Notes
Sunday 8 October 2023 - Saturday 14 October 2023
[page 289]
Sunday 8 October 2023
cc21_matter_spirit: 2 sides of spirituality: complex structure; (my body) complex action (my speech, writing, sociality etc). cc22_trans_hilbert? Every particle is an image of the initial singularity, Minkowski space on the outside, Hilbert space on the inside. Symmetry with respect to complexity [so we can construct the whole universe by copying and connecting instances of the initial singularity].
The paradigm change I have been talking about has been going on for centuries. As I tell it here, it began with Aristotle and Aquinas who were the first to confront religious belief with physical science, albeit rather primitive science, but things have slowly involved through many authors, the most significant highlighted here has been Darwin, but for my story the icing on the cake has been the last two centuries that brought us electrodynamics, relativity, quantum mechanics and quantum communication and computation. Authors like Roy Porter have documented the change in attitude to flesh. Dawkins, Fuentes, Raman, Klein, Rossano, Hume, Rousseau, Dennett, James, Haight, McGreevey, Walker, Cantor, Miles, Axelrod, Bellah, Kauffman, Piketty and heaps of others beside these few I see as I look around my room, have all contributed to our modern view of ourselves and our world. The forces of reaction and inertia are powerful but thery are ultimately doomed. My aim is to speed up the process by showing that they have no hope and should hop on the bandwagon. Reality rules. Roy Porter (2003): Flesh in the Age of Reason, Richard Dawkins (2006): The God Delusion, Augustin Fuentes (2019): Why We Believe: Evolution and the Human Way of Being , Matt Rossano 2010: Supernatural Selection: How Religion Evolved, David Hume (2000): A Treatise on Human Nature, Daniel Dennett (2006); Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon, Roger Haight (1999): Jesus Symbol of God, McGreevy (2022): Catholicism: A Global History from the French Revolution to Pope Francis , Robert Bellah (2011): Religion in Human Evolution, Stuart Kauffman (1995): At Home in the Universe: The Search for Laws of Complexity, Thomas Piketty (2014): Capital in the Twenty-First Century
[page 290]
Coming to the climax of cognitive cosmology which is to restate quantum field theory and quantum chromodynamics in terms of digital quantum communication and computation. cc21_matter_spirit establishes a relationship between spirituality and complexity and the power of evolution, building on the past to complexify into the future. This trend was emphasized by Teilhard de Chardin and we go along with it in cc21. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1965); The Phenomenon of Man
Surviving a big loss of family and money, connected in a desperate mind, my final delusion before I rebuilt my world. In effect my crucifixion, and now I am alive again and having visions of old age heaven. Step 1: sell the car; step 2: write everything down; step 3: enjoy the genius (guardian angel) given to me by 14 billion years of evolution.
The imposter syndrome arises, of course, from being all hat and no sheep. I have great plans, but they remain aspirational and progress is slow but predominantly, pleasing, as it has been all along. My realization today that I am going with a substantial flow makes me feel more secure and less lonely. I would love to go public, but I must wait until I have got the goods to trade with, something more than just hope.
Omnes: So what is the point of cc22_trans_hilbert and why do I find myself turning to Omnes for inspiration? Roland Omnes (2002): Quantum Philosophy: Understanding and Interpreting Contemporary Science
[page 291]
When I read it years ago I wrote it off as a big whinge about formalism (11/2007: 'a thicket of fluff"). He sees a crisis in physics and writes in his preface: 'Beyond the shadow of doubt, the origin of this crisis is to be found in an event that no one has fully recognized in all its significance: the corruption of the formal approach in some fundamental sciences such as logic, mathematics and physics. As a consequence these disciplines have become practically impenetrable . . . A good part of this book retraces the rise of formalism and traces its necessity. . . . As a counterbalance, another part of the book shows how to loosen that formalism and overcome it.'
