Write4U's wobbly world of word salad woo

[Pinball1970]

Please, I have no delusions of grandeur. To my understanding this is no more than any other science fiction story, except that this is not fiction according to people who do understand QM. It is fascinating nevertheless.

My criticism of your approach is that you do not take on board advice from educated posters. They have actually studied this stuff and you always ignore their guidance.

Some of the concepts you read about and cite, like Pilot wave theory, have an absolute stack of stuff you need to have at least a grounding in to know what is going on.

Nothing wrong in being interested but Why don't you start from the ground up?

Rather than falling out of a tree?

 

[Write4U]

Some of the concepts you read about and cite, like Pilot wave theory, have an absolute stack of stuff you need to have at least a grounding in to know what is going on.

I don't need to know the maths to understand this:

The de Broglie–Bohm theory, also known as the pilot wave theory, Bohmian mechanics, Bohm's interpretation, and the causal interpretation, is an interpretation of quantum mechanics.

It postulates that in addition to the wavefunction, an actual configuration of particles exists, even when unobserved.

Which in principle solves the wave/particle duality conundrum.
I believe that my acceptance of this logical model is perfectly acceptable, being that the Copenhagen model requires;
"shut up and calculate" which IMO is not doing science at all.

"Calculate but don’t shut up"​

The cliché has it that the Copenhagen interpretation demands adherence without deep enquiry. That does physics a disservice​

What are we supposed to make of this? If we interpret the wave function realistically, as a tangible physical thing, we then have to figure out how it ‘collapses’ to produce a spot at only one location out of all the other probable locations on the screen. Such a collapse implies what Einstein in 1927 called ‘an entirely peculiar mechanism of action at a distance’ – an anathema of ghostly physical effects transmitted instantaneously across space with no apparent direct cause, now generally referred to as the ‘measurement problem’.

For Einstein, the lack of any kind of physical explanation for how this is supposed to happen meant that something is missing; that quantum mechanics is in some way incomplete.

This is from people who have studied all the basics. Disappointing result.

Bohm's model does away with all this "uncertainty", if given sufficient data.

 

[Pinball1970]

I don't need to know the maths to understand this:

You do.

 

[Pinball1970]

Bohm's model does away with all this "uncertainty", if given sufficient data.

I thought hidden variable theories were essentially ruled by Aspect's work?

 

[Write4U]

Damn!!!

A major development in microtubule research and no place to post it in context.

Quantum Fiber Optics In The Brain Enhance Processing, May Protect Against Degenerative Diseases​

• Research
• Matt Swayne
• May 13, 2024

Insider Brief

• Howard University-led research team has discovered a distinctly quantum effect in biology that survives difficult conditions in the brain.
• The effect may also present a way for the brain to protect itself from degenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s.
• The findings were published in The Journal of Physical Chemistry.
• Image: Life has thus found a way to exploit molecular symmetries to enhance collective quantum optical behaviors, which are robust to warm and wet environments. Credit: Quantum Biology Laboratory: Nathan Babcock and Philip Kurian

more.....

But the study found that a strange thing happens when many, many tryptophan molecules are arranged in a symmetrical network, like they are in larger structures like centrioles—they fluoresce stronger and faster than they would if they were fluorescing independently. The collective behavior is called “superradiance,” and it only happens with single photons because of quantum mechanics.

Pyramidal neurons may have the perfect symmetry required for the task
more

This result demonstrates a fundamental quantum effect in a place where quantum effects are not typically expected to be able to survive: a larger object in a warm, “noisy” environment.

NEURONS

These large tryptophan networks exist in neurons, the cells that make up the mammalian nervous system. The presence of quantum superradiance in the fiber-like bundles of neurons has two big potential implications: protection against degenerative diseases, and the transmission of quantum signals in the brain.

Degenerative brain diseases like Alzheimer’s have been associated with high degrees of oxidative stress—when the body carries a large number of free radicals, which can emit damaging, high-energy UV light particles.

Tryptophan can absorb this ultraviolet light and re-emit it at a lower, safer energy. And, as this study found, very large tryptophan networks can do this even more efficiently and robustly because of their powerful quantum effects.

“This photoprotection may prove crucial in ameliorating or halting the progression of degenerative illness,” said Kurian. “We hope this will inspire a range of new experiments to understand how quantum-enhanced photoprotection plays a role in complex pathologies that thrive on highly oxidative conditions.”

