Sunday, January 9, 2011

Quantum Thinking

Quantum thinking is not something
we are trained to do well. My hope is my yahoo infophysics seminar will exercise
discipline in thinking quantumly such that we can form the habit of
being able to think quantumly.

Feynman said no one understands the quantum and no one will that
cannot think quantumly. He said the quantum may be understood as
computing, but it is not this program, or that program, it is all
possible programs. Nobody can ever possibly understand all possible

The principles of general semantics, holistic dialectics, laws of
form, etc. may be applied in quantum thinking, but there is no
singular answer to anything, every proposition is in a super position
of states, both true and false.

When we accept the synthesis of a thesis and antithesis, we categorize
or specify, Whenever we categorize or specify we make an error.
There is a context where A and B are distinct, and a category where
they are the same. There is a greater context that includes the
synthesis recursively.

That we have beliefs is human. And that the inner genius in us all
is never wrong, there is a categorical imperative making the belief
undeniable,. That the categorical imperative is the absolute truth
only is only true in our fantasy. There is always a greater truth.
Sometimes truth in the category considered is sufficient for our
purpose, but it is not necessarily or provably so.

That our mentors and teachers understood Societies statement that "the
only true wisdom is the knowledge is that we know nothing." is an
expression of truth that has a quantum nature, both true and false,
depending on the category or context of the truth, and that there is
no absolute truth, as general semantics attempts to express. Quantum
truth is not really strange, it is how we think unconsciously, until
we understand quantum thinking.

For several years I have contemplated "quantum driving" as an
introduction to quantum thinking. Since I must drive I have time to
practice thinking quantumly, and driving is a good case study in
quantum thinking since it is a domain most everyone is familiar with
that is readily quantifiable. And for me its a synergy of being able
to consider thinking quantumly and keeping my mind focused on driving

To understand quantum thinking you must understand quantum logic and
the collective actualization of subsets of that logic. The logic
includes everything possible, all possible finite logical systems from
the simplest to the more complex. But what is manifest is dynamical
logic limited to logical interaction of participating finite logical
systems composed by actualized interaction history.

Quantum logic is simply universal general purpose logic, potentially
exhibiting all possible logical systems having up to as many states as
the information universe being considered. The implicit information
universe is all possible logical systems up to the number of states
considered. The one extant finite information universe realized by
local logical interaction is the explicit information universe, that
experientially distinguishes all possible information universes from
the singular actualized one.

By ordinary thinking we construct the means to make something happen.
Quantum thinking requires a certain faith that all possible means
exist, and what happens happens only because it is possible by delayed
choice and least action, not having a fully predetermined history that
propagated into the future by interaction. Instead of simple cause
and effect, we have practically infinite causes for what happens by
complex interaction.

If it is impossible to consider all possible logical systems than our
faith that the universe constructs the means for anything that might
happen cannot be bound finitely. It is easiest to think it is the
nature of the universe to do what is possible and the does not need to
figure out what that is. Without this leap of faith, it is impossible
to think quantumly. To model a quantum computation, we do not model
any algorithm that derives the solution, we need only model the
solution. Somehow, out there, it is as though all possible logical
systems exist while at the same time as there is only one particular
universe from our information perspective.

The case study, of quantum driving, is highly enlightening, but if is
also very boring, and in some ways not worth peoples time in
considering that deeply. It is instructive in quantization of the
effect of a vehicle occupying a physical roadway slot by the presents
of a car behind being held up some time and how each driver trains the
traffic network which assumes collective behaviors determined by
effect, not intention. Contemplating quantum driving can make anyone
a better driver and build the habit of thinking quantumly. At the same
time it will reveal the amazing synergies that happen to happen
systematically it makes us humble in our inability to preconceive the
systems that happen to emerge. It reinforces that considered feeling
of our neural network is more fruitful than any hopeless attempt at
complete reasoning that attempts to constrain reality to what we can

Quantum thinking is not easy for humans. I have decided that unless
you have to drive, and need to be thinking about driving, the case
study of quantum driving is not worth your mental energy. Information
physics applies to every problem, ,and the area one ought to apply
information physics to is what is most important and where their
passion is.

This may include the spiritual subjectively and any aspect of human
thought or endeavor objectively. Recently I have applied it to
political science in
and other communications in various trust networks.

My challenge is to elevate issues to the quantum level
holistically and not succumb to any self righteous belief in any
preferred context. I constantly disappointed myself in my own ability
to think quantumly. Whenever I specify a "the", or generalize an
"is", I violate quantum truth. As I am the only one I know personally who
thinks quantumly at all, and do so badly at it myself, it seems
unreasonable to expect it of others. And yet, this is still our
challenge until humanity transcends its acceptance of singularities
and accepts there are only collective multiplicities abandoning
absolute truth and embracing philosophical. universalism.

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

The Trick behind Quantum Magic

I once believed in the standard model of the quantum. It is a bazaar notion of reality. Experiment is suggesting, however, that it is a real stretch that obfuscates rather than enlightens us about the simple kinetics of allowed equal and opposite kinetic logical action in quantum state. On the one hand quantum theory is the most accurate theory ever devised by humanity, on the other hand it seems no one understands it. Standard quantum theory fails to determine a definite direction in time and fails to distinguish our universe from all possible universes. Clearly, we shall either never understand quantum theory, or we will undergo a radical paradigm shift before its comprehension is possible such that we can understand how relativity emerges from relative electrodynamic action. The action of quantum systems is certainly unexpected, but not intrinsically so bazaar as the standard interpretation might suggest.

Scientific progress is easiest when new facts build on previous knowledge. Quantum logical action however seems to contradict all previous knowledge. It is indeed strange in the context of classical theory. But, if we can view it independently, and ignore our preconceived notions, it is not so strange and can actually make perfect logical sense. For those who make the leap from the legacy foundations of physics and logic it will seem more like "how could it be otherwise", than a bazaar anomaly of nature.