I am happy with the rise of formalism and see it as an essential counter to the notion that calculus and continuous mathematics are the key to physics, where I see a cognitive quantum universe that runs on quantum computation. If we are to see the world as a mind we must embrace formalism as we embrace reading, writing and conversation in general. I see quantum mechanics as the science of conversation pointing out the error in Einsteins general covariance which takes the perverted view that we can look at the world without changing it. I take the next step toward my cognitive nirvana in cc22_trans_hilbert.
[page 292]
Omnes page 45: Maxwells formalization of electrodynamics: 'classical physics has been replaced, for the first time in broad daylight, by a formal [perhaps spiritual] physics whose basic concepts have a strong mathematical flavour and, especially, whose principles . . . have become purely formal and mathematical, a kind of abstract and rather obscure essence of Newton's first principles. By the same token, Lagrange's principle of minimal action took on a new significance, and became in a certain sense the leading principle of dynamics.' He notes Feynman's explanation of Lagrange by the path integral.
Omnes page 46: 'signs of intuition gradually going blind. And little by little formal concepts came to the rescue; thus entropy replaces heat (??)'
page 63: 'my most precious dream is to see one day scientific knowledge so clearly established as to allow a return of philosophy to its pre-Socratic sources.'
page 82: 'common sense is defeated . . . there can be only one remedy: to invent a new way of understanding.'
'diagnosis of the cataracts, the clouded vision of science, formal logic; contemporary mathematics; quantum mechanics.'
Physics before the fracture is "classical"; quantum physics "formal".
page 84: 'mathematics is the abstract study of form' (Hilbert)
page 85: 'the importance of infinity in mathematics',
ie formlessness. Third idea: search for consistent (very hard to do with formlessness). Cantor handled infinity by putting it in boxes and comparing boxes by infinite processes, ie 1 to 1 correspondences. In mathematics TRUE = CONSISTENT. No mention of Turing in his index, but plenty of Boole! [nothing about Hilbert space either]. David Hilbert (1925): On the Infinite
Omnes page 98: Peano's axioms describe an infinite process, an algorithm.
page 101: Natural selection in mathematics. 105: Hilbert the formalist.
page 108: The meaning of mathematics: 109 beauty; 110 fertility; logical; symbolic; social; realism.
pager 113: Mathematicians agree on the validity of conclusions formed by valid proofs on acceptable hypotheses.page 116: The stupidity of realism: we Platonists are asked to believe that the invisible and intangible is more real than the visible and tangible. I have never understood this, which is why I failed Catholicism 101 (with all HDs)
page 122: 'We know that physical reality is [somewhat] governed by quantum laws.' Here we say quantum provides variation, Minkowski selection. The identity of quantum paticles is only partly formed, they are half real.
page 123: 'we must be even more exacting and above all not consider mathematics as an independent domain but as an integral part of an all encompassing philosophy of knowledge', ie part of cognitive cosmology
Monday 9 October 2023
[page 294]
Omnes page 126: '[Quantum mechanics] is therefore a theory of everything except perhaps space and time, the quintessence of physics, a universal theory from which the rest of physics can be derived, at least in principle.'
It is really just Hilbert space and matrix operators on that space. Almost nothing can be derived from it without some initial conditions, the principal one being that we can only observe fixed points in Minkowski space [the selection principle?]. This means that the quantum mechanical variety at the root of evolution is almost unconstrained.
page 127: Minkowski space is absolute and lies at the foundation of general relativity. Where does this absolution come from? a) communication requires contact; and b) random variation in evolution increases entropy, and these increases are 'harvested' by selection (von Neumann).
page 129: Special relativity is Galilean (first law).
page 133: Gaussian coordinates [numbers with order but no fixed measure], Einstein page 123. Einstein (1916, 2005): Relativity: The Special and General Theory
page 135: Atoms in perpetual motion explain pressure (Bernoulli).
page 139: Bohr atom: every atomic transformation corresponds to one quantum of action. The inverse time that this transition takes is the energy of the transformation which determines the 'colour' of the photons emitted or absorbed, In this process one electron orbit is annihilated and another is created because at this
[page 295]
simple level, although an atom is complex enough to retain its form while undergoing a change, photons and orbits are too simple for this so at the fundamental digital level bits can only change by annihilation and creation [as in semi-conductor memory] the fundamental harmonic oscillator, linking energy to action.
