Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Dreamland I.

The MWI [Many Worlds Interpretation] can be confusing, as it should be. I find it hard myself to resist the urge to "quantify" the never-ending string of world-lines into a knowable cosmos. In fact, the urge is sometimes so great that the only sane way out of the maze is to actually indulge my curiosity, momentarily. This is a great way to end a day, or battle the occasional bout of insomnia, (less neurotic than worrying away those spare minutes) before dozing off. Anyone familiar with the MWI has probably considered its ramifications. Recently I have begun to use clever little lies to help me imagine the immense magnitude of the ideas MWI offers us. I can hold in the back of my mind the idea that there are an infinite number of world-lines [possibly created and destroyed as each interaction [on a quantum level] takes place. I can keep the idea that I exist in a manifold existence such as a "superposition," and that everything that I do in this one world is simply one example of how that super-positional being acts and reacts to his environment. I cannot however; come to a functional understanding of how to apply that knowledge, how to understand infinity on a personal/spiritual level. The concept that I will use to explain this disparity is one of dimensionality. MWI does not imply [as I know it] many dimensions but rather many worlds within the same space. Dimensions [standard interpretation here] imply direction and perspective as seen with dimensions 1-3. The 4th dimension could be seen as time (duration), the 5th might be interpreted as a subset of the 6th being all possible worlds within our universe. Beyond the 5th dimension (a dimension of probability and chance) we would eventually discover other entire universes (with other initial conditions from our universe.) Each physical universe would again contain within the 5th dimension (from its own perspective) infinite versions of itself. Each copy would be slightly different from minute detail; differences in atomic charge or values, in some large shifts that would ensure that the life of that world would be short indeed, such as variances in the speed of light, or the lack of sufficient gravity. It could be said that anything that can be thought of (and all that cannot be thought of) exists and does not exist simultaneously within the whole omniverse! Omniverse is a term that I first heard used by Rob Bryanton [creator of "Imagining The Tenth Dimension." both a book and a website actually exist.] Imagining the tenth dimension shows us an amazing perspective and gives us tools to visualize (with out 4 dimensional mind) a many dimensional world which we may reside in, definately worth a read.

To Be Continued...

Friday, October 17, 2008

The Paradox of the Two Joes

I have been thinking about the concept of memories. They are these strange little invisible threads that hold together our view of our entire persona. Our whole life is woven of experiences (touched, tasted, smelled, heard and seen) This is somehow distilled into a data storage medium and kept in a vault in our brain somewhere, like [Steven King's "Dream Catcher" reference] a "memory warehouse." So these bits of data, how accurate are they as representations of actual events? Take even the simplest event, a birthday party, a fishing trip, or the viewing of a film, each one of these events will be dictated and translated into the data banks of our memory in unique ways. Emotions help to give them a rating of importance and where and how they are stored. somethings just seem to get lost in the shuffle.

If we are completely honest with ourselves, we will have to admit that not all the memories that we have are accurate. Processing errors do happen. Some events actually took place in a different set of conditions, time, weather, colors, people and participants might have been different. Some psychologists have theorized that people "paint" their memory into existence.

I would like to set up a scenario for you:

Imagine that a man named Joe is trying to remember his childhood. He has never had any problems with mental illness or mind-altering drug use, and he is healthy in every way. Joe is 27 years old, so his childhood is not too distant from his vantage point. Now imagine that in a parallel universe there exists another Joe, with slightly different memories (again this Joe has no mental illness, history of drug use and is perfectly healthy in every way.) We will call the first Joe [Joe 1] the second [Joe 2.]

At the precise time that Joe 1 tries to recall his childhood an event occurs, (we will just call it a quantum event or quantum shift.) This event causes Joe 2 to be swapped with Joe 1. (or possibly Joe 1's mind with that of Joe 2. The memories of Joe 1 transferred into Joe 2 and vice versa.)

A few questions:

1.) Does Joe 1 or 2 know that the switch has occured? If so, how?
2.) Does anoyone else notice? If so, how?

In all actuallity this event could happen to any one of us, and if it did, by some querk of physics, how would we know it? Would not our only measure of the shift be lost by the act of shifting? Memories might linger, thoughts might haunt the Joes for some time, but which would ever be able to truly discern what had happened?

I order to further explore this paradox one must have an understanding of the Multiple Worlds Interpretation of Quantum mechanics. The Everett/Wheeler model.

My point is this... How sure are you that the world you lived in today was that same world [or world-line] you lived in yesterday? How sure are you of the accuracy of your memories? And if we travle between similar but different worlds, how can any of us really know where we started?