We are taught to believe only what we can measure, but according to measurement it turns out that everything is relative. Is what we perceive relatively the ultimate truth? It is subjectively, but objectively it fails to be consistent and varies depending on who is looking.

Is there some absolute reality behind our relative perceptions? If everything were only relative, by relative perception, then we would need a model of every participant in order to model anything. There is, however, a consistency between relative experience that suggests there is indeed some predictable absolute reality behind our relative experience which enables the prediction of possible relative experience.

But this is an absolute reality we cannot perceive directly. All direct experience is a relative one. Can science describe the absolute reality that is not measurable directly? Science needs to be extended to include the simplest absolute model which accounts for what is measured, and to do so, must become skeptical of measurement from any preferred perspective. Absolute reality is independent of perspective and may be quite different from our ordinary perceptions biased by our perspective and relative motion. The existence of such absolute action is indicated and certainly not excluded. Quantum action includes an objective reality, just one very different from our classical notion of objective reality based on what can be perceived directly by the senses. I contend that comprehension of the quantum requires acceptance of this unobservable absolute reality as real.

Our ordinary "reality" is like a magic show. We believe what we see is real despite the unseen slight of hand. Science also largely denies the unseen. But it is certain that we only see a sparse random sampling of quantum systems. If we deny the reality of the unseen, we are doomed to a statistical interpretation, and we shall never understand its mechanism.

This article strives to be a factual account of what is known about quantum action. I contend we know a lot more than we think we know. But at the same time we also think we know much more than we know because we have been duped by quantum magic. The uncertainty principle, complementary, continuum, covariance, local causality, fields, forces, particles, waves, etc. are not facts of quantum logic intrinsically but only emergent illusions animated by quantum logic without any magic. Even the axioms of classical logic are not obeyed by the quantum. To explore the nature of quantum action we must abandon our prior notions of physics and logic and presume no more to exist than quantum action of momentum occupying independent state, and thus instantiating, relative quantum state space, which evolves in obedience to quantum logical entanglement toward an elusive equilibrium by non-linear logical action. It will be shown that quantum action alone can account for all experience as the only thing happening in the universe without any magic.

Quantum theory postulates a quantum configuration space, Hilbert space, of infinite dimension. It includes allowed transformation of state by quantum logical operations. It provides relations by which observables, or measurables, in our relative perception are manifest with great accuracy. It is consistent with our experience to the limits of measurement. It has been shown to be a complete description of reality without the possibility of local hidden variables.

But what is the reality, the Hilbert space, or the relative realm where our measurements are manifest? The Hilbert space represents an absolute reality from the perspective of a preferred clock and the measurements are derived generally from the same clock. This may be translated to a relative state space via the Dirac relativistic equation.

Let us suppose that a relative Hilbert space represents the ultimate reality. The first issue becomes, relative to what? This introduces the notion of participants in Wheeler's participatory universe. Each participant is an independent event time clock that ticks by reception and emission of information as energy vectors exhibiting changes in momentum occupying quantum state. Participants exhibit extant relative state space. Rather than include infinite dimension of the Hilbert space in reality, only those exhibiting momentum in state to some actual participant need be considered. This distinguishes our world from all possible worlds.

"No elementary quantum phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is a registered phenomenon. . . . In some strange sense, this is a participatory universe" (Wheeler 1982).

If we consider only that which happens there are only the effects of changing momentum state (flux) propagating orthogonally in configuration state space. The first order effect is the canceling of equal and opposite potentials (flux). These are the zeros, or solutions of the wave equation which includes both potentials. It is the matrix product of the complex unit matrix in matrix mechanics. This instantiates an annihilation of both potentials. Independent variables in the quantum are always independent of one another and never line up in any real number solution. Yet, independent potentials do find a way to cancel each other. This can happen mathematically in the imaginary plane solution orthogonal to both potentials, and it does so physically, not just in our imagination. The imaginary number axis is just an orthogonal, or independent dimension, it is an actual whenever more than one dimension is exhibited. At the most basic level quantum action is always a sideways twist in an independent direction registered by two participants from opposite perspectives.

We know that there can be in principle a line that is perpendicular to any two lines. The quantum action, or change in state occurs when equal and opposite potentials cancel in an independent direction. This action exhibits space and time inversely to energy as frequency, or clock rate of quantum action.

The second order effect is the negative change exhibited by each initial potential in the evacuated state. It is an equal and opposite potential which is folded orthogonal fold (flux/change). Each resulting potential is twice orthogonal from the other, opposite each other normally. One minus one is zero, but it is only change that is manifest so that one minus one exhibits minus one, not zero. In a trick of time the quantum defies annihilation of potentials by exhibiting change. Change is by nature relative to perspective so one minus one also exhibits minus one plus one. I may witness a change of plus one and relatively you witness a change of minus one. In the system including both you and I both minus one and one are both manifest. This translates physically into equal and opposite action. The canceling of equal and opposite action becomes the mechanism of the propagation of action across time and space by the change it exhibits.

To be a registered phenomenon which really happened, there must be a participants for each of the participating potentials, which themselves are annihilated and reversed by the change. There must be two participants for any action. This exhibits a bi-local causality which contradicts the classical notion of local causality. It is not magical action at a distance, it is, as Mead puts it, collective action. It is logically entangled, not by magic, but by simply being the opposite perspective of the same logical action. As different aspects of the same thing, the entanglement is immutable. Each participant must witnesses the loss of the annihilated potential or the synthesis of opposite potential. Such a registration instantiates an independent instant of absolute local event ordering time for each participant.

