(originally posted as a Status by Anand)
"Do we live inside a mathematical equation? see article here
Note: Starting around 1970 with the famous experiment by Clauser et..al. The wall between Philosophy, Math, and Physics was breached. It has not been the same ever since.
(Tao od Physics; Dancing Wu Li Masters were written by members from this group e.g.)
The "Fundamental Fysics Group" was important in this development; returning to the more metaphysical origins of early Quantum Mechanics whose spirit had been lost. Eastern Metaphysics was commonly explored during the initial foundational developments.
Physics actually has quit dealing with particles; everything is only vibrations in several fields existing in all time and space. Gravity fields, EM fields etc They unfortunately use the term "particles" in the media, which many scientists have often complained about. There are no such things as particles.
It all is only consciousness.
all this is that, all that is this.
As above so below; as below, so above.
Dear David ,
Really nice to hear from you after a long time , call it a "coincidence'' or whatever , I had enquired about you to Joe a couple of days back , really miss your erudite views, Your piece is absolutely lovely , would I be correct in interpreting that mathematics would by your definition include all things which are structured "even thinking" which has a sound basis and is structured , and of which its results are demonstrable with lucidity ? ,Though the laws may not be at present readily demonstrable in a gross manner but rather would be demonstrable as a result as an existing object available for human perception in the real world ie. if looked at if the primary or leading hypothesis that is proved through various stages of structured knowledge (demonstrable) at each level by knowledge itself leading to the next step wherein the physically existing and immediately perceptible world would be a result that is cognized (again) through structure and which in itself requires no further validation ? . Would I be correct in understanding that mathematics as a representation of truth , the word Idea would subsume under its concept all "things structured " including the act of right reasoning and thinking , in fact everything suble also within its fold which reflects a structure . Which is not to say that I am against theories of randomness or chaos - but rather your post gives me the idea that it would embrace just as any solid becomes liquified and the rules change and in relation to the gaseous stage or as we go higher up in subtlety it ostensibly seems that there is chaos or randomness but only in relation to the preceding stage , and when the subtler state is examined with another still subtler stage say like liquids vs. Gas , then liquids are found to have a "Mathematical" structure (if I am to understand from the meaning ) and the as yet stage which has not been examined appears random and chaotic , which would yield more "Mathematical" regularity when a succeeding state is examined which would now appear chaotic . It would be like something akin to saying that if taken in a cosmic manner - our world is mathematical and the solar system may look chaotic due to the exponential increase in the objects available at that level of knowledge , once the 'sight' is adjusted to that level then it yield a certain structure , say a structure of planets , galactic systems, asteroid belts, shooting stars each which have their own rules and when viewed whollistically would yield a "mathematics for that level " which would be apparent only on moving to the succeeding level which would subsume the preceding level within it . Now that would be Mathematics as you say I hope and as I have understood from reading your post . Looking forward to your views on whether I have read your post correctly.I mean "structure" - not laws which endow a feeling of structure as we see on earth , or just limited to calculations , but I mean by structure "Forms" in its highest word idea .
Dear David ,
Thanks a lot , you do set at rest a lot of doubts that I had , I see we are not way off at a tangent , yes the problem was in understanding the scope of the concept that you had endowed , yes your previous post was quite clear on that and your following discussion is as good and reinforces the scale of conception . really great stuff you have touched upon a very wide cosmic canvas.
As the dialogue in the popular movie The Matrix says:
The Architect: Your life is the sum of the remainder of an unbalanced equation inherent to the programming of the Matrix. You are the eventuality of an anomaly, which despite my sincerest efforts I have been unable to eliminate from what is otherwise a harmony of mathematical precision.
Are we really the sum of the reminders of an unbalanced equation? Is that why we find the conceptualization of Reality impossible, but speculation on it feasible?
Thanks David. I do follow your posts on facebook. theosophy.net is richer by your presence.
(see bottom comment - if you want to skip this stuff)
To say something like an electron is numbers is a rather a bad way of putting it.
Electrons have mass, charge, spin (fermionic: + or - 1/2), magnetic moment and that is about it. But those numbers do not really describe the electron.
An analogy would be that it may be represented as a probability current density that exists in all space-time (at any instant in time). The spin also must be represented as something more like a Bloch Sphere; by current density one means a type of continuous flow. it may have sources and sinks of current density which would create and annihilate parts the vibrating fluid flow.
So one has to skip the concept of a point when describing it. It has spatial form, spin form etc. if you look at these shapes and forms they extend nearly everywhere at once. That is why it is a field consisting of quantities that change in all direction at once per electron, and appear as vibrations of these quantities throughout space. Numbers rather a grand oversimplification. In fact, Cayley-numbers are used in the forms, not Real numbers.
Bloch Sphere. Note: the |psi> is the spin direction, in a separate vector space of complex numbers (cayley-numbers).
The actual point of this comment is that numbers in QM are not numbers. They have properties that do not commute. It uses things where xy = yx is false in general. It is like saying 6x7 is not equal to 7x6
That is the type of umbers being used. Also the Form of the "thing" is not simple. They have weird vibrations in weird mathematical spaces, not in reality.
There is a fairly balanced article on mathematics and Reality here.
The question that arises is how can one be sure that the wave particle duality or the wave itself is the consciousness. What if there is a Reality behind that?
