bang epoch the pre Big Bang ether ‘field’ retained its PA entangled relationship with electrons. This includes the short-lived informational memories brought forward by electrons in their relationship with the massive diversion of energy of the Big Bang. In the post Big Bang epoch new information was influenced to be created along the same lines as it was in the pre Big Bang epoch. All new different energy types, conditions, influences and effects were ‘born’ that related to a 3D geometric universe. These same energy types and their associated conditions then became related to objects, events, movement, velocity and time as it relates to clocks and the speed of light. It is the ‘natural’ ether of PA (like a sea) that became the ‘motor’ that ‘fired-up’ the universe as we understand it to be. The natural PA ether retained its entangled state with electrons. The PA ether retained its motionless state as it was in the pre Big Bang epoch. Furthermore conceptual pixels of knowledge and information then became the physical means through which the universe can be said to be both aware of itself as well as all ‘things’ and events that are taking place at any given time. Within this process PA remains without time but pixels of information are both with and without time as pixels were originally derived from PA by means of the original pre Big Bang entangled patterns of thoughts processes that I have discussed and explained.

It is from this informational ether energy type nexus that different energy types (including conditions) emerged that were relevant to a 3D geometric reference frame. The ether became the energy type and influence for all ‘things’ related to the new 3D geometric reference frame. This included the energy effect of magnetism that was one of the energy effects that emanated from the Big Bang explosion. It is the nexus relationship between electrons and their associated short term spin memories with magnetism that created the necessary energy field type for the effect of electrical energy fields (electricity) to emerge. This includes the conditions for negative, positive and (temporary) neutral charge that gives ‘dynamic- life’, meaning and purpose to the wider 3D universal system. This is a system centred upon and entangled with the concept of PA entangled informational ether. It is this wide ranging entangled form of informational 3D ether that is the informational link to the pre Big Bang type of reality PA ether. PA is the dynamic (essential) common link between the two. It is the common awareness between the two that has no boundaries. This in turn further supports my idea that all “things” are somehow entangled with each other.

Here is a summery of the key points in the immediate foregoing words as they relate to the 3D universe as well as the subsequent consequences they have in the universe.

1. The universe is undivided and is aware of itself and of all ‘things’ and events taking place within it.

2. All things and events are somehow connected to each other by means of physics quantum entanglement theory.

3. All things and events are both informational and have energy as well. This includes information that is a condition and effect of thoughts that include imagination.

4. The universe has intelligence and thus there are hidden geometric forms in the universe that help to not only understand the universe itself and what the rules of nature might be.

5. All things and events in the universe are in ever-changing densities, averages and ratios with each other and as thus they are representational of the holistic nature of the universe.

6. The natural backdrop to reality (inertia) is Primordial-Awareness.

7. There are two concurrent times in the universe. One is clock time and the other one is without time.

8. Forces are by-products of objects and events.

9. The principle energy force of the universe is unknowable but it is describable. It simply ‘IS’.

10. Space is like a web of limitless interpenetrating fields that can be demonstrated to be functions, energy types with their associated conditions, influences and effects.

11. It is not known in physics science how electrons maintain their structural integrity and furthermore it does not yet know where mass or charge come from. (I say that they come from the dynamic nature of PA).

12. There is nothing smaller in physics than elementary particles like electrons. Electrons are structureless so they are not crushable because they have nothing to crush into. This is why elementary particles like electrons, quarks and gluons are the fundamental building blocks of the universe. Without them the ‘contents’ of the universe would largely not exist. This is why the short lived informational spins of electrons might be seen as the analogical father of all elementary particles in the 3D universe. They are without structure and uncrushable because they are the natural pixels of the matrix of informational PA reality. (They are called point particles in physics).

13.The electromagnetic field (fields within fields) can be seen to be something like analogical entangled fog particles that fill all of space. It exists in every reference frame of space and moment in time. The electromagnetic field can be seen to be stationary with respect to itself and only moves when fields of (from yet to be discovered scientifically sources) charge that ‘influence’ to move at different velocities. These velocities are related to the strength of the field of charge that mean something. This means the PA ether field.

