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
Theories and opinions (physics) – Page 3 – John Hartley

Category: Theories and opinions (physics)

Posted on

Is reality defined by what is missing from zero?

I suggest that zero is a multidimensional concept of explicit [temporal] and implicit [ontological] informational meaning

I believe that each of these meanings have values of some kind. These values “exist” in a concurrent relationship to each other and might be seen as being relational to ten dimensional string theory. These values are determinate and indeterminate. I suggest that there are finite and infinite values in these multidimensional “layers” of dimensional information. These layers are not necessarily limited to ten. Implicit values are not limited by nature, extent, determinable theory or fact. Explicit [temporal] values are. But what are these concurrent relational values related to? Is is something greater than nothing? If this is the case what can we make of this? Is it the property of mathematical i that is representative of zero [The zeroth dimension]? Are these the same concurrent values that influence and “set” the direction and purpose of our everyday lives? Do these values also contribute to our understanding of the meaning of our lives too?

Posted on

When Zero might mean all that “IS”

I discuss why nothing might mean something

Some people think that zero means nothing. Others think zero means everything. If you read some of my science related blogs you will see where I believe that the later debate has merit. I propose this hypothesis in relationship to my view that the explicit [temporal] informational influences of the universe are “floating” in a sea of implicit [ontological] influences as described in this presentation. I further discuss this possibility in another shorter blog that I recently composed. From this I am proposing that all information that is implicit is without time [timeless] and as such is nondeterministic.

We can perhaps say from this that all implicit information is related to some sort of timeless [endless] continuum that can be referred to as being nothing. However, as we all know influences are real. Consciousness is real, consciousness has influential meaning. If this is correct, how can we discuss the properties [influence] of something that is nondeterministic and from a temporal perspective is “nothing”. I suggest that all that “IS” is either related to itself [I say a “common” continuum of awareness] as a universal continuum or otherwise temporally exists in a concurrent relationship with it. This is as though it were some sort of oneness. I think that this might be what Einstein was considering within this presentation that I recently compiled.

I propose that this “oneness” of all that IS has both temporal and ontological meaning and as such can perhaps be best described as having the mathematical and notional meaning of “everyday” purpose of zero. This meaning and purpose is represented by the mathematical concept of i.*

In respect to this debate you might find the three complementary links below to be of interest. In another blog demonstrate how I believe that from a multi-dimensional perspective such concept science might have merit.

* Quote:

“The imaginary number i: The imaginary numbers (numbers that include the value i = √ – 1) are a set of numbers not found on the real number line. If that idea sounds unbelievable — where else would they be? — don’t worry: For thousands of years, mathematicians didn’t believe in them, either. But real-world applications in electronics, particle physics, and many other areas of science have turned skeptics into believers. So if your summer plans include wiring your secret underground lab or building a flux capacitor for your time machine — or maybe just studying to get a degree in electrical engineering — you’ll find that imaginary numbers are too useful to be ignored.”

Complementary links:

Introduction to timelessness

The origin of the number zero

Is the past, present and future the same?

Posted on

Is science’s weirdest realm responsible for photosynthesis, consciousness and more?

Some scientists believe that quantum mechanics is controlling our thoughts

In order to introduce this topic I will quote an extract from this BBC article.

Quote:

“The American physicist Richard Feynman said this about the notorious puzzles and paradoxes of quantum mechanics, the theory physicists use to describe the tiniest objects in the Universe. But he might as well have been talking about the equally knotty problem of consciousness.

Some scientists think we already understand what consciousness is, or that it is a mere illusion. But many others feel we have not grasped where consciousness comes from at all.

The perennial puzzle of consciousness has even led some researchers to invoke quantum physics to explain it. That notion has always been met with skepticism, which is not surprising: it does not sound wise to explain one mystery with another. But such ideas are not obviously absurd, and neither are they arbitrary.

For one thing, the mind seemed, to the great discomfort of physicists, to force its way into early quantum theory. What’s more, quantum computers are predicted to be capable of accomplishing things ordinary computers cannot, which reminds us of how our brains can achieve things that are still beyond artificial intelligence. “Quantum consciousness” is widely derided as mystical woo, but it just will not go away.”

I will address the topic of this blog by quoting a full article from Discover magazine dated January 13, 2009. Although this article is now aged, I fell that it does seem to support the ideas I have shared with my readers in other blogs in my website. These are:

Link 1

Link 2

Posted on

It can be shown that we do not live in isolated systems

It can be mathematically and (significantly) organically demonstrated that we exist as a unified whole. Mathematically it can be shown that this holistic unity is as a result of the existence of unknowable energy type formations that ontologically manifest themselves in nature  as objects. Fractals are objects in which the same patterns occur again and again at different scales and sizes. These objects include flowers, trees, mountain range formation, cloud patterns and body parts and object shapes such as human faces.