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Quantum Mind Theory and Quantum Computers

Ever wonder why the human brain doesn't work the same way your computer does? When you feed information (data) into a computer it might store it as a file, calculate using the new data or perform any number of unique functions using this new information. A computer like Belle, Deep Blue or Hydra that can "play" chess might seem very intelligent, but they're really not. A computer can do just what its name implies, "compute." What this means is that a computer can only work with the data that is fed into it, and only within the specific parameters that are programmed into its code. You will not get "original" ideas to come out of a computer, unless your computer is fed in those ideas or the patterns to generate them. This is one of the most frustrating issues being battled in artificial intelligence (A.I.) research today. So lately, scientists have been peering into the mechanics of human intelligence. There is even a branch of study in the field of quantum mechanics that deals with this question, its called Quantum Mind Theory. Researchers like psychologist Roger Penrose have been asking this same question for years, in an attempt to find out how the human brain works. The theory (although still in its infancy) does help to explain the incongruity between classical models of cognition and actual human behavior. A computer works much more in line with Newtonian or classical laws of Physics, while the human brain appears to be following a separate set of laws. A human brain can generate data that was not fed in, and does not have to follow programmed parameters, in fact, very little appears to be programmed into human cognition. A human brain can be fed stimuli and respond with any number of logical or illogical responses. Psychology has always wondered about the inherent random nature of human cognition and behavior. Assigning complex, and lengthy explanations for each new phenomena has been a strategy of psychologists for the past few centuries, but has not taken us any closer to a workable understanding of how the human brain works. If the human mind truly worked like a computer, then classical conditioning would be 100% effective and creativity (imagination, art, literature) would not exist.

So what are these other laws? Quantum Physics offers us a unique view of the human brain and its function, it may indicate that the human mind actually works by using quantum functions to process stimuli and produce behavior. Quantum functions would give us the ability to work with data and produce unique and possibly random results. In order for human beings to behave in a civilized or even functional manner, the use of linear logic would also be needed. Linear logic is the kind most closely associated with classical or Newtonian physics, the natural laws which appear to govern our world. Non-linear logic appears to be more random and chaotic and is associated with quantum physics and chaos theory. Both Linear and non-linear logic would then play a part in how the human mind functions on a day to day basis. Without linear logic we would be a very short-lived species, without non-linear logic, we would be a very boring one.

If we can build a quantum computer, that works like our own brain does, we will begin a new era of technology and dreams of artificial intelligence will become a living breathing reality. Quantum computing has actually already begun (on an atomic scale.) Researchers have devised a system for computing based on the manipulation of atoms, seven to be exact. Tests using this tiny computer have yielded some interesting results, the quantum computer indicated that [2 + 2 = 4.] This might sound like a waste of time, buts its really the first step in manipulating larger more complex groups of atoms, which will eventually surpass traditional computers. Once this occurs the development of a large scale quantum computer will be just a few steps away.

Scientists are eager to develop a quantum computer (QC) for many reasons. QC's will use what is called qubits to process information much like modern computers use bits and bytes. Qubits have essentially two different states (up or down.) It depends on the observer present as to which state the qubit will be found in. QC's will be able to outperform traditional computers (exponentially.) This means that today's most advanced supercomputers or even "clusters" will look like the ENIAC of the 1960's when compared to QC! You may recall that early computers were large and heavy, requiring lots of electricity and operators to use them. NASA estimates that the computing power (at the time of the moon landing) was roughly the equivalent of a scientific calculator such as a TI-83. According to nanotechnology experts, computers utilizing nanocircuitry and quantum technology will be extremely small, (on the molecular scale) and will be infinitely more complex than the computers of today. A leading researcher from Oklahoma State University once remarked, "A nano-scale computer the size of a human fist could one day run the entire electrical grid for New York City."

Current advances in existing computer processors have now produced devices like the "SEAforth 40C18" processor made by Intellasys International Corp. This chip has 40 cores, each runs like a separate but equal CPU with its own ROM and RAM, operates up to 240 times faster and uses 28 times less electricity than its competitors. This example helps to illustrate how quickly technology is approaching the point by which Moore's Law will no longer be a valid predictor of technological progress. (Moore's Law says that technology 'primarily computing technology' will continue to double in processing capability, speed and complexity, roughly every two years.) It has been estimated that 2010 will be the hallmark year where Moore's Law becomes temporarily inaccurate. We do not yet know the rate of technological advancement a society could expect to see, when fully implementing nanotechnology. [One night draw a correlation to the advancements of the modern era upon preindustrial people of island origin.]