14. Electricity might best be seen as an inert condition and influence relating to the stationary electromagnetic field. This is when this electricity condition and influence becomes an electrical field effect of its own (electricity). This is at the point when the electromagnetic field moves with respect to any nearby energy field of charge. The strength of the electrical field (electricity) is related to the speed of the electromagnetic field in relation to the charge of the field.

15. Electrons in the ether field have natural spin. This spin has a short-term memory. This stored information is transferred by electrical impulses to the nuclei of minerals like phosphorus that also have informational spin. The spin of the phosphorus nuclei have a much longer memory span that that of the spin of electrons. It is this entangled relationship between the PA ether fields that influence both the energy and types of energy that allows our mind and brains to think.

Thank you for reading my earlier work!

David Bohm believes there is life, mind and wholeness in all things

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.

A light hearted way of understanding the theory of relativity [temporal 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:

relativity express comic

The art of professional mysticism

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.

Source

Are the building blocks of life information?

Cosmologist Paul Davies proposes this theory and I agree with him

I have quoted the article below [Written by Andrew Masterson] because I feel that Paul Davies is correct with his cosmological information theory. Also see this Physics World article for additional information. Some of the information herein is dated, however I do not think that this spoils my post.

Quote:

“Cosmologist Paul Davies proposes theory that building blocks of life may not be chemicals but information

July 10 2016

Written by: Andrew Masterson

Among all the extraterrestrial species featured in the late Douglas Adams’ excellent Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy novels there is one called a Hoovooloo, described as “a super intelligent shade of the colour blue”.

Oddly enough, this utterly abstract sort of alien might yet turn out to be the author’s most perspicacious invention.

What if alien life is ‘information’?

A leading Australian physicist has co-authored a new paper proposing a radical new theory of life.

If a new paper co-written by prominent Australian physicist Professor Paul Davies is on the money, every other fictitious ET, from Star Trek’s Vulcans to Star Wars’ Yoda, are the products of depressingly limited imaginations.

Pretty much all cinematic aliens – think Dr Who’s Sontarans, the bubble-headed things from Mars Attacks!, the giant worms from Dune – have something recognisably “life-like” about them: they have a chemical structure broadly similar to those found in earth species, and (it is implied) some kind of DNA-ish apparatus that facilitates reproduction.

Professor Paul Davies has a radical theory about the building blocks of life.

They are reasonable enough assumptions to make, but what if they are plain wrong?

Davies and co-author Dr Sara Imari Walker, both from the Beyond Center for Fundamental Concepts in Science at the Arizona State University, suggest that fleshiness and double-helixes might be things confined only to life on Earth. Life in the rest of the universe, they venture, could be based on something much more unlikely: information.

What’s more, Davies and Walker leave the door open – some say – to the involvement of a non-physical, perhaps godlike, influence in the development of life in the cosmos…” [if universal ‘implicit-awareness’ is godlike then I would agree with this notion]

“…The questions the pair raise might seem abstruse, but they are critically important. If humanity ever does encounter alien life it almost certainly won’t look like the dreadlocked guys or insect-monsters in Alien vs Predator. It will be life, Jim, but not as we know it. Real aliens may well be completely unrecognisable as living.

Dr Sara Imari Walker, from Arizona State University, has co-authored a paper with Paul Davies arguing that information rather than chemicals could be the basis for life.

“Without an understanding of ‘life’,” Davies and Walker write, “we can have little hope of solving the problem of its origin or provide a general-purpose set of criteria for identifying it on other worlds.”

The nature of information

Their paper – The “Hard Problem” of Life – has yet to be formally published.

Last month the pair posted it on a science pre-print server called arXiv, and already it is generating discussion among astrophysicists, bioastronomers and science philosophers.

The reason is clear. If “information” is shown to be the fundamental building block of life, the discovery will be a scientific revolution as game-changing as those of classical physics and quantum mechanics…”

“…Many pop culture extra-terrestrials, including the Sontarans from Dr Who, are assumed to have similar life structures to Earth’s life forms.

Mind you, it’s a very big “if”, and one that is attracting curt dismissal from some of Davies’ peers.

