Quantum Physics interpretation ideas

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by HawkI, May 9, 2017.

  1. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    The orderly pattern and chaotic state may appear contradictory but the fact is an orderly pattern is an {element} of [chaotic states] set.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,859
    I have been thinking about it for 15 years, a relatively short time compared to the fact that some of the greatest minds have been thinking and discussing it for hundreds of years.
    This is why I have always qualified my position as IMO.
    Yes, I know.
    I interpret that in abstract terms the determined future is mathematically Implied by the present.
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2017
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    So if you know, why a pattern cannot emerge out of chaos? Why do you need my namesake?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,859
    That's the whole point of a self-ordering imperative, other than a sentient creator.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Principles of Chaos
    I don't.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2017
  8. HawkI Registered Member

    Messages:
    44
    I see myself as a reformed Crank, in some instance a Crank on the mend, I genuinely believe that knowledge is finite and everything can be known, and that knowing everything is the limit of knowledge. I believe we are so close right now to knowing everything.
     
  9. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    You've got to be kidding (about the place of mathematics in the hierarchy of reality).

    It's a TOOL. There were stones long before there were hammers, just as there were numerical orders, conservation laws and laws of motion, AND DIRECT PROPORTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS a very long time before we had an inkling of a symbolic language that was capable of expressing them in small enough bits for our finite minds to manipulate.

    Thinking otherwise is making a simple symbolic language into some mangled and conceited perversion akin to the superstitious tradition of religious idol worship. And it stinks, frankly. Reeks of another homo sapien centered delusion, it does. Like the idea that Global Warming will fix itself, or that G-d will fix it, even if we are the ones responsible for breaking it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2017
  10. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,859
    To be clear, I never said that human mathematics are the causal functions by which reality becomes expressed.
    But it seems logical to me that if humans are able to translate specific permitted and restricted behaviors of physical objects into a symbolic representation in the form of values and equations which seem to create the observable physical behavioral patterns of these natural functions, as they emerge from a prior state of Chaos, there must exist an inherent ordering aspect to spacetime itself.
    I agree completely. My point is that if we are able to represent these inherent (pre-existing or emerging) proportional relationships, some which humans are now able to represent in symbolically abstractions which we have named mathematically functional values and equations.
    I agree and it does not contradict my position.
    That's why Bertrant Russel offered a qualification;
    https://www.dartmouth.edu/~matc/MathDrama/reading/Wigner.html
    Oh, I am confident that the Earth (not God) will fix itself, once humans stop polluting and causing imbalances in the self ordering (mathematical functions) of the ecosphere. It may take a long time to regain that balance, but the earth IS a self-balancing system, until a threshold is reached and the mathematics of the domino effect will collapse the entire system. However, the earth itself doesn't care which species live or die.

    As George Carlin observed in his usual scathing indictment of human behaviors.
     
  11. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    My all-time favorite philosopher. I did not mean to imply that mathematics was without beauty. Its focus on the limited truth it can provide makes it unique among all of the languages we have devised. Supremely unambiguous. Utilitarian. But it really is not something I consider to be superior to any other language, even and especially to the extent to which it is capable of capturing the whole truth about anything. It can't possibly. There is much more to the universe than proportional math, vector calculus, group theory, linear algebra, complex math, Boolean algebra, Statistics, finite math, Galois Fields, topology, geometry, and whatever else you care to toss into the mix from a comprehensive mathematical toolkit.

    Of all of the systems of mathematical logic ONLY Gödel's incompleteness theorem is both 100% complete and consistent. You can only accomplish such a feat within a system of reasoning by focus on limiting the scope of the truth it can provide, in this case, considering only those two attributes. The downside is, there isn't very much else Gödel's system of reasoning can say about anything else. And this consequence extends to all of mathematical reasoning; however nuanced or convoluted or extended or qualified it may be, it will never be perfection in terms of consistency and completeness within the limitations imposed by its own structure.

    Yes, for certain. Big fan of Carlin, too. Like me, Carlin, like Churchill, had his share of "black dog" (depression) days.

    For no particular reason, this was one of mine. It comes out in whatever I am writing at the time. I just need to stop writing for a while.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2017
  12. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,859
    Please don't, I always read your posts with interest and learn something from them.
    I have posted this before, but in case you missed it, I'll link it again;


    I found it remarkable and informative.
     
  13. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,528
    How does the mathematical produce the physical ?

    So far , this video , is based on objects which already exist .
     
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,859
    I see a deeper meaning. As Livio explains, we can draw a circle on a piece of paper but that is only an interpretation of a circle that exists "out there" (in the abstract), as in the Poincare Conjecture, where a circle can be reduced to a single point without encountering a "break" in the abstract surface of that imperative to form a circle. A natural abstract potential .

    Now suppose we actually collapse this infinite potential into a single point (a singularity) which contains all the potentials of abstract circles from infinitely large to an infinitely small singularity. This would be just one example of abstract natural mathematical imperatives.
    I can imagine an eventual release of this potential as a mega-quantum event converting this infinitely compressed potential into a form of energy. The BB.

    I qualify this as my interpretation of David Bohm's; Wholeness and the Implicate Order.
    If I recall, he named these timeless abstract mathematical imperatives; "Insight Intelligence"

    I believe you might identify with this term on a spiritual level also. But from my perspective, this creative causality would not be a self-aware sentient being, but an abstract mathematically implied imperative.
     
  15. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,528

    Notice the circle rather than sphere .
     
  16. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,859
    Sorry, I quote the Poincare Conjecture incorrectly. It should read: the Poincare Conjecture, where a sphere can be reduced to a single point without encountering a "break" in the abstract surface of that imperative to form a sphere.

    Actually this tendency to form a sphere exists in many forms, even in manifolds, as long as there is no break in the surface.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    But it does not work for say, a doughnut shaped universe (which used to be one of my favorite images of the Universe.)

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincaré_conjecture
     
  17. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,528
    But a three dimensional sphere will have a break in its surface when brought down to a two dimensional object .

    It can't be any other way .

    See , your going from two dimensions to three dimensions .

    I go from three dimensions down to two . See my point ?
     
  18. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,859
    Only if you see this as if we live inside the sphere. But as I understand it, the universe is the 2 D outer surface of the sphere or the manifold.
     
  19. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,528

    Not possible .

    Think about 2D in terms of the ability to manifest anything .
     
  20. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,859
    I believe you need to think about space as 2D slices of now and in terms of a flat but curved "nowverse". This link explains it much better than I can;
    https://blogs.scientificamerican.co...what-do-you-mean-the-universe-is-flat-part-i/
     

Share This Page