The second implication for superradiance in the brain has to do with how neurons transmit signals. The standard model for neuronal signaling involves ions moving across membranes from one end of the neuron to the other, in a chemical process that takes a few milliseconds for each signal. But neuroscience researchers have only recently become aware that this can’t be the whole story.

Superradiance in the brain happens in under a picosecond—a billionth of a millisecond. These tryptophan networks could be functioning as quantum fiber optics that allow the brain to process information hundreds of millions of times faster than chemical processes alone would allow.

“The Kurian group and coworkers have enriched our understanding of information flows in biology at the quantum level,” said Michael Levin, director of the Tufts Center for Regenerative and Developmental Biology, who was not associated with the work. “Such quantum optical networks are widespread, not only in neural systems but broadly throughout the web of life. The remarkable properties of this signaling and information-processing modality could be hugely relevant for evolutionary, physical, and computational biology.”

Quantum Fiber Optics in The Brain Enhance Processing, May Protect Against Degenerative Diseases

Howard University-led research team has discovered a distinctly quantum effect in biology that survives difficult conditions in the brain.

thequantuminsider.com

This would have been a nice closer of the microtubule thread. The entire warm, wet argument answered and refuted with proofs.

 

[Pinball1970]

This would have been a nice closer of the microtubule thread. The entire warm, wet argument answered and refuted with proofs.

I specifically asked you about Pilot wave theory. This is a hidden variables theory right?
Has this not been ruled out by Aspect and colleagues?

 

[Write4U]

I specifically asked you about Pilot wave theory. This is a hidden variables theory right?

The pilot wave theory is a hidden-variable theory. Consequently: the theory has realism (meaning that its concepts exist independently of the observer); the theory has determinism.

The positions of the particles are considered to be the hidden variables. The observer doesn't know the precise values of these variables; they cannot know them precisely because any measurement disturbs them. On the other hand, the observer is defined not by the wave function of their own atoms but by the atoms' positions. So what one sees around oneself are also the positions of nearby things, not their wave functions.

Pilot wave theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Has this not been ruled out by Aspect and colleagues?

I don't know. Has it? If so how is Aspect's interpretation more credible than Bohm's interpretation?

Note that Bohm's Pilot Wave meets all observations, and does away with that pesky duality problem.
Does Aspect's interpretation correct that persistent problem or is it another Copenhagen interpretation?

 

[Write4U]

Question; How does the wavefunction in the Copenhagen model affect entanglement?

 

[exchemist]

Question; How does the wavefunction in the Copenhagen model affect entanglement?

There is no Copenhagen model. The model is quantum mechanics. There is a Copenhagen interpretation of that model, that’s all.

Entanglement was predicted by QM and found to observed as predicted by the model.

 

[Write4U]

There is no Copenhagen model. The model is quantum mechanics. There is a Copenhagen interpretation of that model, that’s all.

Entanglement was predicted by QM and found to observed as predicted by the model.

Thanks for the correction.

Now, in context of entanglement in neural network of the brain, I ran across this interesting tidbit.

Networks of Entanglement​

Entanglement can also occur among hundreds, millions, and even more particles. The phenomenon is thought to take place throughout nature, among the atoms and molecules in living species and within metals and other materials. When hundreds of particles become entangled, they still act as one unified object. Like a flock of birds, the particles become a whole entity unto itself without being in direct contact with one another. Caltech scientists focus on the study of these so-called many-body entangled systems, both to understand the fundamental physics and to create and develop new quantum technologies.

In context of brain function this sounds to me very much like a form of Orchestrated Objective Reduction

As John Preskill, Caltech's Richard P. Feynman Professor of Theoretical Physics, Allen V. C. Davis and Lenabelle Davis Leadership Chair, and director of the Institute for Quantum Information and Matter, says, "We are making investments in and betting on entanglement being one of the most important themes of 21st-century science."

What Is Entanglement and Why Is It Important?

Caltech scientists explain the strange phenomenon of quantum entanglement in everyday language.

scienceexchange.caltech.edu

 

[exchemist]

Thanks for the correction.

Now, in context of entanglement in neural network of the brain, I ran across this interesting tidbit.

Networks of Entanglement​

In context of brain function this sounds to me very much like a form of Orchestrated Objective Reduction

ZZZzzzzzz.........

 

[Pinball1970]

I don't know. Has it? If so how is Aspect's interpretation more credible than Bohm's interpretation

It's not an interpretation. Do you know anything about EPR, Bell and the work of Aspect and colleagues?

