On The Nature of Thoughts and Transactional Interpretational Model of Quantum Cosmology
In a Copenhagen light there is no real explanation to why large objects seem to escape the smaller statistical averages laws that compose it, such as the infinitesimal world of electrons, protons, ect.
Decoherence is a mathematical explanation, that was tested in 1990’s by Alain Aspect, a French physicist, among other coworkers. They found that the environment of wavelike structures can entangle and collapse into a single state over a given period time, without the aid of an observer. The problem however, turned out to be according to Hawking, and many other leading scientists who work in multiple fields, still large area’s of the universe would not be in the state they are observed to be in today. Large clumps of superpositioned and virtual matter would have even after 15,000 million years of expansion, still leave the GREATER part of the universe undefined, in the sense that the virtual wavelike matter would still be ghostly and not real at all, when relativity and a conscious observer are involved.
A FEW bright sparks led scientists to believe that the reason behind this, was because we are now ‘’today’’, in the present time, so-to-say, are just ‘’now’’ shaping the undefined universe at time zero, where there was no unique radius, or structure, because there was supposedly no observer. In this interpretation, which was heavily studied by Dr. Fred Alan Wolf, among other scientists independently, it seems as though, even though we experience some kind of movement in time, and distance in space, or even a distance in time, and a movement in space, time is relativistically important, when we are involved.
In Dr. Greene’s book, ‘’The Frozen Lake’’, we are told that time itself happens in a single instance, and that all of time is all frozen out ahead of us in our past and future histories, but this grim mathematical truth seems to be a law that is broken by the very reference of a conscious observer’s point of view, where things don’t seem so ‘’stuck in time.’’ For a really good set of references for this, I advise to ‘’The Yoga of Mind,’’ and ‘’Parallel Universes,’’ by Dr. Wolf. He is quite good at explaining science, even though he is inexorably criticized sometimes that he sometimes errs in distinguishing between metaphysics and physics.
This is one of the reasons why it clicked on that the observer was somehow outside the laws of relativity, and why Dr. David Albert introduced his ‘’Principle of Secret Knowledge,’’ showing that the mind has its own secret dimensional freedom, and yet, it still knows exactly where it is going, and where it is, despite of the quantum laws of the Uncertainty Principle, which should forbid our ability to know these facts.
It came to my attention, that perhaps there are more than just a few ways to explain this. One is by saying, that consciousness is a macroscopic operational system. So that, in some strange Copenhagenistic way of seeing this, consciousness as we know it comes out of a macroscopic system, and thereby following like rules.
However, there is the question of the wave function itself, and why consciousness escapes these rules. It seems evident that there is an something unique with time when in retro-respects to Bohm’s law of $$|\psi|^2$$, so that a collapse in the wave function, by any observer, creates that thing real, and this is of course, so that it must abide as being an equation pivotal in relative working frameworks. In other words, whenever we come to measure any eigenstate of a system, (which is just the same as talking about the infinite possibilities behind such a field i.e. the wave function), a single eigenstate will appear, and all other eigenstates are disregarded, but never totally lost, due to the ‘’Information Paradox,’’ saying that no information, no matter how small it is, can never be lost to the vacuum. This is why, scientists where able to say that the uncertainty principle at the smallest levels known given by Planck's Constants, did indicate that subatomic particles did not necessarily obey the laws of cause and effect… but can experience the effect well before the cause! For reference, the best would be the Generalized Absorber Theory, because when you understand this process, we find that there are hidden variables where an action in the future is complimentary to an action in the past.
Now why should the past and future be complimentary? Well, according to physicists (ADD), you can actually violate the law of uncertainty, if a measurement of the position of let’s say for arguments sake an electron in the past, and make a measurement in the future of it’s position, you can take both the values and come up with the real answer in the present. While some scientists find it [[just]] a strange mathematical phenom, it still remains a fact that in Relativity, the future and the past are not only illusions of the mind, but the mind reflects on that illusion, because we experience a past and a future, which is forbidden in GR alone, because everything is found to be a frozen lake, where there is no observer to distinguish the two.
This is why I like the Transactional Interpretation. Not only does it give explanations to physical functions, but it also adds the notion that things cannot be seen in one direction only. Things are always operating around us, like how a ball can only fall, if it had a place to first fall from, as must as it’s end story defines what happened inbetween.