Today cutting edge physics is producing theories that postulate a matrix of consciousness that substands both matter and energy. Absolute Reality is not physical, but metaphysical. Consciousness emanates from a matrix of digital information bits, and Absolute Reality is at root consciousness. Many modern cosmologists posit that all manifestation is mind or consciousness. It originates in a universal mind, consciousness, logos, matrix, or intelligence that serves as the recursive operating system, program, and programmer of all reality. Rather than standing apart from reality like a Creator, it exists within and encompasses all reality. The universe itself is infinitely intelligent, alive and sentient through all scales of being and dimensions of reality. Every tiniest unit of reality has some degree of psychic life and intelligence, and ultimately each is a unit of the universal consciousness from which it emanates.
A REPRESENTATION OF UNIVERSAL CONSCIOUSNESS OR THE MIND OF GODHEAD AS CONTINUOUS ANALOG TORUS WITH INFINITELY EXPANDABLE FRACTAL SURFACES THAT CAN EVOLVE IN ARROWS OF TIME
Theism and deity worship are projections of the human virtual reality. But true Reality is monistic and infinitely intelligent. Yeshua and other Jewish mystics of his era like Honi the Drawer of Circles and Hanina ben Dosa prayed to the non-existent but very real Abba, which was misunderstood by Greek Christians to mean Pater, "Father." The proto-kabalistic understanding would have been something like Father-Mother (Hebrew word Ab-"father" plus feminine ending -ba).
"Basilides and his true son and disciple Isidorus, assert that Matthew (the Evangelist) revealed to them certain secret doctrines which had been specially communicated to himself by Christ.
“There was a time when there was Nothing; nay, not even that ‘Nothing’ was anything of being, but barely and without reserve, and without any sophism, there was altogether Nothing. When I use the term ‘was,’ I do not mean to imply that this Nothing was [i.e. existed in time, for there was no time]. But in order to explain what I wish to set forth, I employ the expression "there was absolutely Nothing."
"When therefore Nothing was--no substance, no non-substance, no simple, no compound, no incomprehensible, no sensible, no man, no angel, no God--when there was nothing whatever of what is called by name, perceived by sense, conceived by the mind, but all, and even in a more refined sense than this, being put out of the question--then this Non-Existent God--without thought, without purpose, without counsel, without passion, without desire--willed to emanate a universe.
“I use the word 'willed' merely to express my meaning, as it was without thought, without sensation, without will, that this was done; and by 'universe' I do not mean the physical universe that developed afterwards and can be divided by latitude and longitude, but I understand by it 'the seed of the universe.' This ‘seed of the universe' contained the All within itself, just as the germ of the mustard-seed contains the root, the stalk, the leaves, the grain, with each containing again the rudiments of innumerable other things that grow out of it.
“Thus the Non-Existent God emanated a Non-Existent universe out of Non-Existence when he emanated the seed containing within itself the pleroma of the seeds of the universe.”
In other words, according to the second-century Alexandrian school, the historical Yeshua taught the kabbalistic concept of an Eternal Unity that transcends time and existence. It is the root of all reality.
Duality is caused by the interpretation of QM. Interpretations are everywhere and at this point, after nearly 100 years, a wave only approach seems best. Also, the fact that the science (QM) only yields relations between events. The interpretation is the math itself. Nothing more is needed, as I see it.
Waves occur in spatial foams.
They also can be thought of as vibrations (the atoms) interacting with each other exhibiting a global pattern of a (finite) number of vibrations (atoms). the point being that a compression wave (sound wave) can occur as a discrete set of objects. In water waves, both compression and transverse (moving up and down) waves occur together, yielding a circular motion within the wave. These can be used as a heuristic model with success. However, physics prefers a solution from the absolute fundamentals. That exists,
My lost point (pun) is that physics is basically finished from a unified field approach (there is none), but the unifying piece is the problem that is clearly glaring out from the Metaphysics/Philosophy of physics, demanding to be found where consciousness begins, starts, and ends (w.r.t. physics). That will become/produce the unification since it is not unified from looking at pure physical notions.
I reserve the right to change my mind at any time.
I confess the points you mention lose me. Space-time points don't move anywhere when a field vibration passes by (possibly Gravity waves are the exception).
Do these waves have universal form, e.g. sinusoidal, trochoidal or something else?
Do we measure these waves against a fixed baseline? What would happen if the baseline was changing continually too, as is perhaps suggested by the popular Hindu symbol of Swastika. Can we still call them waves?
they are superpositions of sinusoidal waves. (in general, complex valued waves)
One has to remember that the piece moving is a wave in a specific field in the Standard model.
So a harmonic oscillator is below:
(a Probability wave)
Note: the Red lines are pure Imaginary parts of the wave. The Blue lines the Real part of the wave. The wave is the sum of the Imaginary part plus the Real Part. The Imaginary part cannot be measured. If would need a meter that read real + - values, plus a meter to read the imaginary parts (never exists in reality. Very much required n the Math, though). Hence at a snapshot in time, one would see a actual values such as y = 5 + sqrt(-7) the issue is the sqrt(-7) does not exist in the real world. (actual complex number would be y = 5 + i sqrt(7)
what moves is the field (pure mathematical object) for the specific particle.
Above: the red part one can measure. the blue is mixed and has Real and Imaginary parts mixed together.
light waves follows:
(E field only; circularly polarized)
Above is too technical. But the waves are typical "forms"
Struggling to keep up here, forgive me if I hit a foul ball, but haven't found a copy of Physics for Dummies.Do the non real waves have any relation to terrestrial magnetism?