“I think their idea is interesting, but it begs the enormous question of how information can be causal in a physical system,”… “…said Dr Charley Lineweaver, of the Planetary Science Institute at the ANU’s Research School of Astronomy and Astrophysics at the Mt Stromlo Observatory in the ACT.

“I see no way to get around this obstacle.”

Lineweaver’s objection was echoed by many – though not all – scientists and philosophers contacted for this story. It can be illustrated by a simple example.

The fundamental unit of DNA is the gene – humans have around 25,000 of them. If you were to make a computer model of the human genome you could represent each gene with the smallest unit of computer code, known as a “bit”.

One gene equals one bit.

Dr Charley Lineweaver says the theory raises questions about how information can be causal in a physical system.

But the gene exists in the real physical world, and does stuff – like giving you brown eyes or red hair, for instance. The bit is a description of the gene. It does nothing, because it does not exist in the physical world.

Davies and Walker, however, raise the possibility that this basic distinction between real and not-real might be way wrong…” [I argue that all that is analogically ‘not-real’ (metaphysical)  is implicit and all that is real is materialistic]

“…It is a contentious suggestion.

“This is a category error,” said Dr John Wilkins, honorary fellow at Melbourne University’s School of Historical and Philosophical Studies.

Philosophical roots

Wilkins specialises in studying the relationship between information and evolutionary theory. Davies and Walker’s paper, he noted, being speculative, falls as much into the realm of philosophy as physics.

“It’s a long-standing category error that goes back a very long way in philosophy – arguably back to Plato,” he said. “It’s the idea that the way we represent something is somehow the essence of the thing being represented. It’s mistaking the map for the territory.”

Wilkins suggested that the authors had fallen into the trap of failing to distinguish between the complex mathematical modelling that physics demands and the actual physical world being thus modelled.

Their conclusions, he said, “are not philosophically well supported”…” [I strongly disagree]

“…Which brings us, in a weird kind of way, to the bit about gods. Wilkins’ assertion that mathematics model and measure a separate physical reality seems obvious – in the same way that you wouldn’t confuse a map of a town with the town itself. Surprisingly, however, it is not a universally held view, even among hard-nosed scientists.

From the Big Bang onwards, the universe has developed in line with precise mathematical laws, leading to the idea (seductive or repulsive, depending on your point of view) that maths is not a human invention but a fundamental force.

“Scientists have embraced a kind of mathematical creationism,” wrote New York Times science writer George Johnson back in 1998, “God is a great mathematician, who declared, ‘Let there be numbers!’ before getting around to ‘let there be light!'”

Davies and Walker come intriguingly close to allowing a Great Mathematician to enter the story of how the universe, and thus life, came into being. From one perspective it is the central assertion – revolutionary or shocking, take your pick – in their paper.

The ‘hard problem’

Bear with us here. This requires a short diversion.

By using the term “hard problem” to describe life Davies and Walker are deliberately echoing the landmark work of Australian philosopher and cognitive scientist Dr David Chalmers. In 1995 Chalmers declared consciousness to be a “hard problem” – by which he meant that although it is theoretically possible to measure precisely every neuron in the human brain, and track the sparks that flash between them, this understanding still doesn’t explain how thoughts, daydreams, or states of mind arise…” [I strongly believe they can be.]

“…Self-awareness, he said, is not an obvious product of the electrical activity inside your head.

Davies and Walker see a possible similarity with life. Assuming things live on other planets, they say, the question is whether all types of alien can be “accounted for in terms of known physics and chemistry, or whether certain aspects of living matter will require something fundamentally new”.

The “hard problem” in this instance, they add, “is the problem of how ‘information’ can affect the world.” It is a problem that they suspect “will not ultimately be reducible to known physical principles.”…” [Physics, Maxwell’s Demon hypothesis suggests that this is not the case, and this has been confirmed in numerous laboratory experiments.]

“…Or, in plainer terms, physics and chemistry won’t cut it alone: there’s something else in the mix. That something, they think, is “information” – but what exactly is that, and where did it come from?