In particular, the quantum Bohr condition implemented a scheme of natural selection. Natural selection, in some way, must be the key to QED and QCD, and therefore the foundation of quantum physics and the evolution of the world. It links to the Lagrangian through Feynman's integrals.
page 144: Let us ignore Hilbert space!!! The space of action / imagination linking quantum mechanics to Shannon's theory of communication. 'Quantum mechanics reached its maturity in 1927'.
page 146: The language of physics is a formal one 'and so it is not our language',
page 147: Epistemology of physics: 'We shall stay away from everything concerning space and time . . . ' ???
page 148: Billiard Ball is a wave function [NO, it has a wave function, but it is real].
page 149: emphasis on probabilities, although we make atomic clocks accurate to 1 sec in the age of the Universe. On interpretation: 'It is clear that the wrong . . . . that the interpretation seeks to right stems from the formal character of science, from the fact that its initial concepts are accessible to imagination'. Anyone can imagine creation and annhilation. W. F. McGrew et al: Atomic clock performance enabling geodesy below the centimetre level
[page 296]
What quantum mechanics does is create a bridge for us across the gap between creations and annihilations [constructed from Hilbert space outside spacetime].
page 150: Reasons for the necessity of interpretation of QM:
1. Obscure formalism (could not be simpler?)
2. Observers not clear (although every experience is an experience of a quantum event)
3. Probability: 'Everything in the quantum world occurs at random and there is no direct cause for quantum events' except for the fact that every move we make causes quantum events.
Laws 'only express the possibility of an event occurring at one time or another' and of course, detail the actual events that occur with very high precision. So much crap.
page 152: Complimentarity: Quantum action is defined in nature with complete precision because it is a logical operator. In spacetime we have ΔE.Δt ≈ Δp.Δx ≈ ℏ. Quantum is the limit of resolution, like the length of one Einstein rod or the period of one Einstein clock [Aristotle would be pleased to know that the quantum of action is one full turn on the complex plane, angular momentum in Minkowski space].
Bohr page 153: ' "Thou shalt not talk about the atomic world in itself." ' See Wittgenstein. Too simple to talk about [like the classical God].
page 154: 'physics now appeared to split between two opposing systems of laws' variation and selection.
Knocking Bohr: Look at Zurek's explanation of the 'collapse', 'reduction' etc ie a source can only emit one symbol at a time. Wojciech Hubert Zurek (2008): Quantum origin of quantum jumps: breaking of unitary symmetry induced by information transfer and the transition from quantum to classical
[page 297]
Omnbes page 161: Omnes seems to overlook the fact that his book is itself formalism. So silly! Many authors like Omnes and Rovelli like to make mountains out of a quantum molehill. Purpose of c22_trans-hilbert is to give simple explanation of the cognitive universe in terms of quantum mechanics and Minkowski space exploiting the evolutionary paradigm of variation, selection and entropy increase. Big bang introduces zero entropy by (meaningless) infinite temperature. Quantum approach introduces zero entropy by zero structure.
We talk in formalism all the time, just as quantum theory talks. Now he says, having got the laws by formalism we go back to the evidence. Is this what I am trying to do? View the evidence though the eyes of the law, the law of conversation?
page 162: Omnes books: Interpretation of QM; Understanding QM. Omnes 1994: The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, Omnes (1999): Understanding Quantum Mechanics
page 163: 'Nothing could be more arid than the principles of quantum mechanics . . . It is inevitable that such a vast theory should overturn the philosophy of knowledge's traditional assumptions. . . . the arrival of formalism propels us toward a future of unlimited possibilities,' This is the job of variation, Hilbert space.
page 164: 'There can be no doubt that the principles of quantum mechanics clash with common sense.' As understood by you, a prehistoric determinist. So, he says, deduce the classical from the quantum
page 165: 'we no longer explain reality from our mental representation of it but we want to explain new representation given the laws'.