In a Copenhagen light there is no real explanation to why large objects seem to escape the smaller statistical averages laws that compose it, such as the infinitesimal world of electrons, protons, ect.
Decoherence is a mathematical explanation, that was tested in 1990’s by Alain Aspect, a French physicist, among other coworkers. They found that the environment of wavelike structures can entangle and collapse into a single state over a given period time, without the aid of an observer. The problem however, turned out to be according to Hawking, and many other leading scientists who work in multiple fields, still large area’s of the universe would not be in the state they are observed to be in today. Large clumps of superpositioned and virtual matter would have even after 15,000 million years of expansion, still leave the GREATER part of the universe undefined, in the sense that the virtual wavelike matter would still be ghostly and not real at all, when relativity and a conscious observer are involved.
A FEW bright sparks led scientists to believe that the reason behind this, was because we are now ‘’today’’, in the present time, so-to-say, are just ‘’now’’ shaping the undefined universe at time zero, where there was no unique radius, or structure, because there was supposedly no observer. In this interpretation, which was heavily studied by Dr. Fred Alan Wolf, among other scientists independently, it seems as though, even though we experience some kind of movement in time, and distance in space, or even a distance in time, and a movement in space, time is relativistically important, when we are involved.
In Dr. Greene’s book, ‘’The Frozen Lake’’, we are told that time itself happens in a single instance, and that all of time is all frozen out ahead of us in our past and future histories, but this grim mathematical truth seems to be a law that is broken by the very reference of a conscious observer’s point of view, where things don’t seem so ‘’stuck in time.’’ For a really good set of references for this, I advise to ‘’The Yoga of Mind,’’ and ‘’Parallel Universes,’’ by Dr. Wolf. He is quite good at explaining science, even though he is inexorably criticized sometimes that he sometimes errs in distinguishing between metaphysics and physics.
This is one of the reasons why it clicked on that the observer was somehow outside the laws of relativity, and why Dr. David Albert introduced his ‘’Principle of Secret Knowledge,’’ showing that the mind has its own secret dimensional freedom, and yet, it still knows exactly where it is going, and where it is, despite of the quantum laws of the Uncertainty Principle, which should forbid our ability to know these facts.
It came to my attention, that perhaps there are more than just a few ways to explain this. One is by saying, that consciousness is a macroscopic operational system. So that, in some strange Copenhagenistic way of seeing this, consciousness as we know it comes out of a macroscopic system, and thereby following like rules.
However, there is the question of the wave function itself, and why consciousness escapes these rules. It seems evident that there is an something unique with time when in retro-respects to Bohm’s law of $$|\psi|^2$$, so that a collapse in the wave function, by any observer, creates that thing real, and this is of course, so that it must abide as being an equation pivotal in relative working frameworks. In other words, whenever we come to measure any eigenstate of a system, (which is just the same as talking about the infinite possibilities behind such a field i.e. the wave function), a single eigenstate will appear, and all other eigenstates are disregarded, but never totally lost, due to the ‘’Information Paradox,’’ saying that no information, no matter how small it is, can never be lost to the vacuum. This is why, scientists where able to say that the uncertainty principle at the smallest levels known given by Planck's Constants, did indicate that subatomic particles did not necessarily obey the laws of cause and effect… but can experience the effect well before the cause! For reference, the best would be the Generalized Absorber Theory, because when you understand this process, we find that there are hidden variables where an action in the future is complimentary to an action in the past.
Now why should the past and future be complimentary? Well, according to physicists (ADD), you can actually violate the law of uncertainty, if a measurement of the position of let’s say for arguments sake an electron in the past, and make a measurement in the future of it’s position, you can take both the values and come up with the real answer in the present. While some scientists find it [[just]] a strange mathematical phenom, it still remains a fact that in Relativity, the future and the past are not only illusions of the mind, but the mind reflects on that illusion, because we experience a past and a future, which is forbidden in GR alone, because everything is found to be a frozen lake, where there is no observer to distinguish the two.
This is why I like the Transactional Interpretation. Not only does it give explanations to physical functions, but it also adds the notion that things cannot be seen in one direction only. Things are always operating around us, like how a ball can only fall, if it had a place to first fall from, as must as it’s end story defines what happened inbetween.
Chow for now, Amigos.