Cramer's Transactional model and Mead's Collective Electrodynamics illuminates this process far better than the Copenhagen interpretation but the mechanism is clear in the orthogonal matrix products in quantum mechanics, the Schrodinger equation, Clifford algebra, and all formulations of the quantum. As Cramer put it, the last hundred years of experienment

Standard quantum theory is based on a preferred clock. However, basing configuration space on a preferred clock leads to time indeterminacy. Standard quantum theory is missing a definite direction in time. From special relativity and the light speed limit, we know that the ordering of events at any locality is immutable. No observer can directly observe the clocking of registered events at any participant locality going in reverse order. If we add this constraint to quantum theory that registered events are irreversible then we have agreement with special relativity. This is consistent with all experiment, without exception. It is not an unreasonable presumption. There is a time independence of distance divided by light speed between participants in an event such that it has no definite direction in time, but time is determined locally by the ordering of registered events. Fundamentally, individual events are bi-causal, not cause and effect. Only a sequence of local events define a definite direction in time which unambiguously exhibits causes and effects in a particular order independent of relative perception.

With the definition of irreversible event time direction included, experiment confirms that quantum action of right angle folding in configuration space accounts for all of electro dynamics and kinetics of our world to an accuracy of at least 24 decimal places. It requires no notion of fields or magical effects at a distance. Nothing has tiny effects on everything else. There is only change in momentum state occupied by canceling of opposite potentials. But by what magic does all this 90 degree folding synthesize the reality we perceive? There are no other angles in the quantum. There are no straight lines or circles. Everything is synthesized by right angle folds.

By our ordinary sensibilities it is impossible. Every angle is manifest in our realm, not just 90 degree angles. It is impossible to make a 10 degree angle out of 90 degree folds in three dimensional space.

The begs the issue. If we measure an angle of 10 degrees and three dimensions, but in quantum configuration space it is always zero or 90 degrees in a higher dimensional space time, what is the reality?

In configuration space, it is only 90 degrees or zero. This is the realm that determines what can happen. This represents the reality better than any approximation of fixed dimensionality. But the independence of direction is only significant only to one bit precision logically with respect to the perceived angle. Other logical constraints in the quantum system refine the angle we measure as accurately as we wish. Both the 90 degree angle in configuration space and the perceived angle of 10 degrees are real. The 90 degree angle internal to the quantum system is fundamental, representing one logical fact of independence, while the perceived 10 degree angle is emergent representing a multitude of logical entanglements instantiating a multitude of dimensions..

If we arrange a polarizer at zero degrees to quantum action, 100% of the action will pass. At 90 degrees, zero action will pass. The one bit of orientation information is obeyed perfectly 100% of the time. When we arrange the polarizer at 45 degrees, we are asking for the second bit of orientation information and half the actions will pass because we don't know what the second bit will be as it depends on logical entanglements that are external to the system being considered. At 10 degrees five internal logical entanglement bits are constrained. Uncertainty is the illusion born from missing local quantum logical configuration space information. Unpredictability is predictable, not inherent, in quantum systems. Reality is manifest to the number of bits exhibited by the logic of quantum action, further refinement is not uncertain, it is simply undetermined and has no definite value. A more exact value can only be obtained by discriminating, and thus exhibiting, additional bits of quantum logical information. That which is not exhibited by quantum logical operation is simply not manifest, it does not have any particular value which exists absolutely. some refinement of value may be discriminated cooperatively by future interaction or not. We can only know the future in an arranged quantum system. We can arrange the system such that any future value is produced. When the value is discriminated it is predictable by the perfect nature of quantum logic. The unknown state, past and future, makes our perception uncertain, since we lack this information. But the quantum obeys the logic whether we know it or not. It is simple deterministic reversible non-linear logic, not magic.

We say independent variables are orthogonal because they do not depend on one another, This is the meaning of independence. It means they do not co vary with each other. Mathematically they are at 90 degrees in configuration space. Physically we only measure this to one bit precision. Can we say the angle is really 10 degrees if that is what we measure? Not absolutely. The measured value can take any value from zero to 90 degrees depending on the relative motion of the observer. Objectively, the only absolute objective angle manifest is the 90 degrees manifest in configuration space since it is the only angle that is independent of who is looking.

The orthogonal fold of quantum action is mathematically in an imaginary direction including the square root of minus one, -1^(1/2). Mathematically, we can twist the axis of our number line by multiplying by i, the square root of minus one. This twist manifest a physical direction, not an imaginary one as the mathematical terminology might suggest. This allows independent variables to line up opposite each other and cancel in configuration space. Logically it states that they are equal but independent while instantiating physically a relative space time interval inverse to frequency and energy, or count of logical distinctions. Only space time thus manifest is extant with respect to configuration space. State space, and thus space time, not animated by orthogonally propagating momentum is not manifest.

The vacuum energy need not be postulated as random. It is background energy from sources unknown as could be expected from the apparent big bang. It is the lowest energy, the zero point, we measure relative to. It fills a stage exhibiting momentum animated in three dimensions not the infinite potential dimensions of configuration space. Locally only three degrees of freedom in time are logically presented.

In configuration space there are as many dimensions manifest as there are degrees of freedom in they system which exhibit interaction. There may be as many as there are elements in the quantum system. A system of four entities exhibits 6 dimensions if they are all exercised. These are local dimensions, however. They do not extend to any six dimensional continuum. They are private to the quantum system which exhibits them independent of other dimensions exhibited by independent quantum systems. Internally there are more than six potential dimensions. Each independent variable may represent an independent dimension in addition to the six potential degrees of freedom between them for a total of 10 in concept, but only six which may be actualized, and only four (3 1/2) that can be perceived externally. Adding elements to the system rapidly increases the potential dimensionality internally, but externally we can see only 3 dimensions of space and half a dimension of time.

Why should we consider these extra dimensions in configuration space actual? First of all because quantum logical entanglement in configuration space is perfect and immutable accurately anticipating measurement from any relative state space over any time or distance and there is no alternative model that works which is not consistent with the matrix mechanical orthogonal transforms in configuration space. Furthermore we can easily understand the different perceptions of different observers as parallax in projecting the absolute configuration space dimensionality into the unique limited dimensionality of the observer that depends on motion. Finally, it has been shown that there can be no mechanism that can express the system in fewer dimensions exactly. Thus the only complete description of reality includes all the dimensions exhibiting momentum in state in quantum configuration space. Should we exclude any, or add dimension not animated by quantum action, we open the door to inexplicable quantum magic.