[page 298]
page 165 continued: '. . . we shall only consider those propsitions concerning position and velocity of a physical object at some instant of time' which requires infinite energy and momentum in the real world.
Omnes page 168: From kinematics of pendulum to classical dynamics and determinism via Newton's equations. 'Classical determinism is the logical equivalence between two propositions of Newtonian dynamics with respect to two different instants of time'. Laplace.
page 170 Notes: Why is quantum theory NOT common sense. It is just sources talking to one another [using the stationary eigenvalues selected by Hermitian operators].
page 171: Tell the angel what matter is. A Hilbert vector [?]
page 172: We tell them the value of a projector 'The essential thing to remember is that each property has a corresponding operator whose only possible values are 0 and 1.
page 173: Observables: - random variable
page 175; Operator ≡ computer program ≡ algorithm
page 176: Non commutivity. 'in quantum mechanics there are propositiobs that can be expressed in ordinary language but which have no meaning due to the underlying formalism'. No, non commutative means that ab - ba = ℏ, ie two operators are one quantum apart [ie ab = not-ba]
Does mathematical ≡ Aristotelian?
page 177: Histories. page 179 Consistent histories accept the additivity of probabilities. This makes sense in Minkowski space but not with superposition in Hilbert space. - 2 slit experiment.
[page 299]
Omnes page 180: In a consistent family of histories probabilities are additive, as in a consistent family of coin tosses.page 183; The observed events of the past are certain, the possible events of the future are not. What is the meaning of the boundary between past and future [maybe represented by a null geodesic where time stops, an observation, ie event]
'Every description of a physical system must consist in propositions belonging to a unique and consistent quantum logic. Every argument regarding a system must be supported by logical implications which can be demonstrated. It should be clear that such a principle is rooted in the depths of physics and does not rely on the presence of any observer, which is totally fortuitous, if not irrelevant, contrary to what has long been believed.' Sure, but all this logic is about actually observed observations which are not a priori predictable.
'1. Logic has its source in the laws of nature
2. this logic cannot be dissociated from the existence of probabilities and ultimately from the necessary presence of chance.
'There are no laws of history which enable us to predict the future deterministically'.
page 184: Recovering common sense.
page 185: A macroscopic object is a network of microscopic communication, each changing the particles in communication.
page 186: 'pseudodifferential calculus' [??]
page 190: Determinism and probability; 192 quantum fluctuation.
[page 300]
Omnes page 193: 'we must not consider systems containing an instrument in the process of measuring some quantum object, or other subtler devices.' This rules everything out because all quantum systems are communicating ie measuring eachother.
page 194: All our knowledge machinery has been created by evolution in the quantum world. He knocks Bell. He speaks as though our corporeal bodies are not quantum mechanical. Bell has observation (ie history) on his side. We only ever observe classical stuff using quantum mechanical senses. Quantum mechanics was dreamt up to explain classical observations, like antihydrogen falling in gravity. John Bell (1987): Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics, E. K. Anderson et al (2023_09_27): Observation of the effect of gravity on the motion of antimatter
page 196: 'Another major problem looms in the background: the relation between formalism and reality, between theory and nature, which will appear distinctly in the end [?]'.
page 209: 'A rigorous theory must begin by specifying the attributes that make a given experimental device into a measuring instrument'. Ie it must be something with a classical input and output and some quantum stuff in between, which is everything really.
page 211 "The Chasm" 'every measurement results in a single datum' a one to one correspondence. He says the theory does not explain the uniqueness of reality and says he cannot refute Everett. What about conservation of energy? Hugh Everett III (1973): The Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
[page 301]
Omnes page 240: He has been rabbiting on for ages and now we come to the statement 'science is presently mature enough to permit the revival of metaphysics.'
