Section 72 (last updated 4.28.2021)
Symmetry- change having no physical difference
Add Feynman 2:50:00
In quantum mechanics there is a deep Connection between symmetry of physical laws and conservation laws. The question is that how can there be motion while still maintaining a constant form, and this answers on a deeper level how an object with a constant form moves in a completely independent way. For example, my body is running, but running is an independent motion that the body is doing. Symmetry of physical laws means that when the situation is changed it does not make any physical difference. you do something to the situation that has no physical difference like rotating a diamond keeps it looking like it is still, other than the lights reflecting off it, which indicates it is rotating.
Rotating crystals are very interesting objects in physics and there is an entire field devoted to studying the behaviour of crystals because they characterize a fundamental dynamics of the motion of symmetry. The external motion of a rotating diamond is counteracted by the interior. While one side moves one way the other appears to move the opposite way.
The physical property of a crystal demonstrates the discreetness of events happening as a continuous duration of time. When we perceive a moment happening here and now we witness a continuity of the same scene disclosing a set of independently acting variables sharing the same location, for example, man walking down the street is seen concurring with a bird flying, across a building standing etc. But when the scene is changed for perception and now a different scene is directly perceived as disclosing a set of independently acting variables, while we can only reflect back at the previous scene as a discontinuity of different moments rather than different objects at the same moment.
During a spatial extension we see a set of discrete variables acting independently but forming the same duration, but from a purely temporal extension when the scene is not directly perceived here and now, memory of it can only derive these objects as different moments, the object is not there present for mind so it can only recall a moment of that object. When directly perceived a man is a moving and living whole going about different actions, but memory of that man can only recall a moment when he was sitting or standing or laughing or crying etc. The reality is that the function of the brain puts a set of discrete events together at the present moment because at the present moment there is the immediacy to interact with things, but during a past moment when the mind is reflecting on things, it does not hold a continuity between events but sees them as purely discrete moments. For example, the same dog and man that are once together alive doing a multitude of actions appear in the mind as a moment of a particular action. How spatial extension is related to the temporal order of moments in time constitutes a difficult dynamics to how an object moves while maintains a static form
This phenomenon of “mirroring” captures the same object at a different angel and therefore at a different moment. The mind evolved to filter out these moments into an intergraded self identical object in motion.
When we apply this same concept of time to spatial extension, or rather time and space we adopt as the same continuum, which this concept of “mirroring” is applied to, we begin to understand the process of magnification.
What a thing is not is it’s limit (phen of spirit)
The way the conception remains identical as distinct from the objects of its experience takes the way of maintaining itself as a particle moving through a wave, or rather a particle is the identity in a changing wavelength. a particle identical while a wave moving through it. The conception is indifferent quality in relation to a set of events occurring to it while enduring through them.
The basic form of a particle is the spherical void which a shape forms around as object of its character.
Our deep acquaintance with classical mechanics makes us think that a particle is moving object through a wave, like an aircraft through the sky. At a quantum level Locomotion however must itself be considered as a discrete possibility generated into being as a dynamical quality of a thing.
In string theory a particle characterizes a possibility from a string.
A particle functions as a pure conception of a reality from a set of possibilities, particle mediates the duration of a wave. A particle is a character, a personality in an experience.
In this way the particle as discrete measure becomes extended as a wave of potential discrete possibilities of itself, the experience from the point of view of one reality is the transition to the other, is the same with being in the position of one moving to the other. (add to DNA
What we see in the famous double split experiment is the fact that through the particle a wave changes it’s potential state. One wave becomes many waves.
All of it’s potentials come out
The slots are akin to particle like states and the wave passing through them is determined into potential different changes. This means that the particle like state determines the course of the wavelength. We see this exact same process in the phenomena of a white light moving through a prism.
When light passes through a prism the light bends and the different colours that make up the white light becomes separated into the differing colours of a rainbow. This means that the potential states of a white light becomes discrete and revealed when the structure of a prism take it on as a duration. One actual form is dissected into its many possibilities. Actuality determines potentiality. Aristotle “man begets man”, the off springs are the potential of the parents.