They manifest themselves in organic structures in the visual form of self similarity in such objects. This “self-similarity” goes infinitely deep: each pattern is made up of smaller copies of itself, and those smaller copies are made up of smaller copies again, forever in a perfect mathematical fractal set. In mathematics this is known as the Mandelbrot set. A video demonstration of this self-similarity going infinitely deep (forever) can be seen here.

I suggest that fractal theory provides a pointer to what many people might see as the shortcomings of contemporary main stream physics theories. However, one of the eighteen versions of quantum mechanics probably does. This means that one day [it was in 2021]* could conceivably be linked to a suitable mechanical physics model such as the Bohm implicate order model.

*P.S. [6/Mar/22] 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.

Posted on

Einstein believed in his later life that the past, present and future all exist simultaneously

He talks about the concept of ‘now’ in his new modelling

Unlike in his earlier life in his 1952 book ‘Relativity’ Einstein tells his readers that he had changed his mind and that the past, the present and the future all existed simultaneously. He believes that there is a single existence along the lines I suggest in this blog*. In this sense Einstein is debating that physical reality is a four dimensional existence. He extends these words by saying:

Quote:

“What nature demands from us is not a quantum theory or a wave theory; rather, nature demands from us a synthesis of these two views which thus far has exceeded the mental powers of physicists. Do not be troubled by your difficulties with Mathematics, I can assure you mine are much greater..”

In material contained in the links below Einstein reminds us that “…it is an illusion to think otherwise…” about simultaneity as being the dominant property of the universe. The late distinguished physicist Richard Feynman talks about this possibility in his book ‘Sum Over Histories’ and seems to summarise his point with these few words (as quoted by another author):-

Quote:

“…Events in nature are probabilistic with predictable probabilities P.

The probability P for an event to occur is given by the square of the complex magnitude of a quantum amplitude for the event, Q. The quantum amplitude Q associated with an event is the sum of the amplitudes associated with every history leading to the event.

The quantum amplitude associated with a given history is the product of the amplitudes associated with each fundamental process in the history...” *

*A belated complimentary quote from this article:-

“… Yet even the great Einstein despaired of understanding the flow of time and the meaning of now. Einstein’s quandary was described by Rudolf Carnap:

“….”Einstein said the problem of the Now worried him seriously. He explained that the experience of the Now means something special for man, something essentially different from the past and the future, but that this important difference does not and cannot occur within physics. That this experience cannot be grasped by science seemed to him a matter of painful but inevitable resignation. So he concluded ‘that there is something essential about the Now which is just outside the realm of science.’ “…” (I emboldened the text)

In another blog (also cited above) I talk about this topic in relationship to Bohm’s Holomovement theory and predeterminism. This blog also includes a link to a BBC video on the same subject. I feel that this video is compelling viewing.

*I believe that the Planck line in physics is a field of symbolic ‘nows’. Now’s are without time. Temporal fields (with time) exist on one side of the Planck line and ontological fields (relating to the rules of quantum mechanics) exist on the other. Both the temporal and ontological fields are in a concurrent relationship with each other as well as the Planck field of now’s. I think that this is what Bohm might be saying with his Holomovement theory (also known in other works as the implicate order).

Click here to view a copy of the original quoted text that I gleaned ideas and quotes from.

Also see my earlier complimentary post here. You might also find what Carlo Rovelli has to say in Nature magazine of interest as well. Also see this physics explanation.

Posted on

How things might work

I recently wrote this item for the benefit of my sixteen year old grandson. I wrote it to encourage him to be not afraid to think about what the “big picture” might be in the wider universe around us. I have made no serious attempt to prove anything and kept the references to a minimum.

Quote:

“All ‘things’ are somehow related to quantum fields (fields)*. There are relative (temporal) and non- relative (ontological) fields and both can be seen as influences relating to some sort of universal ‘whole’. Whereas temporal fields relate to observable and measurable ‘things’ and events related thereto, this is not the case with ontological fields that include intuition and awareness. This means that there are two different types of causation with respect to the workings of the ‘whole’.