page 242: So assume the big bang model. page 244: Mircea Eliade: 'the sacred' is an element of the structure of consciousness and not a mere stage in the development of that consciousness'.
page 245: 'there is nothing chaotic in the mechanism'. He has been a determinist all along!
page 246: what is science? 'a representation of reality'.
page 247: 'complete logical consistency.' Cosmological constant problem?
page 248: 'Science represents the world as bundled up inside a tight network of laws.' Empirical rules; principles; laws derived from principles. Page 252: Kuhn.
page 254: More silly stuff: 'the rallying concepts épistémè (Foucault) or paradigm (Kuhn) may be convenient indicators of the history of mentalities, but they have nothing in common with reality, the only object relevant to science.' Ie human attributes have nothing to do with science. Thomas Kuhn (1962, 1996): The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Episteme - Wikipedia
page 255: Method: 256: How is discovery possible?
page 257: 4 stages: empiricism, concept formation, development and verification.
pager 258: I say I say invention is irrational, random permutation
page 269: 'By "theory of knowledge" I understand a scheme seeking to explain how human consciousness may know the world.' Far too narrow. How the world knows itself. We are a minuscule subset [just look at the tree of life it has created!].
[page 302]
Omnes page 273: 'The chasm, the ultimate irreducibility of Reality to formalism'. So why write books, which are examples of formalism, invariant, eternal, without a life of their own, purely kinetic.
page 274: Exist ≡ communicate Quid est hoc quod est esse?
page 279: 'The separation of Logos and reality appears to be the most appealing hypothesis and the one promising to be the most fruitful. As I said Χιαν κραπ. I spend two days reading this again because I thought it might help with cc22_trans_hilbert but did not get much but to realize that I agree with all the annotations I wrote years ago so I feel that I have converged to a fairly fixed point. So mayne I start with a question and answer. Wat is it to be? To communicate.
Tuesday 10 October 2023
Some variations to quantum field theory:
1. Hilbert space is prior to Minkowski space, independent of Minkowski space and the source thereof.
2. No infinities or infinitesimals [in reality, there are merely mathematical ideals]
3. No quantum fluctuations [the quantum is a fixed logically define measure]
4. All [elementary] interactions are 1 to 1 and involve one quantum of action.
5. Energy of interaction is the inverse of the time required [for its execution]
6. All elementary interactions involve annihilation and creation of elementary particles [because they are to simple to have parts, like an atom, that can change while leaving the whole intact].
7. As Einstein found, continuous fields cannot create discrete particles.
[So I find it difficult to agree with Auyang who writes: "Fields are continuous but not amorphous; a field comprises discrete and concrete point entities, each indivisible but each having intrinsic characteristics. The description of field properties is local, concentrating on a point entity and its infinitesimal displacement. . . . The world of fields is full, in contrast to the mechanistic world, in which particles are separated by empty space across which forces act instantaneously at a distance (page 47). Sunny Auyang (1995): How is Quantum Field Theory Possible?]
8. How does Minkowski space play the role of selector [or is it quantum theory selecting eigenvectors]? Fixed points.
9. The common ancestor. All life forms have fundamentally the same physiology [and fundamental particles too?]
10. Quantum mechanics is a theory of interpersonal [inter source] communication and general covariance is a mistake.
John Dominic Crossan God and Empire John Dominic Crossan (2007): God and Empire: Jesus against Rome, Then and Now
Crossan page 16: Rome: Old Testament Iliad, NT, Vergil Aneid.
[page 303]
The initial event in my story is not a cosmic explosion but the steady construction by evolutionary methods of an ever growing universe, built in relative peace by relatively peaceful means ultimately, but necessarily, reconstructed by gravitation into black holes, supernovas and other violent structures out of the control of quantization and controlled instead by continuous attractive gravitation that knows no limits but without which we would not exist. so cc22 celebrates the contrast between gravitation and quantum theory, maybe, as a prelude to QFT and QCD? This is an idea, but I can see now that it is going to take a while to complete cc.