 

[Write4U]

It's not an interpretation. Do you know anything about EPR, Bell and the work of Aspect and colleagues?

Are you saying that EPR et al rules out entanglement networks, such as may exist in the brain?

 

[Pinball1970]

Are you saying that EPR et al rules out entanglement networks, such as may exist in the brain?

I have not mentioned the brain please stick to the topic. You need some understanding of QM to understand entanglement the EPR paper and what is meant by hidden variables.
Bells work in the 1960s was tested by teams including Alain Aspect and colleagues,he won the Noble.
His work effectively rules out the hidden variables idea and pilot wave theory is a hidden variables theory.
Whether that rules out all hidden variable ideas is another thing.
Locality comes into it too and that is above my pay grade. James may know this stuff.
And yes there is a shit load of maths involved.

 

[Write4U]

I have not mentioned the brain please stick to the topic. You need some understanding of QM to understand entanglement the EPR paper and what is meant by hidden variables.
Bells work in the 1960s was tested by teams including Alain Aspect and colleagues,he won the Noble.
His work effectively rules out the hidden variables idea and pilot wave theory is a hidden variables theory.
Whether that rules out all hidden variable ideas is another thing.
Locality comes into it too and that is above my pay grade. James may know this stuff.
And yes there is a shit load of maths involved.

This is what I understand from Bell's Inequalities

Since Bell inequalities have been observed to be violated, either (i) or (ii), or both, are false. Those people who are attached to the metaphysical concept of a reality independent of our observing it definitively want to keep (i) and therefore they have to accept that (ii) is false. But then Bohmian mechanics precisely provide such an escape. Bell himself wrote that he felt vindicated when he read Bohm's seminal article, actually.

On the other hand, interpretation of QM are just that interpretations: they make the exact same predictions and they share common features essential to derive those predictions. Non-locality is one of them: it is inescapable and Bohmian mechanics is non-local in exactly the same way as the Copenhaguen interpretation since in both cases the non-locality comes from the wave function dependence on the positions, spins, etc of all the particles in the system under scrutiny. There is really no difference at that level between both interpretation.

I believe that ORCH OR (the subject I am following) does depend on local variables. That's where the "reduction" part becomes important.
The distillation or selective focus on related factors and then the "orchestration" of the "expected data" to be compared with incoming sensory data. When the expected data matches the "orchestrated" incoming data, cognition produces what Hameroff calls a "bing" (quantum collapse) in the system.

I suspect from what I posted above, this process is called "superradiance" of data that is simultaneously processed by the entire neural system .

In quantum optics, superradiance is a phenomenon that occurs when a group of N emitters, such as excited atoms, interact with a common light field. If the wavelength of the light is much greater than the separation of the emitters, then the emitters interact with the light in a collective and coherent fashion.

Rotational superradiance[5] is associated with the acceleration or motion of a nearby body (which supplies the energy and momentum for the effect). It is also sometimes described as the consequence of an "effective" field differential around the body (e.g. the effect of tidal forces). This allows a body with a concentration of angular or linear momentum to move towards a lower energy state, even when there is no obvious classical mechanism for this to happen. In this sense, the effect has some similarities with quantum tunnelling (e.g. the tendency of waves and particles to "find a way" to exploit the existence of an energy potential, despite the absence of an obvious classical mechanism for this to happen).

Where a classical description of a rotating isolated weightless sphere in a vacuum will tend to say that the sphere will continue to rotate indefinitely, due to the lack of frictional effects or any other form of obvious coupling with its smooth empty environment, under quantum mechanics the surrounding region of vacuum is not entirely smooth, and the sphere's field can couple with quantum fluctuations and accelerate them to produce real radiation. Hypothetical virtual wavefronts with appropriate paths around the body are stimulated and amplified into real physical wavefronts by the coupling process. Descriptions sometimes refer to these fluctuations "tickling" the field to produce the effect.

Superradiance - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

If I understand Anil Seth, this continuous process produces the inner movie that we consciously experience.

 

[Write4U]

Question: Was consciousness always a latent potential, a hidden variable in the physical properties of the universe?

This is where I believe Bohm was on the right track with his proposition of the implicate becoming heuristically explicated via the evolutionary processes of trial and error.

Famously cited as a Eureka moment. An experience of cognition and understanding of something that was heretofore a hidden (unknown) variable.

Dual process theory​

In psychology, a dual process theory provides an account of how thought can arise in two different ways, or as a result of two different processes.