For more information about Quantum Mind Theory read the following books:

The Emperor's New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds, and the Laws of Physics (1991)
Author: Roger Penrose

Society Of Mind
Author: Marvin Minsky


Digital People: From Bionic Humans To Androids
Author: Sidney Perkowitz

Thursday, September 25, 2008

LHC coolant leakage incident

CERN- The Large Hadron Collider had to be temporarily shut down (early) due to a coolant leak. It was soon to be shut down and winterized anyhow, so this is only a minor setback. The failure was caused by a ton of liquid helium leaking interior, into the tunnel-ring, which in turn caused the surrounding magnets to overheat by at least 100 degrees. The LHC has to be kept extremely cold: 1.9 kelvin, -271C, -456F. It is unclear if testing may resume for a brief period (after this weekend) or later in spring. Please check out the BBC press release or watch their video linked here on my blog.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

What exactly is a Quantum?

What does the word Quantum mean? The term quantum was coined by Andre-Marie Ampere (1822,) and was later adopted by Albert Einstein, to describe the wavelike-particle nature of light. He employed a variation of the word "quanta" (now called photons) to describe these wave-particles of light. Lewis De Bruglie (1924,) later described the movement of subatomic particles similarly, characterizing them as also being wavelike in nature. Werner Heisenberg added his "uncertainty principle" and the world of modern quantum mechanics was beginning to take shape.
Quantum mechanics (defined by Wikipedia) is "the study of mechanical systems whose dimensions are close to the atomic scale, molecules, atoms, electrons and other subatomic particles." Research in this field is now heavily concentrated on more minute "quanta" (now used as the plural of quantum) is known to be the smallest indivisible particle, the equivalent quantity with the same units as the Planck constant: related to fermions, bosons and photons.
Quantum theory is most valuable, because it accurately describes and predicts the mechanics and dynamics of minute scale particles. It actually works! Unlike other theories, Newtonian physics breaks down (hopelessly) at the particle level. It has been theorized that if Newtonian physics were active in quantum scale, the universe as we know it could collapse into a jumbled mess of super compact atoms and electrons. Matter would cease to exist in an orderly format.




Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Different Initial Conditions


So lately I've been toying around with the idea of different initial conditions and their outcomes. Initial conditions are those conditions that existed just prior to and during the formation of a universe. The laws which will govern physics, chemistry and all motion are written based on these initial conditions. Here's the interesting part: if quantum theory is correct, then initial conditions should vary greatly, in fact infinitely! This should be the mechanism for the manifestation of a never ending set of different universes., each following its own rules and each bound by its (possibly random) set of initial conditions. All possible initial conditions are played out into manifestation, and nothing is without possibility. [These two last items are part of how quantum theory works. "Every possible action event or thing is manifest, and everything is possible."]
That means that different initial conditions would produce different math, logic and science. Consider the almost absurd proposition that there exists a world were [1+1 does not =2,] in fact there is no "1" and there is no "2." It's not that the linguistic representation for the universal concept "1 or 2," would be missing, but that the actual universal concept for those numbers would simply not exist. This seems very counter intuitive but again, quantum theory is very explicit about this, "There is only one rule. There are no rules!" So if that seems preposterous, consider our very own concept of the number zero (0). The following logic may help us to understand what that "zero" may be hinting at. [0 + 0 = 0, 0 - 0 = 0, 0 / 0 = 0, 0 x 0 = 0] Perhaps an oversimplification, but with a touch of madness, we may begin to see the possibility that other math systems could actually exist if the rules for that universe were not the same as our own. Some systems should inherently be highly chaotic and short-lived. Some would never even possess the potential for matter to manifest (at least in a similar way as it does in our own universe.) Other universes could be vastly more organized, with laws that make our own seem rudimentary and primitive. To such complex beings we might be the analogue of Edwin Abbott's flatlanders. (Flatland, 1884) It has been postulated that super-strings or perhaps other even more mysterious objects vibrating in the 10th dimension (see Rob Bryanton's film "Imagining the Tenth Dimension" for further information on this concept) could be the cause of the formation of these initial conditions. Some might say that a pan-dimensional being (similar to the God of Kabbalists, Christians or other religious groups) uttered them into being, as is the theme for Genesis 1:1. The Hindu's believe that Brahma in the form of Spanda Shakti radiates all manifestations within our cosmos, effortlessly by her very nature. Whatever the cause(s) may be, it remains a fascinating idea that these initial conditions can have such a permanent and profound affect upon the universe that they become a part of. The film "Stardust" does an excellent job illustrating just a few of the above points. Its setting is (at least partially) influenced by contemporary quantum physics and the concept of different initial conditions. In this film we see some different laws at play and there is most certainly the concept that this world is contained not within another dimension, realm or faraway planet but within a parallel universe, linked to our own and hidden within plain sight. The works of C.L. Dodgson (Lewis Carroll) "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland " (1865) and "Through the Looking-Glass," (1871) provide us with a view into a world were our laws are curiously twisted or altogether backward. A further look will reveal Carroll's near obsession with strange mathematics and non-linear logic. The short-story "Mimsy were the Borogoves," (1943) by Lewis Padgett (husband and wife sci- fi writing team Henry Kuttner and C.L. Moore,) further expounds Carroll's strange logic into a bizarre sci-fi legend, filled with "X-logic" and odd beings from another world. This was recently made into a children's film "The Last Mimzy."
If we are to dismiss the idea of the existence of such strange places , we might consider the possibility that others may just as easily dismiss the existence of our own world. Remember this is all about possibility, and possibility (quite logically) has no bounds!