Should we accept quantum configuration space as the ultimate reality and our own perception as the distorted parallax view, we must accept that an angle of 10 degrees does not exist exactly as 2/5 is not representable exactly in a finite number of bits of quantum logical action. Furthermore, while pi is evident in our world at the most fundamental level as the relation between angular and linear motion, it does not exist except by close approximation of many actions in quantum configuration space propagating orthogonally. In this view, the logical statement, "God created the integers, all else is man made [Kronecker].", is the physical reality as well. Finite discrete logic only exhibits both repeating binary fractions and non-repeating irrational numbers only approximately. They exist exactly only in our minds, the world of ideas, and our statistical classical illusion of reality. They are not physically manifest on the bottom layer as no infinite sum can be exhibited in finite time in any constructable system. In quantum logical reality only finite logic can be considered, all infinities must be abandoned.

Before we can speak meaningfully about photons exhibiting the exchange of momentum between electrons as predicted by matrix mechanics, or quantum logic. of the Schrodinger equation and matrix mechanics, we ought to understand and accept the basic nature of allowed quantum action. The classical view will always delude us but quantum action is not magic, it is well understood. We must accept that the classical view is just wrong. It describes the illusion, not the trick behind the magic.

We only perceive a sparse random sampling of the quantum. Our experience of the averaging of gazillions of events is not the complete truth. While quantum action may suggest many ways something can happen and we can never know exactly which way it happened, we know that what happens is only what is allowed by quantum action in configuration space with more certainty than any other scientific formulation.

One way to understand how quantum logic happens is the exclusion principle. Independent variables manifest independent logical space married by exclusion from common state. The exclusion instantiates a bidirectional adjacency delay distance. Intrinsically, the distinction in state is of arbitrary size, since it man take on all values, from one Plank length to billions of light years depending on relative motion. Only the singular logical fact of their distinction in quantum state is absolute. Action instantiates time and space and energy all together by constant relationships t=1/f, x=c*t, e=h*f. Time space and energy are never exhibited independently.

It is interesting that independent state implies an independent variable thus suggesting orthogonality such that the law of exclusion of from common state of common momentum having the same binary direction, is sufficient grounds to anticipate the extension of state space as happens in quantum configuration space, by orthogonal action that logically and thus physically enforces the exclusion from common state in an extant relative reference frame perspective. This joins quantum action with the mathematics of distinctions as bits of information such as in G-S-Brown's Laws of Form, and illuminates Wheeler's quandary of how we get "it from bit". Information about independence of state is what populates space and time.

A way to understand the result of quantum action in our ordinary space is as a relative resonance, where equal frequencies exhibit adjacent equal wavelengths of space time intervals such that space and time are defined and thus manifest. It just happens that the inability of equal energy to occupy common state, demands that resonant sequences, propagating this logical independence singularly exhibiting space, time and energy.

The electron is defined by two propagating orthogonal potentials with an angular momentum. The angle of the momentum is always 90 degrees. Each potential folds for times, for a total of eight 90 degree folds or 720 degrees in each cycle. It is not like a sin wave, it does not have an electric and magnetic field which vary in value over time. It is a constant potential which folds orthogonally eight time in what is called a spin network, spin ladder, twistor or spinor. While it seems odd that it must, in effect turn sideways eight times to turn around once, this is necessary since it has two vector components that must both turn around for one complete cycle. One component of spin is right handed independent of orientation, the other is overhanded or underhanded depending on orientation. Each orthogonal fold alternately follows the direction of each spin component.

We only see the end result of the folding, a final lateral and transverse potential. While eight orthogonal folds in principle might define eight independent dimensions, only two directed dimension vectors are manifest in our realm by an electron. The only effect in the end is two potentials, one lateral and one transverse by some exact number of cycle lengths defining time and space inversely to energy or clock rate of quantum action.

Photons represent an exchange of momentum between electrons as evidenced in the photoelectric effect in agreement with quantum action. The change is state of an electron is only by the emission or absorption of a photon. A photon in configuration space is a resonant series of space time intervals defined by spin networks of potentials folding eight times, exhibiting the elastic exchange of momentum between electrons in two dimensions.

Actually, reception or emission of momentum by electrons does no fully define two dimensions, they exhibit two directed vectors each only in one direction. Two dimensions in both directions is only defined collectively by the complete bi-local interaction. In the standard model, this includes both the photon, and its backwards in time partner, the anti-photon. This non-local effect is not magic, it is simply due to the logical limit of the reality which can be synthesized by quantum action. If we accept that only the reality exists which is synthesized by quantum logical action, this is what is expected, it is not magic. Dimensionality not exhibited by quantum action is not uncertain, it simply does not exist because is is not exhibited. The dimensionality exhibited has a bi-local nature without and absolute local reality of manifest position. Only relative position is manifest to a finite degree by extant quantum logical action.

If we consider the relative state space of each electron involved in the elastic transfer of momentum we find that momentum has a relative nature. In the rest frame of each electron it has zero momentum and zero kinetic energy. From each perspective the other approaching electron is seen to have a high kinetic energy. Each relative state space has an independent clock and sees energy transferred from the other electron at light speed. From each perspective the photon and the anti-photon switch roles. Each sees the others photon as an anti-photon going backwards in time. From either perspective time only moves forward but the illusion that time is going backwards for the other guy is allowed by the independence of the two clocks, x/c. The idea that time is going backwards for the other guy is an illusion, not magic, both clocks only go forwards actually. The fact is that absolute time is a local illusion that has been excluded by relativity and quantum theory. It only seems like magic if we still believe in absolute time. Einstein remarked that according to quantum theory, time direction ought to be random, but due to the intrinsic relative nature of momentum, and thus momentum transfer, the relative nature of time is implied by quantum action when only participant frames are considered.