Crossan page 24 Rome: religion, war, victory, peace.
page 25: 'The emperor's divinity was the incarnate heart of Roman imperial theology and stayed as such long after Augustus was dead.'
Omnes distinguishes kinematic from dynamic and mourns the kinematic as soulless without realizing that it is the foundation of creation. I think I have begin to capture this in cognitive cosmology.
page 30: 'empire is the normalcy of civilization's violence.
'if you oppose empire-as-such, you are taking on what has been the normalcy of civilization's brutality for at l;east the last six thousand years' and I would say 10 000 since the beginning of agriculture and the possession of land.
[page 304]
Crossan: Benjamim: 'There is no document of civilization which is not at the same time a document of barbarism. On the concept of History, Crossan, page 7 Walter Benjamin (1940): On the Concept of History
So we must contrast the failures of civilization with the magnificent harmonies that prevail in living bodies. Perhaps cc22_trans_hilbert can be an interlude discussing this ib terms of the idea that the world is full of gods, symmetry with respect to complexity and symmetry [simpliciter] and when this theme is developed apply it to QFT and QCD as the founding chapters of physical theology. Slowly figuresd appear in the must.
Crossan page 35: Madison to Jefferson: 'Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provision against danger real or pretended from abroad.'
page 36: 'Non-imperial civilization is something yet to be seen on our Earth.
Wednesday 11 October 2023
Volvo sold $1024.24,
My work is a long shot but with considerable potential and capitalizes on my life's work so it is worth pursuing even if it does not become as forceful as I would like it to be but it is nevertheless a contribution to the empisteme and the ghost of a theological paradigm change. Historically one sees the origin
[page 305]
of cropping as the origin of ownership or control of land and all that is built on it, the power of possession eventually leading to the relationship between civilization and imperialism that Crossan derides. We see it in the argument over the Voice in Australia where many of its opponents say it will enable the first people to take away our land.
Crossan page 74: Divine punishment. Insofar as the world is divine all events are divine. It for us to give them meaning. Some things we cause by commission or omission and here praise and blame may be appropriate. Other events have no or negligible human input and are properly called acts of god'.
page 79; If we see my individual cells as inhabitants of my body we can see that they are provided with all possible amenities for jobs that are on the whole quite within their power. This harmony is a consequence of shared genetics and perhaps we would establish it with shared theology / physics as we will see in QFT / QCD. Re Jewish Sybylline Oracles page 79. Sibylline Oracles - Wikipedia
The whole project has been premissed on the idea that we can learn something about the nature of the world from its early evolution and apply that to the management of our future. I have just skimmed through Crossan and found it pretty useless because the God of the Bible is very violent and has nothing to teach us. Now I am struggling to extract a lesson from what I have written so far in cognitive cosmology
[page 306]
so as to be able to justify it by applying it to QFT and QCD as a preliminary to ??? it all as a harmonization of physics and theology as a theoretical basis for defining the future of humanity on Earth but my mind has gone blank. Reading Omnes taught me nothing and I find that the biggest take away I have is that quantum mechanics us a theory of interpersonal communication and Einstein's general covariance is a mistake.
cc22_trans_hilbert: We now come to the edge of the present. The story so far embraces Einstein's relativity and von Neumann's development of abstract Hilbert space as the proper home of quantum mechanics. We deviate from the standard story on a number of points (see list 10/10 above and modified repetition here, the latest version). The principal revision lies in the sharp separation of quantum mechanics and special relativity, clearing the air for a much simpler treatment of quantum field theory abd using the assumption of the zero energy univerde to provide a basis for the converdsion of particles from formal kinematic entitieds in the quantun world to real dynamic entities ib Minkowski space. This approach explains the origin of massless bosonbs and their role in the interface between the kinematic quantum world and the dynamics of the classical world we inhabit.
[page 307]
Does this say it? Part of my problem is interpreting my own ideas.