The Reverend Dr Stephen Ames thinks he might have an idea. He is a canon at St Paul’s Cathedral in Melbourne, and a lecturer at Melbourne Uni who holds dual doctorates in physics and the history and philosophy of science.

“I do think of the universe as being structured towards an end, and part of that end is that it is knowable through empirical inquiry,” he said.

In other words, the laws of physics are what they are – but studying them, in time, over generations of scholarship, will lead to the understanding that in a fundamental way the universe was kick-started by what Ames terms a “powerful agent” – or, in more traditional terms, God.

External force

Regardless of what anyone chooses to call it, the interesting (and to many scientists troubling) thing is that by suggesting that life may not be completely explicable through physics and chemistry, Davies and Walker implicitly leave open the possibility of some sort of metaphysical force playing a hand. The pair is quick, however, to rule out one popular, contentious idea.

Basic logic (and math) tell us that in order for the universe, and life, to develop in the way that it has, there must have been very precise initial conditions at the instant of the Big Bang. Even the most minuscule difference in any one of scores of things – the number of electrons, for instance, or the ratio of matter to antimatter – would have resulted in a universe in which planets and people were impossible.

The problem, say Davies and Walker, is that to get to where we are today those initial conditions “must be selected with extraordinary care, which is tantamount to intelligent design: it states that ‘life’ is ‘written into’ the laws of physics”. There is no evidence, they conclude, of “this almost miraculous property”.

Ames agrees with them in dismissing ideas of intelligent design, a largely creationist idea equally unpopular among mainstream physicists and theologians (of which, of course, he is equally representative).

“The word ‘design’ brings to mind too many ideas of engineering and blueprints,” he said.

“But I’m personally very interested in Davies’ endeavours to give an account of the universe in terms of information and in terms that would appear not to need any special initial conditions…” If he can do it, that would be remarkable.”…” [The highly respected Hiley-Bohm physics model does this.]

“…For many in the physics and astrophysics games, however, even the simplest suggestion that hard science can’t ultimately account for the entire universe and everything in it – alive or not – sets off warning bells.

And in this area, it should be noted, Davies has form. You would struggle to find a definite pro-deity statement is any of his writing, but he is very fond of religious metaphor – one of his books is called The Mind of God – and some of his statements are, well, a tad ambiguous.

“If there is an ultimate meaning to existence, as I believe is the case, the answer is to be found within nature, not beyond it,” he wrote in a 2007 newspaper article. For mainstream physicists any suggestion of “ultimate meaning” is close to salivating, revival tent fundamentalism.

“He’s on that edge of philosophy and physics all the time,” said Ames.

‘Deliberate’ ambiguity…” [When you are dealing with non-locality in mainstream physics, of course it is. I see these words as being an unfortunate statement.]

“…Sydney astrophysicist and bioastronomer Dr Maria Cunningham, of the UNSW School of Physics, said she found Davies and Walker’s paper fascinating but was troubled by its possible theological implications.

“Davies’ ambiguity is deliberate, I think,” she said. “Since before the term intelligent design was coined – going back 25 years or so – he has maintained that the parameters and constants of our particular universe are so finely tuned that it does make you wonder whether this is just a random thing.

“It’s something that physicists and philosophers have been talking about for a long time. I think maybe [Rene] Descartes was one of the first to actually come up with the idea that there had to be something separate for life – that it couldn’t just be a mechanistic process.”

Cunningham described herself as a “hard-headed reductionist” who sees neither a way, nor a need, for information to exert an influence. Eventually identifying the deep laws that govern life – which she feels to be rare in the rest of the universe, but there, nevertheless – will not need the “new physics” Davies and Walker suggest.

“I don’t feel comfortable with the suggestion that because living things exist there has to be new physics explaining living things,” she said.

She pointed to recent studies revealing that hydrogen cyanide and hydrogen sulfide – both floating around in outer space – when exposed to ultraviolet light can form nucleic acids, amino acids, and lipids, the basic building blocks of life. These and similar research projects may one day sufficiently answer the question of how life comes to exist, without reference to new science or old gods.

Of course, perhaps somewhere in the universe, a few dozen light years away, one of Douglas Adams’ Hoovooloos already knows that answer.