We say electrons exert a repulsive force on one another. But the only action in the quantum is the equal potentials of an electron apparently bouncing off one another by exclusion from common quantum state because they are logically disconnected. These events are witness only by the participants. there is no effect on any other participants. Indeed, electrons moving toward each other will end up moving away from each other due to such interactions. Electrons repel each other only by discrete interactions, not by some magical influence at a distance where all electrons effect all other electrons. Our perception of the electric force is not magic, it is by the averaging of the effects of gazillions of interactions.

We perceive elastic action of equal energies which is readily accounted for by quantum action. Resonance of equal energies exhibits our perceived lattice of space and time. But we also energy "flowing" from higher energy to lower energy. Quantum action only propagates only by equal and opposite action. By what magic is it that unequal action happens in quantum logic which only acts where energies are equal? Again it is only by our relative perception that we judge the energies to be unequal. In quantum configuration space they are always equal. This can happen because there exists in quantum logic the possibility of a slower than light rest frame where the energies are in fact equal, and that quantum configuration space and thus that rest frame is in effect instantiated by the interaction undirected in time. We will always observe the greater energy flowing to the lower energy in our rest frame. Why? The simple answer is that quantum action is clocked by the fastest clock. It we accept that logical clocking and quantum clocking is the same thing, it follows that the fastest clocks must determine what logic is clocked. Which clock appears fastest depends on relative motion and clocking is local not absolute as allowed by the independence of clocks, x/c. It is not magic, it is just the nature of relative perception of logical action.

The Bohr model of the atom predicts only the simplest atoms. In order to predict all the atoms and have a complete representation of reality we can only rely on quantum action in quantum configuration space as described by matrix mechanics and the Schrodinger equation. Reconciling this quantum reality with our classical notion of particles and waves from our preferred perspective introduces dozens of arbitrary parameters and fails to account for all perspectives. Even Hawking's has admitted his belief there can be no unified field theory that accounts for everything. The answer is not to endlessly strive for a theory that extends legacy science of magical fields and forces effecting everything else in the universe, as the possibility of such an answer has largely been excluded. Instead, any theory of everything that describes the universe as it has been constructed, must consider only that which can be constructed by the kinetics of simple discrete quantum logical action. Experiment perfectly confirms such actions to be complete to the limits of measurement.

In addition to being consistent with our ordinary experience we can expect and have anticipated strange phenomenon due to the nature of quantum action from quantum interference to superconductivity and now even quantum gravity. Much of this I have been describing in the InfoPhysics yahoo group. From the perspective of quantum action the behavior of our world is expected, not strange.

I have long been considering the development a publication which presents all the evidence that quantum action does indeed account for everything. This article represents an introduction to such a publication. The challenge is to overcome the entire body of scientific foundation which stands contradicted by the simple reality of quantum action. It is a beginning of a new kind of science exploring the chaortic information ecology of quantum logical action extant in our world which exhibits dynamic physical action relativity as the active perception of static logical independence in the dynamical logical system thus constructed we call the universe.

I seek collaboration as this acceptance of the reality of quantum action is a new frontier of understanding which we have only scratched the surface of. But his may be too abstract for many to relate to easily. The meta mathematics of logical distinctions as in the Laws of Form is so simple a child can understand it. But that the constraints on reality are ultimately logical, not physical, presenting "it" in our relative perception, from "bit" in configuration space, requires a leap of faith into a different notion of reality.

Yet even our classical notion of logic has been trumped by the logic of the quantum exhibiting logic that is dynamical, not static, relative, not absolute. But it is not strange or magic, it is just different than we expected. Problems considered unsolvable by classical logic succumb to discrete quantum or evolutionary logic. It gets correct answers where classical logic fails to give complete answers. It mirrors "correct thinking", or right answers rather than classical rationalization. It appears to be that the universe may actually be logical, but at the same time demonstrating that the axioms of classical logic were not really God given.

Einstein said any theory of everything must be free of infinities. It is not logically describable how a finite world could be constructed other than by discrete dynamical logic. Unless some experiment uncovers some contradiction we already know perfectly what the simple logic of quantum action is by which our universe is apparently constructed and are discovering that we already have a theory of everything simply awaiting us to describe everything by its simple logic.


Friday, March 21, 2008

Quantum Newtonian Thermodynamic Kinetics

"Newton’s Law of Cooling describes the cooling of a warmer object to the cooler temperature of the environment. Specifically we write this law as,

T (t) = Te + (T0 − Te ) ^(e - k*t),

where T (t) is the temperature of the object at [any given] time t, Te is the constant temperature of the environment, T0 is the initial temperature of the object, and k is a constant that depends on the material properties of the object."(Arizona U. BioMath)

On the bottom layer, the photon, or exchange of momentum between electrons, is the quantum process that statistically exhibits this cooling in general agreement with the second of thermodynamics. Temperature is conceived of as the ambient average kinetic energy density of molecules, but at the atomic level of individual photons temperature is simply frequency or energy in different units obeying quantum logical kinetics of equal and opposite collective action by the serendipity of tuned frequency, in phase, with opposing binary orientation, of the emitting and absorbing electrons.

To apply Newtons law of cooling to quantum systems we must include both participants in the relation since nothing happens without two participants. We use E for energy vector units in place of temperature units since kinetic energy is a directed quantity and since frequency or color is the more prevalent interpretation of the kinetic momentum transfer exhibited by photons than temperature. We say the energy gained by one electron is the same as the Energy lost by the other. The ambient energy is the vacuum energy Ev.

Ev + (E1 -Ev)^(e-k*t1) = -E(t2) = Ev + (E2-Ev)^(e-k*t2)

Given a distance x between the objects (electrons/atoms) participating in the photon notion of the momentum exchange we can relate t1 to t2. If


From the perspective of the emitting electron and substitute in the above equation.

In this manner we can relate marcrocosmic entropy to quantum logical action leading to the Schrodinger equation.

