Page and Paragraph
(Whole paragraphs rounded to pages) |
Transcription from Danah Zohar's
Quantum Self |
Doug's Commentary and Criticism |
Page 44, para. 1 |
"We have already seen that
the act of observing quantum systems
changes them into ordinary objects. The mere fact of our interference in Nature
transforms her, and that
fact alone would require that we change our whole way of looking
at ourselves and our place in the natural world. But worse still
for those who like to think that the world 'just is as it is,'
our interference has an unexpected dimension." |
Our bold and color highlights follow a code:
- black-bold - important to read if you are just scanning
our review
- orange-bold - text ref'd
by index pages
- green-bold - we see Zohar
proffering quantumesque memes
- violet-bold - an apparent
classical problematic
- blue-bold - we disagree
with this text segment while disregarding context of Zohar's
overall text
- gray-bold - quotable
text
- red-bold - our direct
commentary
- [] - our intra text commentary
Danah is making a huge mistake
of attempting to preserve legacy 'objective science.' To do that
she must retain a long list of anti-quantum classicisms:
- wave function 'collapse,'
- collapsed reality as classically objective,
- fermionic reality as classically objective (it isn't),
- 'objective' reality as classically 'stoppable' for purposes
of 'zero momentum' scalar measurement of fermions which never
stop,
- particle and wave as either-or objectively lisr,
- quantum theory as mechanical (it isn't),
- reality as objective for convenience of physics,
- etc.
Danah's "...act of observing
quantum systems changes them into ordinary objects..."
We can simplify Danah's misnomer here by using quantonics script
to say, "Quantons evolve based upon all of their many interrelationshipings
with their both local and global environmentings." Some
interrelationshipings have greater quantum~partial affectationings
than others.
To counter Danah's concerns re "pernicious individualism,"
many interrelationshipings may be viewed as a dynamic Quantum
Society. In this case, as Doug pointed out in a prior segment,
Quantum Society isn't just anthropochauvinistic-anthropocentrism.
Quantum~Society isn't just human anymore.
In Quantonics one of our major suppositions is that Nature
is intrinsically aware at all scales of reality. An implicit
of that is "Nature measures
herself, and selects outcomes from her own perpetual everywhere
holographic EIMA
self~observation."
|
Page
45, para. 1 |
"Not only does observation
somehow collapse the wave
function, thus helping to give us a
world in the first place, but it turns out that the
particular way in
which we choose to observe quantum reality partly determines
what we shall see. The quantum wave function contains
many possibilities, and it
can be up to us which of these will be elicited." |
Danah's "...give us a world..."
does not depend upon a classical notion of wave function 'collapse.' Nature's
creation of fermions is source and agency of what most of us
refer "material reality." But fermions are dynamic
flux which never collapse. We may n¤t classically
measure them, rather we must quantum~monitor their perpetual
evolutionings. Perpetual quantum~evolutionings abduct
quantum~reality as radically instable. This violates (i.e., belies)
classical canonic stability as a dialectical ruse. Quantum~monitoring
requires instability
borne of quantum~scintillation!
1Jan2012 - Doug.
Fermions are n¤t 'particulate.' Fermions evolve as
quantum~flux and may never be classically 'stopped,' for
convenience of classical 'measurement.' There are n¤ classical
'scalars' in quantum~reality. Your blood pressure is a great
example here. Heart rate too. Always changing, always evolving!
Bosons, specifically photons, enable us to see, via QED
interrelationshipings
with electrons, fermionic (material) reality. Too beware Danah's
particularity of photons. They too are perpetual fluxings, always
changing and changing
all with which they interrelate. Photons literally transmute atoms'
energy levelings. If photons have enough energy they can transmute atoms themselves!
Photons are n¤t objects, and they possess n¤ 'classically
objective properties.' Photons are ensembles (Banesh Hoffman
calls them "crowds") of waves (AKA 'wave packets')
essentially comtaining wave ensemble 'pictures' of their local
holographic surroundings. A photon intra our Sun has an omniffering
'picture' than a photon in a Peruvian jungle.
Readers should put our comments, so far, in light of a Keynesian
economic goal of "stabilizing world financial systems."
Readers should see vividly that is an anti-quantum approach,
and as a result it will fail just as we monitor what is happening
now during second decade of our 21st century. Economic systems
are quantum and as such are perpetually uncontrollable and perpetually
uncertain...as Keynesians are about to omniscover. Fiat doesn't
enhance economic stability, rather destabilizes all economic
systems which embrace it. Doug - 3Oct2010.
Fiat, just like 'classical concrete,' is an
abstraction which is delusional. Au is fermionic: quantum~real.