The relationship between kinematics and dynamics mediated by gravitation may serve to answer many of the problems raised by Omnes and Rovelli. Carlo Rovelli (2017): Reality is Not What it Seems: The Journey to Quantum Gravity
Rovelli page xv: 'Science is about reading the world from a gradually widening point of view'. The problem with research in gravitation is that the scientists are not reading thew world because the Planck units are very small and therefore exceedingly high energy. In fact they are probably figments of they imagination and they will never be able to observe them. Einstein;s theory of gravitation seems to be perfectly satisfactory but cannot emloy very many people.
A crisis of confidence. It all seems too good to be true, especially the creation of space and the role of gravitation turning kinematics into dynamics. Just press on. I can't be as bad as the quantum gravity mob.
Thursday 12 October 2023
cc22_trans_hilbert: restate the project and summarize the benefits so far preparatory to taking of QFT and QCD, emphasizing the communicative nature of quantum mechanics [in the hilbert layer] and the role of gravitation in realizing kinematic consistencies (mathematical theories) as dynamic realities with a comment on Omnes.
The kinematic dynamic bootstrap.
[page 308]
Phone cc22.1 The world builds itself like Hilbert creating formalism in a dynamic system with no structure but omnipotence.
cc22.2 The first structure in this initial singularity induced by fixed point theory is Hilbert space.
cc22.3 This Hilbert space is kinematic kept in perpetual motion by the dynamic initial singularity.
cc22.4 Quantum mechanics selects stationary eigenvalues from this system consistent with mathematical theorems with consistent kinematic structures.
22.5 These structures are rendered dynamic by creating gravitational [potential from which they harvest energy to become real and dynamic.We guess that the first particles created by this process are massless bosons.
The quantum creation of Minkowski space whose peculiar metric is established by massless bosons which carry quantum states through spacetime on null geodesics.
Then laws and symmetries. Symmetry with respect to complexity because all particles are images of the divinity, ie the initial singularity, which is a dynamic operator the analogue of a particle and this definition covers all particles from photons to galaxies and beyond in both directions.
Auyang page 44: Chen Ning Yang said several times 'if we were to rename "gauge invariance"
[page 309]
today, it is obvious that we should call it phase invariance and gauge fields should be called phase fields.' Sunny Auyang (1995); How is Quantum Field Theory Possible?
Auyang page 47:Fields are continuous but not amorphous; a field contains discrete and concrete point entities, each indivisible but each having intrinsic characteristics. The description of field properties is local, concentrating on a point entity and its infinitesimal displacement . . . The world of fields is full, n contract to the mechanistic world, in which particles are separated by empty space across which forces act instantaneously at a distance.
Bangarra: Spear Spear (film) - Wikipedia
Now I am going to places where I haven't been before
Friday 13 October 2023
cc2.1 A history of impossible problems
cc22.2 Evolution solves them all (so far).
The method of lying in bed in the morning until I get an idea good enough to get up for has worked for the first time in years and I have at last a plan for cc22 based on the history of physics hitting a sequence impossible problems and evolving ways out of them beginning with Galileo and heliocentrism and coming to the present impasse with gravitation and solved by me!! Next step skim Rovelli for a few quotes and then get to work. Carlo Rovelli (2017): Reality is Not What it Seems: The Journey to Quantum Gravity
[page 310]
Rovelli page 65: ' The world is made up of particles and fields and nothing else; ther is no need to add space as an extra ingredient. Newton's space is gravitational field. Or vice versa . . . the gravitational field is space.'
page 81: Map of Dante's Universe
page 91; 'more than a century after [quantum mechanics'] birth it remains shrouded in obscurity and incomprehension.'
'. . . there exists a fundamental granularity in all things, including light.'