The trouble, as people familiar with Adams will be aware, is that it is very likely to be “42”. Which doesn’t help at all.

(Paul Davies’ office was approached with a request for an interview for this story. There was no response.)”

The power of unpredictability in the universe

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 invite you to view one of my favorite scientific videos

More about Alan Turing that you may care to know

Seven keys that might be useful for you to better understand all that “IS”

I argue that the universe is one of a dynamic relationship between all that is ontological and temporal. I have nominated ontological as being all that is “implicit” in the universe and all that is temporal as being “explicit”. Physicists have long realised that this relationship is “weird”. In my opinion the seven following keys [tools] provide conceptual embryonic insight as to how complex an observer might observe the inner workings of the universe. This is if they are able to observe from the “cosmological-region” of whatever existed prior to the Big Bang. I broadly introduce these keys as follows. More detailed physics theory quotations pertinent to these short opening insights follow in the same order immediately thereafter.

The keys:

A. The act of looking at something somehow changes what it was before you looked at it.

B. How is it that all things have some sort of hidden physical meaning, and perhaps influence other things such as consciousness.

C. It is possible for one thing to be two things at the same time.

D. There are hidden things and potential events ‘sitting somewhere’ waiting to do something in response to something else.

E. There is always a degree of guesswork involved in measuring anything in physics.

F. Given the right circumstances and conditions, ‘things’ can tunnel through solid objects leaving no apparent clue as to how this might have come about.

G. All things and events in the universe are somehow entangled with each other so that they can also share information between themselves, via influences and other causal tendencies to do something, such as when individuals are thinking in between talking.

The widely accepted physics theories that seem to support these seven concepts.

1. Quantum superposition theory

Quantum superposition theory is a principle of quantum mechanics that says that all things (like particles) exist in two states. One state is before they are observed and the other is after they have been observed. The act of observation ‘changes’ things from what they were before.

2. Hidden variables

Hidden variables relate to things that are as yet unknown or unknowable to physics. These include how it is that particles have implicit properties, and the causal implicit properties of consciousness [in other documents I mostly say awareness] at the same time.

3. Indeterminate state

An indeterminate state is something like a photon particle having the properties of being an indeterminate implicit [ontological] wave-like state and an explicit temporal particle state at the same time.

4. Virtual particles

A virtual particle is a particle that could be analogically invisibly ‘seated’ within the fibres of a piece of cloth. This is a piece of cloth that an observer might observe with a needle with cotton in its eye stitching backwards and forwards on either side of the cloth. This means that virtual particles can “mediate” processes between particles as they move from, say, an explicit chemical state to an implicit non- chemical state of some kind. This might include a different type of non-detectable energy or influence. In respect to these words also note the following link and its contents…

Quote:

“…Quantum theory predicts that every particle spends some time as a combination of other particles in all possible ways…”

5. Quantum uncertainty principle

Quantum uncertainty in physics means that there is a limit to what can be known about the smallest scales in nature. This means that the best that science can do is to calculate the probabilities as to where things are and how they might behave. In an everyday sense this means that scientists have difficulties in accurately measuring things in space because space is so turbulent. This also means that there is a degree of guesswork involved in being precise in predicting whether a thing, event or process is going to move or change this or that way, or not.

6 Quantum tunnelling

The quantum tunnelling effect is a quantum phenomenon which occurs when particles move through a barrier that, according to the theories of classical physics, should be impossible to move through.

7. Quantum non-local (entanglement) theory demonstrates the indeterminate commonly linked state of all that “IS”. This is an animated version and this is a professional physics version, describing what entanglement is.

I hope that this seven point information might be helpful in you better understanding some of the mysterious happenings in the wider world around us. This might include you and me.

If you feel confused and perplexed by such scientific jargon don’t worry! This is what the physicist Richard Feynman said about this type of complex physics. The quote is linked to a statement that he made to students before one of his lectures.

Quote:

“…Will you understand what I’m going to tell you?… No, you’re not going to be able to understand it-You see, my physics students don’t understand it either. That is because I don’t understand it. Nobody does.”*

*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.