Fiat is less than bosonic: quantum~bogus! Fiat
is empty calories of bloated Keynesian GDPs. Compare flow of
fiat to flow of Au as [Vv]alue. AuGDPs are Value. FiatGDPs are
faux value. N¤ value!
|
Page 45, para. 2 |
"A photon, for example, has
both position possibilities (a particlelike nature) and momentum
possibilities (a wavelike nature). A physicist can set up his
experiment to measure, and hence fix,
either of these--though in
fixing one he loses the other
(Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle). His interference--his measurement
or observation--seems in some strange way to influence which
side of its nature the photon will exhibit. The thought experiment
about Schrödinger's cat isn't complex enough to illustrate
this, but another experiment conceived by John Wheeler does so
graphically." |
N¤ photon has classically 'static' position. So to
claim we can measure it is stupidity of highest grossness.
N¤ 'thing' in quantum~reality may be 'fixed.' There
is n¤ valid concept of classical 'zero momentum'
in quantum~reality.
Please obtain a crucial meme here: Absence of 'zero momentum,'
is an intrinsic quantum~complementation
of presence of 'absolutely perpetual flux.' Implications of this
are so vast as to be almost beyond human imaginationings. To
test your quantum~stage, ponder a Doug query, "Are quantum~isofluxings
absolutely perpetual fluxings?" To answer that, do we need
some n¤væl quantum~thinkqing? What proto~suppositions
are necessary? Doug - 5Oct2010.
|
Page 45, para. 3 |
"If a photon is given the option
to travel through either
one or both slits in a screen
(being quantum mechanical
it has the option to do both), the physicist's experiment will
have the following result. If he places two particle
detectors to the right of the slits, he finds that
the photon behaves like a single particle--it
follows a definite path through one slit and strikes one particle
detector." [She offers a figure here, but Doug
does not show it.] |
There is n¤ such idea as, "...particle
detectors..." in quantum~reality. Why? There
are n¤ 'particles' in quantum~reality. Photons are dynamic,
macroscopic, always fluxing, always evolving wave function ensemble
'packets' of energyings. Detection of said packets elicits quantum~scintillation.
Scintillation is quantum~uncertain both in modulation of an electron's
energy level and in demodulation of electron's energy level.
Using scintillation to classically 'detect' is implicitly a fool's
errand. (Using scintillation to omnitor
quantum~processings is a good meme.)
Photons do n¤t have classical trajectories! Photons'
individual Chautauquas perigrinate stochastically, uncertainly,
n¤n linearly. There is n¤thing classical about
photons, period. Danah is showing extreme ignorance in this case.
Doug - 3Oct2010.
|
Page 45, para. 4 |
"If, on the other hand, he
places a detector screen between the two slits and the particle detectors, the
photon behaves like a wave--it travels through both
slits, interferes with itself, and leaves an interference pattern
on the detector screen." [She offers a figure here, but
Doug does not show it.] |
All photons (bosons) and matter waves (fermions) behave like
waves. Classical 'physicists' and 'scientists' simply choose
to misinterpret quantum~reality using their objective biases.
See Doug's QELR of science.
She is right about self interference and we then may infer
interference borne of quantum~entanglement.
|
Page 45, para. 5 |
"Physicist and photon are involved
in a creative dialogue that somehow transmutes
one of many quantum possibilities into an everyday, fixed reality. Therefore, the act
of measurement does play some role in deciding what gets measured.
'In some strange sense,' says Wheeler ' this is a participatory
universe.'" |
See Doug on quantum~scintillation.
N¤ reality is n¤r can be 'fixed.' Period!
|
Page 45, para. 6 |
"Beyond particles, beyond fields of force, beyond
geometry, beyond space and time themselves, is the ultimate constituent
{of all there is}, the still more ethereal act of observer-participancy?"
[This is a quote by Zohar of Wheeler, 1983.]
|
We see John Archibald Wheeler
here appropriately delegitimizing classical ideas of:
particles, notions of force, geometry, and Newtonian-Einsteinian
'space-time.'
In Doug's opine, Wheeler was a greatest of greats in quantum
due diligence and innovation. Richard Feynman thought similarly
re Wheeler.
|
Page 45, para. 7 |
"To capture the flavor of this
observer-participancy, Wheeler recounts an old Hebrew legend.
In the legend, Jehovah and Abraham are having a heated dialogue
about who has the upper hand in accounting for why the world
is as it is." |
|
Page 47, para. 1 |
"'You would not even exist
if it were not for me,' Jehovah reminds Abraham. 'Yes, Lord,
that I know,' Abraham replies, 'but also you would not be known
if it were not for me.' In more scientific language, Nobel laureate
Ilya Prigogine makes the same point when he says, 'Whatever we
call reality, it is revealed to us only through an active construction
in which we participate.'" |
|
Page 47, para. 2 |
"In quantum physics, this interdependency
between the being of a thing
and its overall environment is called contextualism, and the
implications of it are vast, both for our whole conception of
reality and for our understanding of our selves as partners in
that reality. It is one central reason for my claim that quantum
theory must contribute eventually to a new world view, with its
own distinctive epistemological, moral, and spiritual dimensions.
The epistemological dimension--what is the nature of our knowledge
and what do we mean by truth?--was expressed very well in the
phenomenology of French philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty, in
what he called 'truth within a situation:'" |
Of all paragraphs quoted here by Doug, this one carries perhaps
hugest ramifications for the 'death of Keynesianism,' the 'death
of FRB,' and the 'end of Cartel' and political intervention in
fiscal affairs of capitalism. Doug - 3Oct2010.