There are givens (meaning simply how things are) in the universe. These include gravitation of at least two different types, that relate to either the effects of the Big Bang or to the rules of nature, such as those between objects such as galaxies and other types of universal systems. These might also include other universes and dimensions. Light, electricity, magnetism and the hidden laws of random and geometric nature are also givens. All of these givens have effects of some kind on each other.

They, and their inherent individual properties seem to be influenced and ‘carried’ by a ‘hidden’ (in physics called hidden variables)** ontological neural network. One example of a property is speed as it relates to light, and another is electrical charge as it relates to the properties of the electrons and photons in atoms. Science does not know how it is that particles (like gluons and quarks that ‘hold’ the universe together) have the mysterious ontological properties that they do, nor for what reason they act in manner that they do.

Temporal objects and their relationship to other temporal objects are related to clocks and/or the speed of light as per the rules of relativity physics, that is, between smaller or larger objects. Motion of objects is also temporal. The effects (influences between objects not touching each other) of these diverse temporal relationships can be linked to standard causation scientific theory.

They are knowable, observable and measurable. On the other hand, ontological effects between objects are knowable and can be experientially detected (like psychokinesis and telepathy), but they cannot be observed and measured in accordance with the normal rules of physics. Both of these ‘types’ of temporal and ontological effects are relational to a separate holistic ontological field that is related to the external ‘perimeter’ of an ever expanding universe (as it relates to the speed of light).

This three-way concurrent relationship can be seen as being in different temporal and ontological ‘averages, densities and ratios’ with each other. All fields can be seen as containing patterns of information that mean something. These concurrent relationships between each of these three ‘fields’ is in turn related to the ontological sub-quantum rules of quantum mechanics. This is a field of indeterminate randomness. The rules of temporal relativity physics is determinate. It is the indeterminate effects of the universal ontological whole that are causal to the wider universe as being random. This theory can also be applied to the ontological and temporal human condition as well as its ‘connection’ with the wider field of nature.

All things and events operate within their own temporal or ontological field reference frames. These reference frames might be seen as being like continuums that exist in a parallel concurrent relationship with each other until the speed of the expanding universe exceeds that of the speed of light. It is this ontological relationship that gives ‘meaning and purpose’ to universal reality. This is through continuously changing morphic resonance and fields (ontological sub-quantum telepathy-like influences between organisms that is the cause of the formation of matter as discussed in item two).

We, as ‘complete’ persons, together with our thoughts, decisions and behaviour are representations of this universal process, the oneness of the universe.

There are seven demonstrable and describable ontological (sub-quantum) keys that help to explain this dual relationship as well as how it might work in the manner that it does. One of them is non local entanglement theory as demonstrated in this cited animated video).

If you are confused about this type of complex quantum field physics debate the following quote is linked to a statement that the late distinguished physics Richard Feynman 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.”

As a concept scientist I fall into this bracket too.

“…Reality is fundamentally different from our classical picture of a smooth, continuous, well-defined Universe. Although it’s true that these quantum fields began as a mathematical construct, they describe our physical, observable reality more accurately than any other theory we’ve concocted…”

** An example of a hidden variable is…

Quote:

“Consider elementary school students’ shoe sizes and scores on a standard reading exam. They are correlated, but assert that larger shoe size causes higher reading scores is as ridiculous as saying that high reading scores cause larger shoe size. In this example, there is a clear hidden variable, namely, age”

I suspect that the distinguished physicist Dr Adam Becker might also be echoing some of these points in his 2018 Harvard University lecture as well.***

***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.

Posted on

Is the separation point between life and death so definitive as the medical profession tells us that it is?

This important medical study seems to be suggesting that this is not the case.

Quote:

“… The AWARE (AWAreness during REsuscitation) study is the first launched by the Human Consciousness Project, a multidisciplinary collaboration of international scientists and physicians who have joined forces to study the relationship between mind and brain during clinical death, and is led by Dr. Sam Parnia, a world-renowned expert on the study of the human mind and consciousness during clinical death, together with Dr Peter Fenwick and Professors Stephen Holgate and Robert Peveler of the University of Southampton. The team will be working in collaboration with more than 25 major medical centers throughout Europe, Canada, and the United States.

Although the study of death has traditionally been considered a subject for theology or philosophy, recent advances in medicine have finally enabled a scientific approach to understanding the ultimate mystery facing humankind. “Contrary to popular perception,” Dr. Parnia explains, “death is not a specific moment. It is actually a process that begins when the heart stops beating, the lungs stop working, and the brain ceases functioning – a medical condition termed cardiac arrest, which from a biological viewpoint is synonymous with clinical death.”

See the full article here