Decoherence
(Add light cone) (Add supersymmetry) (add Higgs boson)
Quantum decoherence
Motion as conception-Zeno paradox
What it means for motion to be conception in the sense of generation is explained exactly by how conception is rationality as function of consciousness. Ordinarily the first question of motion related to the cause of things, the first mover is self-motion, but as to what self-anything means is very ambiguous because we normally think that to move oneself means to have sense of individuality moving in distinction from everything else. However in nature the opposite is true because self-motion is informed by other, or in other terms, the relation defines the self-identity. This is very obvious in the realm of natural sciences especially physics because any description of
An objects motion involves its relation with something else as its influencing cause. Anything in nature is said to be in relation to something else as this is the basis for relativity. That an object is distinctively in motion is identified by its relation as it comes into some kind of physical contact with another object, directly like sharing same substrate or indirectly like crossing by it(Add here the limits of the term relativity) why does the salt pebbles move because of the waves of water. Newton’s law of motion describe primarily that natural motion is set of relation. This means that in the sense of physics nothing moves independently from everything else, or in other terms nothing is independently moving. However if nothing is independently moving then how is motion distinguishable as it is obviously is? This is the same problem put forward by the Ancient Zeno paradox (explain Achilles and tortoise)
The Zeno paradox is usually illustrated as: the quickest runner can never overtake the slowest, because the pursuer must first reach the point whence the pursued started, so that the slower must always hold a lead. Since the slower is always at a point ahead and both are at the same rate of motion, the point ahead of the faster is always moving simultaneously ahead. This means that strictly speaking by definition there is no faster runner because he is always over taken by the point he is trying to arrive at,
What the Zeno paradox does is that it abstracts away from a sequence a set, say the 100 meters Achilles has to run, and makes that set a point of nullity, void for conception, such that it is used to divide two points of motion from each other giving their context in relation to the void more important than their qualities that contradistinguish as something rather than nothing which is their quality of motion, one faster and one slower. But their qualities of motion in a void conception appear to be non moving, like for example if you look at an object in pure space it is hard to pick out if it is moving or not. The Zeno effect produces an absolute nullity making every relative motion absolutely one object such that the totality of all things moving in relation to each other appear as non moving whole.
Motion is disapproved by taking away any relative point and outing it in absolute non relative void but this void is the very power of motion because it constitutes the primary condition of self-determination.
The power of that limit is the void space such that every time the previous point going in to the space, the subsequent one has already taken to the corresponding space away. The Zeno argument is falls only because it is used to dismiss motion when in fact it is argument that proves motion. The Zeno paradox is only wrong in conclusion not presupposition. The power of abstraction of a void is the conception of that in a sequence in motion.
In modern times we only have empirical evidence of the observer effect but fail to explain what this evidence mean, especially what is the phenomenological and ontological understanding of the observer effect as function of consciousness related to the conception of physical object?
(Add to consciousness as the centre and smallest point, how smallest is determined not by quantity like individual cell but by species, species of cell is more fundamental than the individual organs and bodies it makes. Cosmological principle, consciousness as the smallest point is infinitely falling into the centre meaning that it is falling away from every conceivable form so as to conceive them, the first person subjective conception is in quality the smallest point, even conception of the whole universe is the smallest point because it becomes subject to whiteheads the conception discloses the objects within its reference frame)
The uncertainty principle implies that outside the conception of consciousness, anything is everything. The observer effect as function of consciousness which differs from being merely function of perception in that the former is determined by thought, having thought is the conception analogous to having sight is the observation. When the observer which in this sense is the thinker, conceives something, that conception changes the phenomenon from being potentially everything to being actually something. Consciousness is the function of mind that yields the object to the thought. The change of the object by its conception means that it conforms to the idea of that conception.
The issue with the image of creation is the old problem of the infinite regress paradox concerning the source of the creator, the creator of the creator (find the turtle problem- turtle on turtle). The mechanical model gives up on this paradox by arguing knowledge of the operator is not needed for knowledge of the system because as long as the operations of the mechanism are presentable, knowledge of the operator behind it is not relevant. (Alan watts) the specialized sciences cannot afford to relay on providing proof of God before they empirically demonstrate any phenomena said to be its creation. The physical sciences do not keep the idea of God as cause of things without empirical demonstration of this causal relation. Physical science therefore turns to the causal relation among things themselves as enough for sufficient explanation of causation.
The grave danger in the exclusion of god from origin of things risks removing the effect of the observer on the phenomena. We see this in scientific materialism wherein knowledge of self is not required precursor for making accurate empirical observations about external phenomenon. The arrival of quantum mechanics reintroduces to Modern thought new inquisition of the self with the notion of observer being an integral part of the physical phenomena. (Add here what is term of observer)
(Uncertainty principle add to)
The term “observer” brings with it intuition of the sensible faculties like vision, hearing and so on. However in quantum mechanics the ob-server relates more to the philosophical notion of freedom in the realm of thought. Freedom here is not capacity to act accordingly to caprice which is instinct usually confused for freedom, but instinct so far determined by some external stimulus does not provide sufficient definition of freedom related to will and determination. Freedom in the bare sense is state of absolute possibility concerning how something is in the first place determinable. Potentiality linked with notion of freedom establishes basis for the question of determination.