Our environment is changing rapidly. Our cultures are changing
rapidly. Peoples' awareness of political and fiscal evils perpetrated
upon them are growing. Keynesians beware! Politicians beware!
Bankers beware! Your end times are nigh... Doug - 3Oct2010.
Doug has avoided Merleau-Ponty simply due his embrace of 'static
truth.' In quantum~reality, "Truth is an agent of its own
change." Truthings are quantum~flux, just like all
else...
|
Page 47, para. 3 |
"So long as I keep before me the ideal of an
absolute observer, of knowledge in the absence of any viewpoint,
I can only see my situation as being a source of error. But once
I have acknowledged that through it I am geared to all actions
and all knowledge that are meaningful to me, then my contact
with the social in the finitude of my situation is revealed to
me to the starting point of all truth, including that of science,
and, since we have some idea of truth since we are inside truth
and cannot get outside it, all that I can do is define a truth
within the situation."
[This is a quote by Zohar of Merleau-Ponty, 1960.]
|
|
Page 47, para. 4 |
"I shall say more about this,
and about the moral and spiritual dimensions of observer-participancy,
in later chapters, but a word of caution about quantum contextualism--'truth
within a situation'--is necessary here." |
|
Page 47, para. 5 |
"Misunderstood and pushed in
the wrong
directions, the
fact that the
human observer in some way helps to evoke the reality
that he observes could have unfortunate cultural implications.
It could lend the full weight of physics to the currently
popular, and in my view very pernicious, notion that the individual
self is the
sole author of value--that there
is no 'truth' in this world but only one's 'perspective.'" |
|
Page 48, para. 1 |
"To some extent, certain of
the popular books already written about quantum physics have
encouraged their readers to draw such conclusions. Consider,
for example, the epistemological and moral implications of Fritjof
Capra's claim that, as 'the mind of the observer creates the
properties possessed by electron,' those properties can in no
sense be called objective. Concerning atomic physics he says:" |
|
Page 48, para. 2 |
"In transcending the Cartesian division between
mind and matter, modern physics has not only invalidated the
classical ideal of an objective description of nature but has
also challenged the myth of a value-free science...The scientific
results {scientists} obtain and the technological application
they investigate will be conditioned by their frame of mind."
[This is a quote by Zohar of Fritjof Capra, 1983.]
|
|
Page 48, para. 3 |
"Mainstream
quantum theory itself carries within it the dangers of such subjectivism
(to wit, Heisenberg: 'The conception of objective reality
has thus evaporated...'), but Capra pushes it further by introducing
the notions of value and frame of mind. Such
thinking is dangerous, and what is more, it is bad physics." |
Let's just override her garbage intellect here. Quantum~reality
is subjective, period! Doug - 3Oct2010.
Classical science is doomed. That is what Danah fears, but
what she refers danger is actually good quantum change which
will sweep away much antique and passé classical thingking
methods.
|
Page 48, para. 4 |
"Nothing in quantum theory
itself suggests that observation or
the observer 'creates' reality (the properties
of subatomic particles). At the moment of observation,
some dialogue between the quantum wave function and the observer
(be this man or machine)
evokes, and thus gives concrete
form to, one of the many possible realities inherent
within that wave function. But there is already the potential
for some very definite sort
of reality there--the wave function of a table can't collapse into a cat or a kangaroo.
It can become only a table." |
Her "very definite" implies
classical certainty to Doug. More BS. |
Page 48, para. 5 |
"Furthermore, once the wave
function has collapsed, its
reality is as objective as
anything else science studies. Any two (or more) people looking
at Schrödinger's cat will agree that he is objectively dead--he
won't look dead to one and alive to another.
His mortality is not a matter of anyone's 'point of view,' and
certainly not of someone's 'value judgment.' He is
just simply, and finally, dead." |
|
Page 48, para. 6 |
"The whole large set of questions
raised by the conundrum of Schrödinger's cat, among them
the role of the human observer in reality formation and the associated
problem of objectivity, only
highlight the fact that at this stage we haven't enough understanding
of human observers and the physics of
their consciousness to reach any informed conclusions.
The problem of the cat obviously obliges us to rethink a great
many of our preconceptions about ourselves and possibly about
the purpose of our existence, but to meet the heady challenge,
we must face head-on the problem of
consciousness." |
Nothing classical will ever explain quantum~con(m)sciousness.
That is a big reason why AI can't seem to get traction. Classical
notions disable implementation of quantum~AI.
Read Bohm and read Karl Pribram. Consciousness is quantum~holographic.
If you do not grasp that you are already evolutionarily dead.
Worse, you have n¤ legacy of any worth to future humanity.
Abraham's four millennia old Autiot is closer to quantum~reality
than current objective 'science' will ever be. Energy isn't classically
'objective.' Waves are flux are energy, folks.
Current economic theory is 'state' folks!
Thank you for reading,
Doug - 3Oct2010.
|