The ground state of the electron is one hbar energy unit above the vacuum energy making it that which is minimally distinct from the vacuum energy by one bit of information. We may apply this to quantize the energy transmission relation to thermodynamic heat flow.

But momentum and hence kinetic energy is relative to motion and we have expressed a preferred perspective exhibiting a particular value of E. It is a model of a particular experience not an objective statement of what is experienced by all observers.

In the rest frame of the first electron, its own kinetic energy is zero. Clearly, from its perspective it was hit by the anti photon coming from the absorber which, relatively, has the higher energy, causing it to accelerate into a new reference frame backwards in time according to our perspective.

In this case t2=t1+x/c contracting out previous relation by a factor of 2*x/c. To include both these facts in a model containing both perspectives we must abandon the notion of absolute time and accept the time independence of the two participants equal to x/c leading to the Dirac relativistic equation. But neither perspective is really backwards in time causality since both perspective are needed for anything at all to happen and each sees a x/c time delay forward in time by relative perspective.

In this manner we can see how relativity emerges from quantum action by choosing a perspective. Not only is relativity consistent with quantum action but the relative nature of momentum and energy in quantum kinetics accounts for the relative nature of time itself. A quantum action is a singular event and cannot be attributed an absolute direction in time. Relativistically any light speed path is a zero time and distance path, it is local effect, not nonlocal, except by the distortion of some preferred perspective.

But, considering combinations of multiple perspectives that might be communicated we have can also see a doubling or canceling of momentum, A absorbed photon transfers all its momentum to a surface while a reflected photon imparts double its momentum to the surface or four times the energy. Considering all perspectives there is no entropy at all and the Schrodinger and Dirac equations do not apply. We can't say the system tends toward equilibrium and indeed, by non linear action, may be inflationary and more than conserve energy.

There are two separate realities, the experience model equal and opposite vectors average toward zero and energy is conserved and entropy increases. In the absolute model action is conserved and quantum logical complexity increases with time, exhibiting negative entropy by non linear action that is not zero sum, but additive absolutely in the grand scale of time.

Classical reality is the experience model where heat flows like a fluid in our experience. But we know how the kinetics actually work and how the statistics emerge. Quantum probabilities are not fundamental they are emergent. Non linear momentum exchanges across space do not spread out like a fluid. A photon from a laser goes just one way, not every way to some probability. It momentum is transferred as if the vacuum energy was a semi-solid taking all paths to a singular destination of a tuned receiver by push-me pull-you two way causality when both relative perspectives on the transfer are considered.

We cannot resurrect classical realism. Cause and effect can never account for relative momentum exchange. It I am sitting still my my reckoning way out is space and you are doing the same by your own reckoning, when we happen to slam into each other each will blame the other to have caused the accident if they follow classical cause and effect reasoning. This is simply incomplete thinking in a kinetic world where quantum kinetics is relative by Newtons laws the only consistent reality becomes Einstein's laws due to this relative nature.

Instead there is a new reality where all elements of a quantum system equally participant in the cause of the action. Choosing any particular participant to be the "observer" gives an incomplete relative experience model not an objective model of the quantum logical collective action. The distinction between a measurement and an effect is artificial. A measurement is only one cause as in relative collective existence the distinction between causes and effects is also artificial as nothing happens without both happening by quantum logical equal and opposite action being all that happens.


Monday, February 11, 2008

Resurrecting Newton

Science 2.0 is a different way of thinking about science. There are
no theories only models. The models are assimilated into our complete
understanding to date. It is a knowledge base mapping experiential
data to the relative and absolute ordering the emergent fractals of
that taken to be fundamental and emergent in the cognitive context of
each model. There are no scientific facts independent of context of a
model and no model excludes any other model except as trumped by
nature herself. Each model must be considered independently but not
in exclusion of other models and the relation between the models
uncovered in the advancement of science.

We start by integrating the classical laws of motion with relativistic
motion. In the first we can go as fast as we want. In the second we
cannot exceed light speed. The truth is that both views are correct.
The traveler at relativistic velocity close to light can achieve a
limitless proper velocity and venture across the galaxy and beyond in
a lifetime, but not without traveling into the future in a reality
where space and time are related such that you cannot travel in one
without traveling in the other.

I've made a lot of noise that every model is wrong because it has
limits and exceptions. But to know the whole truth as far as we can
determine each model ought be applied in the domain where it is
correct. Only if a model applies in no case at all is it totally
useless for prediction. Even models that apply to no observed cases
may prove useful in exceptional cases not yet studied. Science 2.0 is
not a competition where falsified models give way to successor models
as no model can be considered complete and complete understanding
means applying all possible models up to the complexity of the system
to determine how they are and are not manifest by the system.

The problem is that entertaining two independently consistent models
at the same time for the same system is plagued with inconsistencies
between the cognitive contexts of each model.

For example, if I travel to a star 10 light years away in one year on
my clock, I would say I traveled at 10 times light speed. But, but,
but, isn't that faster than light? The fact is that all my
calculations of acceleration, thrust, velocity and travel time would
be correct using Newton's laws. Even NASA uses Newton's laws for
space travel without need for relativistic correction for the space
craft perspective.

But Newton's laws fail to predict that when I return in two years, 22
years will have passed on earth. The question of how long I will
travel and how long will I be gone have different answers. My reality
and your reality are clocked independently. Both realities are real.
It is not true absolutely that you cannot go faster than light speed,
as the church of relativity doctrine teaches. At the same time it is
also true that you cannot actually pass any light no matter how fast
you go. A light path takes zero time relative to the frame of the
light. The direction of light travel is not necessarily determined in
collective electrodynamics but passing light violates time ordering of
events creating a contradiction in event ordering between the two
perspectives of time ordering. This would allow interaction with
oneself in the past in a doubling of energy to infinity. These self
interaction are renormalized out since we never observe explosions of
energy coming from nowhere. It seems apparently true as Einstein
speculated that event ordering is strictly enforced locally while
mutual clocking depends on relative motion.