Illustration by: John Tenniel, (1863.)

Monday, September 15, 2008

LHC

CERN- So now that we know the thing works properly, there will be quite a few more experiments left to do. I will post more later on this topic as the news unfolds.

Sunday, September 7, 2008

Hindu Cosmology

http;//www.youtube.com/watch?v=xo4b8EiY9Vk

-This is a great, older video, narrated by the late great Carl Sagan!

- Please feel free to comment on the video or about cosmology (Hindu or otherwise.)

Unfortunatly you have to type or paste the above link directly into your web browser, haven't quite got this blog linking down just yet.

Saturday, September 6, 2008

Me "Version 2.0"

The "Many Worlds Interpretation" (MWI) -AKA [Everrett-Wheeler-Graham Model] states: [very loose translation here] that due to the quantum nature of the universe(s) we reside in, every possible outcome or event occurs with all possible particles at some given point in space and time. So in other words, somewhere out there, lies all possible worlds, beings, and things, simultaneously engaged in all manner of interactions, extending into infinity. This interpretation implies that there are an infinite number of "Earths" all slightly different. [The differences could quite significant (some Earths would be uninhabited) or quite subtle (one atom in one cell of one tree has a slightly more positive charge, for the moment.)

Please read the Blog entitled, "The Measurement Problem" for more details for how this set of theories were formed.

This model assumes that the universe is either infinite or part of an infinite number of other universes (like a sea of bubbles.)

This model accurately accounts for the laws of quantum mechanics and presents a cohesive vision for us to grasp.

I find this model offers so many questions to ponder, (once of course it beins to truly "sink in.")

-"What is the true nature of the individual?" ("Is it a world-line version?" "Is it a selectivly conscious collective?)

-"What can be said about the ultimate nature of the universe we live in?" "Is it infinite? Does it exist with other infinite universes in a some kind of superverse, multiverse or megaverse? Is it all simply a matter of semantics? (I doubt it is.)

-"What is our role as individuals?" "Is it to play our role here in this particular 'world-line' to the best of our ability? "Ultimatly, what matters more, the entire sum of versions of self, or the individual self?"

-"Does this mean that evil and good have just become even more relative?" "Do 'good' acts here balance 'evil' acts elsewhere and elsewhen?" "What is the kharma of a being that is manifest in an infinite number of interconected systems, interacting in an infinite number of ways with other beings and itself?"

-"When does death really occur?" "Is it when all worldline versions of yourself die?" "Do you transfer your consciousness directly to another version of yourself upon death in any one world-line?" "Is death even possible in the MWI?"

-"What would be the net gain, loss from any one action in such a system?"

-One must also realize that "you" are simply one version of "yourself." All the other versions' lives are just as REAL and just as noteworthy.

- One definition of 'Quantum Perspective' : (means to me) viewing oneself as an "other" version of oneself. -We are just one version of an endless stream of versions.

For more reading:

http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many_worlds_theory

http://http://www.fredalanwolf.com

http://http://www.johntitor.com/

CERN [LHC] Big Day! 09.10.08

CERN (Geneva, Switzerland) will run a beam through their Large Hadron Collider (LHC) on September 10th 2008. Full coverage during event will be available on satalite links. US observers will be watching on 09.09.08 (read press release and links for details

CERN [LHC] The Big Day

CERN (Geneva, Switzerland) will be turning on their most advanced partical collider, their "Large Hadron Collider [LHC] on September 10th 2008. (September 9th here in the US.) Full coverage of the event will be available on several satilite links.