103: Rovelli likes the 'relational' aspect of qm, ie communication [I like to say qm describes the conversations of sources of persons].
page 104: Spectrum (eigenvalues) + probability (Born).
page 105: 'main reason why Schrödinger's wave is a bad image of reality is the fact that when a particle collides with something else, it is always at a point, it is never spread out in space like a wave. If we conceive of an electron as a wave, we get in trouble explaining how this wave instantly concentrates to a point at each collision.' He does not understand [the wave is not in Minkowski space but in Hilbert space where it serves to compute probabilities].
page 108: 'Particles are quanta of a field".
page 109: ' There are approximately fifteen fields whose quanta are the elementary particles.' Note: ' the standard model relies on certain symmetries and these symmetries seemed to permit only particles devoid of mass. Mass enters by interaction with the Higgs field.' Higgs boson - Wikipedia
[page 311]
Rovelli page 111: Quantum mechanics has revealed three aspects of the nature of thing: granularity, indeterminacy and relational structure.
page 112: 'Due to this indeterminacy in the world described by quantum mechanics, things are constantly subject to random change. All the variables 'fluctuate' continuously as if on the smallest scale everything is vibrating.' This is fluctuation in the timing of events, but events have fixed spectra with probability structures [determined a la Born by distances between relevant states in Hilbert space].
page 115: Reality is reduced to interaction, just like human society. Just as an electron is 'nowhere' unless it is interacting, so is a person or source. Every interaction is ab 'observation' or measurement.
page 125: He tries to contrast quantum mechanics and general relativity bypassing Minkowski space which (?) is the only meaningful content of general relativity:
Conclusion: By that, the general theory of relativity as a logical building is eventually finished. The relativity postulate in its general form that makes the space-time coordinates to physically meaningless parameters, is directed with stringent necessity to a very specific theory of gravitation that explains the perihelion motion of mercury. However, the general relativity postulate offers nothing new about the essence of the other natural processes, which wasn't already taught by the special theory of relativity. . . . Albert Einstein (1915, 2010): The Field Equations of Gravitation (Translation)page 126: ' space and time must also be quantum entities possessing these strange properties.' Quantum space + quantum time =quantum gravity. Maybe silly equation.
page 129: 'qm + gr imply that there is a limit to the divisibility of space. Below a certain scale . . . nothing exists there (maybe) [and if nothing exists below a certain scale, nothing exists anywhere??].
page 130: calculate the size of a particle before it falls into its ow black hole ie planck length, 10-33 cm. Why? This is the sacle of qwuantum gravity (?).
page 148: Momentum = fourier transform of position.
The rest seems to be purely imaginary fiction on an impossibly small scale [Planck length and time] with a tremendous amount of unobservable detail which must be resolved at enormous energy / momentum which seems to put the cosmological constant problem in the shade.
[page 312]
Rovelli page 234: 'Beyond the next hill there are worlds, still more vasst, still to be discovered.
Saturday 14 October 2023
'Confidence building measure". Read old stuff and see that my trajectory is good. Fear sends people to the right and into their shells, the opposite of the Cantorian expansion of psychological space advocated in Nicholls 1987. The link between quantum mechanics and human communication, interpreted via evolution, indicates that the safe course is to come out of the shell and look around, as we saw with the insects who leaned to fly.
The ubiquity and incredible creativity of evolution arises from its basis in random input. One of the nuisances in Australia are
[page 314]
flies which are almost impossible to kill because apart from having well developed and fast vision, sacrifices a pair of wings to give them an onboard gyroscopic reference to their orientation in space. Halteres - Wikipedia
Piketty: The body model says we are all equivalent cells supported by each other and everybody gets a living by being part of the system. This begins at the quantum mechanical level. Everyone gets a living wage paid for out of a percentage of the total take. Thomas Piketty (2020): Capital and Ideology
The unification of theology must unify the management of capital Piketty. My house earned more than me. Taxation. A political and intellectual problem. Control capital to go beyond capitalism.
Justin Pemberton: Capital in the 21st Century. The omnipotent singularity creates capital ≡ entropy ≡ freedom for everybody. Thomas Piketty, Justin Pemberton: Capital in the Twenty-First Century
What is capital? a tool that enables one to do something. It must be dynamic, although modern market treats it as kinematic, cannot do anything by itself.