Light speed relatively would be infinite proper velocity. You can
always use twice the Newtonian acceleration to achieve twice the
proper velocity and get to your destination in half the time. But no
matter how many times you double your proper velocity you will never
get to your destination in zero time or less.

In the future when high speed travel is a reality will we really say
Joe will be going going ten light years at .999XXXc velocity? Or will
we say 10c? The Newtonian, or proper velocity is more useful and
sensible generally. I suppose we will avoid violating the foolish
consistency between the models by saying warp 10 or something rather
than admit he is traveling faster than light by his clock.

In Science 2.0 Einsteins world does not replace Newton's world. The
basic idea of relativity was due to Newton in his relative laws of
motion. Einstein merely extended the notion to include time
globally. Locally Newton's laws still apply just as well as
Einstein's do. Considering only Einstein's laws to be correct leads
to errors in interpretation. The complete truth, so far as we have
determined, is that each must be true in the context to which it
accurately represents according to measurement. The failure of
relativity is that it does not allow mixing of different reference
frames limiting our knowledge of the system. The failure of classical
mechanics is it only models local experience. Employing classical
local dynamics to every participant and relating them relatively only
as necessary to answer questions about the relative distortion between
them is how Science 2.0 avoids any preferred perspective.

If philosophy can admit the correctness of Newton and live with the
inconsistencies, we can then also assimilate the various quantum
interpretations and then even Maxwell's equations. The work has
largely already been done (Carver Mead), but in reinterpreting the collective of
results, in an additive rather than exclusionary manner, the cognitive
context of the synthesis of the models is realized.


Science 2.0 Principles

Nature is a Machine that can be understood as an information system:

The new science exposes a relative reality expressing other dimensions
inconsistent with our classical notion of a machine. An information
system is a machine which has no dimensional or other constraints.
Any machine can be modeled as an information system. The universe is
in the countable set of information systems so far as it can be
understood. An information system from which experience projected
represents the machinery of the universe from one or more
perspectives. The information system is the analog of the machine
which may or may not represent the actual machinery of the universe.

We can't know if our model is the same as the actual machine. Most
often we find that our model is an emergent effect of statistical
interpretation of organization in another fractal of organization or
information channel. The map is not the territory and we can only
know how our maps interrelate for an incomplete description of
experience. Since our universe apparently exhibits universal logic
what might be exhibited is unrestricted and impossible to model

Finite Nature:

It is the presumption of science that the universe is a machine. In
the new science it is firstly a constructable machine. It may be
other things as well, but it is the finitely constructable machine
that is of primary interest to science. Previously Science has
accepted infinities into the realm of the objective, but nature has
contraindicated many of the first principles of Science 1.0, and
Einstein wisely speculated that any complete theory must be free of
singularities which indeed infinities represent.

There are many ways we can enumerate all constructable mathematics and
languages from the simplest to the more complex, infinitely. These are
what is constructable or describable in any manner. Science seeks the
simplest of these models that reflect experience. We can only be sure
we have the simplest if we can eliminate the possibility of there
being an equivalent model with fewer states. In the worst case all
simpler models can be tried to prove there is no simpler finite model.

Multidimensional information semi-fractal perspectives:

Science is a methodology, not an ideology. Part of that methodology
has been formulating theories that present ideals of nature. Instead
nature exhibits an exceptional nature, and ideals are only exhibited
in a limited relative information context. Elsewhere other fractals of
organization dominate in our experience. The ideal is an analogy of
some emergent relative order. It is only one channel of truth, or
information, in complex systems. Each maps the cognitive context of
one perspective on experience.

Taxonomy of Perspectives:

The perception of the observer in Science 2.0 is accepted to be
biased, distorted and relative. We find however that there are
mechanical, chemical and electric devices that confirm our experience
better than a human witness. They further can allow us to project
experience beyond human observer to any participant in an arrangement
being studied, down to the level of an atom. Every participant is
equal in Science 2.0. No special observer status is conveyed to any

The human reality is our interface to the objective but it is a
subjective and collective reality, not an objective one. We must
except that the human reality is distinct from the objective reality
though they may seem to overlap considerably. Science 2.0 is a
mechanical methodology to distinguish what we know objectively from
what we think we know. Some things we think we know are testable, and
may become objective statements in some context and be found to be
myths in other contexts. Some beliefs are not decidable and taking
either side is in error objectively.

The infinite perspectives include the spiritual and Platonic. Much of
the body of Science 1.0 lays in this realm until finite contexts of
applicability have been formalized for each of the ideals and related
to a relevant perspective.

The social perspectives include cultural and relative perspectives
down to electrodynamic interaction. The life organism, Church,
Nation, family, organism, organ, chemical, electrodynamic.

Self is the perspective where we have no choice about what we truly
believe. We are social elements as much as we are ourselves. As an
object in this world we instantiate an independent clock and are an
equal participant. It is necessarily a subjective perspective.

The absolute perspective includes only that which is necessary and
consistent with the relative perspective of of all known and all
possible participants in the universe. For example, a registered
quantum event has an electrodynamic effect that may have all different
values for different observers, but fact of the quantum logical action
exists absolutely as the exchange of some amount of momentum is
witnessed by any observer that cares to look.

The synthetic model is a machine that accounts for the absolute model.
For example, the quantum mechanical description of matter and energy
may be complete, but it only tells how interaction is felt non locally
with transmission and reception of energy packets instancing
gazillions of bits of apparent space time information from exponential
effect of just hundreds of bits of relative energy information. The
synthetic model describes the actions of individual bits of quantum
action team up into harmonic effects of the absolute model.

The Transcendental perspective posits that physical quantum
information is not special and information on every fractal of
organization is connected in some way to all others and is as much an
actuator of that fractal and it is actualized by it. While this may
be generally true it is also may be highly speculative unless the
mechanism is discovered. With respect to science, it must be
testable. It may be true that quantum action is deterministic
intrinsically, but what we experience is statistically emergent. It
is only causally connected to the information in our world by a 50%
correlation. The physical quantum reality is an independent logical
perspective from the human realm with causation going both ways. We
do not have an objective bases ultimately to say physical quantum
information is necessarily more fundamental. We can only see if
physical quantum information is sufficient to account for the
emergence of all other information contexts we can study or not.