(Add here explain how the observer effect related to uncertainty principle)
Contemporary quantum mechanics does not include the principle of freedom as a basis for determination and so our understanding of natural processes includes no explanation of the conceiving factors initiating them. The “observer” in contemporary terms is defined by systems which manifest “subjective decoherence when observed”; which means when an unknowable course of action in subatomic phenomenon is perceived, the cause is labeled “subjective decoherence” because the unknown factor is not viewed as part of the phenomenon but instead is interpreted as a kind of disturbance occurring during the observational method. (Explain how this is quantum decoherence is interpreted but say how it is natural) but as to in part the cause of the disturbance is itself the unknown effect
(Add Observer effect)
Quantum coherence
Quantum coherence is defined by a continuous phase disclosing different states. (Whitehead conception disclosed its own measurement) in other words coherence occurs so long as a conception maintains definite reference frame wherein interactions of opposing variables are disclosed . For example, so long as some object is within the reference frame of my observation, this state is said to be coherent because it has a definite conception, which may not mean that the content of the conception are definite because what is disclosed by the conception may be indeterminate but the conception is definite in approximating the details concurring within it. The content of the conception can be indefinite, uncertain and indeterminate which speaks to the function of decoherence. The question of decoherence concerns the paradox of coherency: is the self-identity of the conception predicate for distinguishing continuities as differing variables or do the differences of variables predicate for forming the disclosure of the conception?
Quantum decoherence is a “collapse of wave function” defined as a loss of information from a system into the environment. In other words decoherence happens when a change occurs in the
determinacy disclosing different variables such that the conception disclosing the differing parts together becomes itself a particular part among the variables of the conception. This means that in a quantum state when a conception is not perfectly isolate but in contact with factors distinguishable from itself, the coherence of the conception decays with time called decoherence. The behaviour of the conceiving state is changed, or that a change is picked out in the conceiving state such that it is no longer definite, I.e. No longer self identifiable, and so the conception becomes distinguished as an object within a non-distinct conception.
Decoherence explains the shift of conception is related to the change of physical composition that is When the conception of object changes, the physical properties of the object changes such that it is no longer the same and or different object. This is subtle in the way perception operates because we do not normally think the change of perception means there is an actual physical change of the objects but change in the realm of perception is the simple shifting away from one object to another while the objects themselves remain definite away from the conception. When perception alternates from one object to an other, the transition appears to happen between two unrelated and non identical entities. However the faculty of perception is the conception disclosing the alteration of one object to a different one remains self identical throughout the transition, but in the meantime the self identity of the conception conforms to the identity of the object as it lays differentiation from other objects, for example if at one moment the conception of perception is self-identical with an object like a dog, in another moment the perception is self-identical with a tree but the discontinuity that objects fall out of frame is not due to the limitation of perception but concerns the very limitation of conception generally, a nature of flux, there is an inherent uncertainty.
The uncertainty principle is not mysterious because it constitutes every aspect of our limited conception, whether the limits of perception or thought. The limit of perception is not in its form but is in the capacity to grasp the details of content of its object. For example human vision is comparatively better than dogs vision not because of scope, how much can be seen by the eye, but because of colour and quality of the particular object. Likewise dogs sense of smell is better because of the ability to identify information and make connections between smell to its object.
The identity of the perception changes in accord with its object, and the object is said to have self-identity subsisting independently from its perception, all the while there exists substrate of consciousness that remains self-identical behind the changes perception conforms to. It is important not to conflate the change of perception with the natural change of an object because this relation is not the same as the more fundamental scope wherein the natural process of generation follows the same manner as mental modes of conception. In evolutionary biology there seems to be the appearing and disappearing of life forms characterized by speciation including the traceability of all new species to common ancestors.
The common ancestor is not any specific group of early organisms because evolutionary biology is constantly discovering a new “last universal common ancestor” which is defined as the most recent population of organisms from which all organisms now living in earth have a common decent. The universal common ancestor is not looked at as any specific kind of organism but rather better understood as processes of natural generation. It turns out according to modern empirical science that all life on earth evolved from single-celled organism. Life at the cellular level involve process of speciation that result in macroscopic organism, a transition that involves a completely different definition of what we mean as common ancestor. The evolutionary transition of singled cell organisms into multicellular organism is a transition from what we know as microscopic level to macroscopic scale. What does it mean to consist of one cell as opposed to multicellular organism? Multicellular organisms is a clustering together of single celled organism to form a single entity whose capabilities are the specific functions of the bodies making it up. The role that the whole plays is the conceptions of the parts expressing the same idea.
Consciousness discloses physical change is accounted in two ways: first, change of the physical configuration of objects occurs within the disclosure of a definite conception wherein the content of the conception changes and the form remains coherent. This concerns the speculation that if the conception is merely passive and receptive to the change of the object what active role does the conception play as disclosing the change? What causes the object for the conception to no longer remain the same while meanwhile the conception maintain the same form so as to identify the difference of the object?