Often, the two processes consist of an implicit (automatic), unconscious process and an explicit (controlled), conscious process. Verbalized explicit processes or attitudes and actions may change with persuasion or education; though implicit process or attitudes usually take a long amount of time to change with the forming of new habits. Dual process theories can be found in social, personality, cognitive, and clinical psychology. It has also been linked with economics via prospect theory and behavioral economics, and increasingly in sociology through cultural analysis.[1][2]

Dual process theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Cognitive psychology - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Write4U]

Cognitive psychology is the scientific study of mental processes such as attention, language use, memory, perception, problem solving, creativity, and reasoning.[1]

Cognitive psychology originated in the 1960s in a break from behaviourism, which held from the 1920s to 1950s that unobservable mental processes were outside the realm of empirical science. This break came as researchers in linguistics and cybernetics, as well as applied psychology, used models of mental processing to explain human behavior.

Here, I believe we are making progress with the discovery of quantum processes in the brain. The implicate becoming explicated.

Work derived from cognitive psychology was integrated into other branches of psychology and various other modern disciplines like cognitive science, linguistics, and economics. The domain of cognitive psychology overlaps with that of cognitive science, which takes a more interdisciplinary approach and includes studies of non-human subjects and artificial intelligence.

Cognitive psychology - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[James R]

I specifically asked you about Pilot wave theory. This is a hidden variables theory right?
Has this not been ruled out by Aspect and colleagues?

Bohmian mechanics is, indeed, a hidden variable theory. That means that it is inherently non-local.

If I understand correctly, Aspect's work on the Bell inequalities rules out local hidden variables, but it doesn't rule out non-local hidden variables.

Non-local hidden variables come with their own set of problems, however. I vaguely recall that Bohm's "pilot waves" mess with causality and such in weird ways. I'm not sure how well (or if) Bohmian mechanics plays nicely with relativity; I suspect it does not.

 

[Pinball1970]

Non-local hidden variables come with their own set of problems, however. I vaguely recall that Bohm's "pilot waves" mess with causality and such in weird ways. I'm not sure how well (or if) Bohmian mechanics plays nicely with relativity; I suspect it does not.

Bells work since Aspect won the Nobel was discussed in various forms on physics forums. I do not think you can get a laymans grasp of it, I cant.
Certainly not of the maths.
How did Bell did not win the Nobel for his work? Nearly every physicist I have heard talk about his work use the same word, "profound."
He died quite young.

EDIT from Wiki. Bell died unexpectedly of a cerebral hemorrhage in Geneva in 1990.[32][33][34] Unknown to Bell, he had reportedly been nominated for a Nobel Prize that year.[35]: 3 [36]: 155 [1]: 374  His contribution to the issues raised by EPR was significant. Some regard him as having demonstrated the failure of local realism (local hidden variables). Bell's own interpretation is that locality itself had met its demise.

 

[Write4U]

Question; In a dynamic spacetime environment are there not always "local hidden variables" such as wave interferences?
Seems to me such variables are inevitably present all the way down to Planck scale, no?

de Broglie–Bohm theory

The Copenhagen interpretation states that the particles are not localised in space until they are detected, so that, if there is no detector on the slits, there is no information about which slit the particle has passed through. If one slit has a detector on it, then the wavefunction collapses due to that detection.[citation needed]

In de Broglie–Bohm theory, the wavefunction is defined at both slits, but each particle has a well-defined trajectory that passes through exactly one of the slits. The final position of the particle on the detector screen and the slit through which the particle passes is determined by the initial position of the particle.

Such initial position is not knowable or controllable by the experimenter, so there is an appearance of randomness in the pattern of detection. In Bohm's 1952 papers he used the wavefunction to construct a quantum potential that, when included in Newton's equations, gave the trajectories of the particles streaming through the two slits.

This is the Pilot wave interpretation.

In effect the wavefunction interferes with itself and guides the particles by the quantum potential in such a way that the particles avoid the regions in which the interference is destructive and are attracted to the regions in which the interference is constructive, resulting in the interference pattern on the detector screen.

De Broglie–Bohm theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Why is this not preferable over the Copenhagen interpretation? A particle travelling on (in) a wave exhibits the same behavior as when the particle is travelling as a wave. But in Bohm's interpretation a particle is always a particle, instead of being smeared out and entering both slits as a wave.
Is that not the more realistic interpretation? Regardless of any justification of the Copenhagen interpretation, should the a priori assumption not be according to standard physics? AFAIK, the Pilot wave model works. It just appears a little more complicated to us, but that is debatable, no?