Big is slow, fast is first:

In the quest for first principles in the new science we may be tempted
to find general principles that may always be applied. But clearly
there will be exceptions to all ideals. None the less, there are
themes that emerge in every semi fractal of organization and are
useful across many disciplines. These are markers that allow relating
one information context to another. Big is related to complex
organization with slow change and small to simple organization where a
small change may have a significant immediate effect. Higher
frequencies have shorter wave lengths. Everything is interrelated in
an information system and has effects at a different rate. The
fastest clocks tend to determine the outcome.

It is not always true that big is slow and fast is first, consider big
fast twitch and small slow twitch muscle fibers. Fast internal
clocking does not always exhibit fast external clocking. But by
relative clocking we are unlikely to go wrong associating frequency
with size or complexity. Conveniently, frequency defines a
communication channel and harmonic component of an information
fractal. Conveniently the instantiation by energy of space and time
are directly related, and energy is directly related to frequency. A
long wave is slow frequency and low energy.

While an ant may take ten steps a second, a elephant takes just one.
This is a related fractal where the principle applies but it is not
the same effect really. I include this dual principle in the new
science tentatively, because we need some clock to start with.
Einstein remarked that according to quantum theory the direction of
time should be random. Clearly it is not random as every experiment
verifies. The fastest clock in our realm is the sun. In any realm
being studied there is some fastest clock. What happens in that realm
may not be caused by the fastest clock because tuned senders
(emitters) and receivers (absorbers) of energy equally cause the
event, but using the fastest clock as the first approximation will
generally be rewarded in any information system including biological
and primitive physical systems not to mention brain and mind.

Our prior first principles of a continuum, covariance, inherent
randomness, etc., have been contraindicated by nature. This
preliminary list of principles aims to allow the emergence of a
relative space time as it is manifest by quantum action perceived as
relative energy.

There is no science in isolation:

The new science is where ideals apply and how they are related. The
internet provides content addressability. and semantic standards allow
all our ontologies to be related according to objective criteria of
fact and myth they may imply. The new science will consist of
information objects such as this item that will be linked to related
ontologies such that the ideas may be translated between the cognitive
contexts. In Science 1.0 we could all speak the same language in the
same cognitive context. In the new science nature determines what
information contexts are manifest objectively and none can be excluded
by some ideal. It is time we incorporate at least a minimal semantic
formality in our contribution to the new science such that objectivity
is ordered with respect to related contexts such that we can
distinguish what we know from what we think we know. It will be open
and collective like wikipedia and constrained in other trust networks
employing more specific requirements for objectivity.


Collective Electrodynamics: Quantum Foundations of Electromagnetism

"In this book Carver Mead offers a radically new approach to the standard problems of electromagnetic theory. Motivated by the belief that the goal of scientific research should be the simplification and unification of knowledge, he describes a new way of doing electrodynamics--collective electrodynamics--that does not rely on Maxwell's equations, but rather uses the quantum nature of matter as its sole basis. Collective electrodynamics is a way of looking at how electrons interact, based on experiments that tell us about the electrons directly. (As Mead points out, Maxwell had no access to these experiments.)The results Mead derives for standard electromagnetic problems are identical to those found in any text. Collective electrodynamics reveals, however, that quantities that we usually think of as being very different are, in fact, the same--that electromagnetic phenomena are simple and direct manifestations of quantum phenomena. Mead views his approach as a first step toward reformulating quantum concepts in a clear and comprehensible manner.The book is divided into five sections: magnetic interaction of steady currents, propagating waves, electromagnetic energy, radiation in free space, and electromagnetic interaction of atoms. In an engaging preface, Mead tells how his approach to electromagnetic theory was inspired by his interaction with Richard Feynman."

I got so excited when I found this. I got one of the first copies printed of the book and cannot believe the scientific community has not taken greater interest in the book. Why? I started a facebook group on it.

In this book, Carver Mead has overthrown Maxwell. A student of Feynman, Mead's keen understanding of the quantum (with Lynn Conway's information systems vision) conquered Very Large Scale Integrated semiconductor physics changing our world technologically with "the book" on VSLI.

Now he has exposed the world of charge and magnetism to be false, an emergent illusion resulting from the collective action of as universe composed of potential actions composed of fluxiods (hbar) in integer multiples in a cause-cause rather than cause-effect universe based on Cramer's transactional model of the quantum. Mead shows we know better and we should stop teaching Maxwell as fact in schools!

On the one hand, Mead declares the universe to be of a wave nature, obviously. The universe conspires to have no two equal frequencies by exclusion, instantiating kinetic independent state, and all of experience.

On the other hand he exposes the reality underlying the waves is discrete, cooperative orthogonally folding discrete fluxiods instantiating kinetic momentum exchanges. In a sense, Mead's notion of waves is just as imaginary as are charge and magnetism. Nothing is waving fundamentally there is simply the repetition of arbitrary cooperative patterns at certain frequencies that exhibits existence in our realm. Our experience of energy is frequency by Planck's constant. All else that happens in the quantum is simplified in our mind to a wave at light speed alternating according to frequency. The reality can be much richer than a simple wave as Mead himself illuminates.

I do not agree with Mead's wave interpretation, since the wave notion is emergent just as electromagnetism is, but concede that is what we experience, mostly.

In any case, in my view, this is a very important book in the beginnings of a new science that is free from it's legacy of useful delusions.

energy = information
fluxoid = bit

The end of the reductionist trail is the fluxoid, discriminating 50% of quantum possibilities (Wheeler, Zieglinger, et al), instantiating one bit of existence. It is the beginning of the new science, the universe as a universal cooperative information system, with potential organization beyond our wildest dreams.