Second, the form of the conception, its self-identity, conform to a compulsion brought about by an unexplainable change assumed to be caused by object acting independently so as to make conception limited to the objects having a self subsisting identity to produce motion independently of the conception. The difficulty is that the change of the object even if has the power to occur with no presence of the conception, the change of object is disclosed by a conception that is an indirect presupposition of the change.
(Add Kant apperception here, as where is the quantum state, it is in our operations of mental faculties)
(Add to discontinuity discrete matrix)
When an object enters perception instantaneously an other leaves it, we assume that there is a substrate which maintains a stability during the shift in the perception of objects and that the changing perception is always passive to what is maintained for it as a substrate of objects having movements independently from it.
It is often overlooked that there is substrate which stands to maintain the stability of object during change of perception and equally the coherency of perception as the object changes before it. The faculty of perception is related to what is external from it but also related to what is internal in those externalities. What underlies the apparent coherency of perception and its object is a non stable position in a state of absolute flux. Decoherence is not discombobulated because it is not state of disorganization and randomness of physical compositions.
The definition of “flux” is rate of flow of a constant state of possibility which constitutes the conception as substrate for the faculty of perception enabling its function to capture a naturally decoherent state of change into an abstraction of stability. Flux does not mean that out of view there is uncertainty because things are constantly moving and happening around, nor does it mean that out of view objects have no physical composition because they are not perceived. The conjuncture of the special faculties of sensation is an abstract state (add above conjunction of the senses the idea)
(Add to cell of planets) The cell is the environment developing the self-agency to operate within itself. Cell is dimension of the environment with determination to change the conception of itself.
Superposition decoherence
(Add here Hegel dialectic) Superposition is the physical equivalence of the logical synthesis in the dialectic. Hegel explains the logical basis of dialectic is that the relation of two inverse determinations is their difference which is the third determination derives a distinction from the two of the relation, is now a distinct determination maintains the two by disclosing their difference as the unity, the only similarity they share is the difference which becomes a different variable.
If cause A produces effect x and cause B produces effect y, the relation of the causes (A+B) produces the relation of the effects (X+Y). The superposition is therefore the synthesis of two opposing determinations forming one distinct determinations. For example rolling motion of a wheel is the superposition of two motions. A wheel rolling down a hill is the combination of two separate motions: one, rotation without translation like a wheel spinning in place, and two, translation without reparation like wheel skidding forward without spinning. In a quantum decoherence state, the abstract position of mind, the wheel is simultaneously spinning, skidding and rolling, which means there is physical composition of all these happening instantaneously, which is not hard to imagine three different wheels having each of these forms but hard to imagine one wheel having these three states all at the same time. in a coherent state like the way perception sees, the wheel is either one of these and not the others, or three different wheels doing each condition.
accord with their moving indeterminate activity. The natural disposition of things is not what is presented for perception as stable and definite object but this is only what is disclosed by the particular faulty during its conception. Rather things are only abstractly and potentially related as the structure they exhibit when directly perceived.
(Add how perception is reflection of object) Examination in the nature of perception shows that the perceiving faculty is in tune and in sync with the already natural process of flux inherent in physical phenomena, that everything is in flux proves correct in decoherence only that the conception constitutes abstractions of coherency in the indeterminate state transforming it into particular definite states whose continuity remains the initial decoherency. However this change of conception in the quantum realm is actually the very change of the particularity pertinent to a physical composition. Even in our ordinary perception when I turn my head to look at one object as opposed to another, there is the physical change, the movement of one object coming into my view point as the other object falls out of view. Coherence concerns first that there is some definite thing within the viewpoint of the conception and second that even the change of the conception, its decoherence, is a definite thing.
Decoherence is the thinking process operating behind the scenes of what we come to understand as coherent experience. Experience of the world appears stable and coherent while thought seems disemboriated and always in flux.
Instead of viewing the distortion as an effect from an unknown principle it is taken as the cause of unknown data.
Conception is the basis of motion describe that consciousness abstracts from realm of possibility some indistinguishable form as not everything, a particular form of relation. For example any thing moving perceived will appear as going in the path of some geometric form, while everything generally becomes its plain, even though when the frame of references changes, something else is picked out as having some moving path. This relation so far as it is being conceived, conceptualized as particular form different from the whole of possibilities, keeps reaffirming itself , feed back loop, as that specific thing.
Its motion therefore appears as if it is taking up every possible position, that everything else is void because out of the frame of reference, that is void of itself and putting itself in all those positions continuously but so long as it is particular and why it is distinguishable because if it took all the position at once it would be indispensable as anything other, therefore it’s particularly appears as if it is moving from one position to another over and over again. This constitutes the nature of pattern every specific kind of motion appears, something going in circle, back and forth in straight line, zig zags are all feed back loops of patterns who are motion reaffirming their particular form.