Reading Philosophy

Aug 02, 2006 04:26 # 43309

Doctor_Tomas * posts about...

Making quantum magic

?% | 1

I watched "What the #?%& do we know"

I ripped off a one page explanation of the relation between reality and magic from a quantum standpoint. I think a number of people thinking synchronized thoughts could act as a quantum detector which could crystalize major magic from the infinite probability waves that surround us.

Quantum/Magic
by Doctor_Tomas

The basic problem with a quantum theory based philosophy is the blurring of the line between magic and reality. Magic is by definition not possible. Many things thought to have been magic have come to be accepted as ordinary reality. What then is the difference?

In reality to get from point A to point B some sort of force must be applied and the intervening space must be traversed in such a way that obstacles are removed or bypassed. In magic the magician moves from point A to Point B with no application of force, no need to get around or through obstacles, and no passage of time.

In physics laboratories such magical actions have been shown to be commonplace. Perhaps the simplest example would be the electron which is known to routinely jump from one orbital to another with no passage of time and without transversing the intervening space. (My apologies to physicists for whom this example is a great oversimplification. But even physicists would agree that electrons moving from one shell to another fulfill the simple definition of magic I have stated).

To perform actions on a visible scale that would be acceptable to the population at large which today would be considered magical, one would have to demonstrate an acceptable chain of cause and effect. Perhaps a demonstrable phenomenon which can by extrapolation would explain an otherwise magical event.

Perhaps the pathway to such a phenomena has already been provided by ESP experiments which have demonstrated that a large group of people can have a small but measurable and repeatable effect on the roll of dice. Skeptical scientists have long been dismissive of such things. To find what you are looking for it is best to have a theory concerning the nature of the underlying principle. The importance of theory to discovery is seen in physics all the time.

If we know A by acceptable proof and we can then prove that A implies B and B implies C. If C is true a phenomenon P will be observed under certain specific experimental set ups in a particle accelerator.

What we need is a syllogism A therefore B therefore C which would result in a gross physical result that can be demonstrated each time a proper situation is created. Quantum physics was developed by a series of such syllogisms, most of which rely on not much more than the simple arithmetic. What was considered magical thus became the basis for something like 75% of our technology.

Once detected a probability wave crystallizes into what would be considered ordinary reality. Some believe that the human mind is the ultimate detector. This would explain why theories so often precede discoveries. This would explain the remarkable incidence of simultaneous discovery and would explain the everyday experience of bumping into facts which are of particular interest to the seeker.

anyway if you relate to these ideas at all let me know. If you think I write too dryly or just plain suck let me know.
Dr.T

Aug 05, 2006 09:57 # 43316

cyborg *** replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

?% | 1

You're clearly far too caught up on a mechanistic universe to consider that that's just a model, not the actual thing. The maths that describes what happens in quantum physics is sound as to the evidence.

Perhaps the simplest example would be the electron which is known to routinely jump from one orbital to another with no passage of time and without transversing the intervening space.

Well if you are proposing we live in a continuous universe maybe I could propose (as per Zeno's Paradox) that any movement is magical.

And if you're thinking of an electron as a tiny little ball orbiting around another set of tiny little balls you may want to re-examine the way you think of the atom.

You can't let the analogy for the thing be the thing rather than just a convenient shorthand and then complain that the thing can't do something it does because then the analogy wouldn't make sense.

But even physicists would agree that electrons moving from one shell to another fulfill the simple definition of magic I have stated)

No, because you've stated that magic is by definition not possible whilst it is by observation only possible for electrons to have certain energy levels. You are very much hung up on the concept that they must 'move' as one might move across a room. You are not very much like an electron. The micro world is very much different to the macro world.

Perhaps the pathway to such a phenomena has already been provided by ESP experiments which have demonstrated that a large group of people can have a small but measurable and repeatable effect on the roll of dice.

It has? New one on me. I was pretty much certain that every controlled experiment on everyone who claimed they has these abilities conclusively showed they were delusional.

Skeptical scientists have long been dismissive of such things.

That's becuase they're good ones. I don't know what experiments you've seen that demonstrate anything like ESP but I'm guessing they weren't anywhere near the quality required to produce statistically significant data.

Oh and scientists who aren't skeptical aren't very good scientists. By definition a skeptic requires evidence: just what do you think a scientist should be doing if not collecting evidence?

What we need is a syllogism A therefore B therefore C which would result in a gross physical result that can be demonstrated each time a proper situation is created. Quantum physics was developed by a series of such syllogisms, most of which rely on not much more than the simple arithmetic. What was considered magical thus became the basis for something like 75% of our technology.

What are you on about? You seem to be saying some people sat around, one day decided to foist quantum physics on us because that would be fun (and if you think it's not much more than simple arithmetic then you're one hell of a mathematician or you just haven't even tried looking at the advanced stuff). You seem to have a rather bad opinion of the people who have built 75% (?) of our technology on magical principles (that just happen to work for some reason...).

Some believe that the human mind is the ultimate detector.

Not I. Mainly because it's not a detector of any sort.

This would explain why theories so often precede discoveries.

Hypothesis -> evidence -> theory. It is a common misconception that somehow scientific theories come fully formed after a good deal of discussion between scientists on how much they like the theory before everyone goes off and actually gets the evidence to show the theory has any weight. No, what happens is that a scientist will form a hypothesis - a guess - and see if he was right or not. If may take a hell of a lot of hypotheses before one of them can get promoted to the lofty height of theory.

If one is to discuss science then semantic precision is required.

This would explain the remarkable incidence of simultaneous discovery

Cite please. What simultaneous discoveries are you referring to and why are they remarkable?

would explain the everyday experience of bumping into facts which are of particular interest to the seeker.

To a true seeker all facts are interesting. If you are only interested in a subset you will probably still see some in your day. I do not see what is extraordinary about that.

Aug 06, 2006 22:57 # 43325

yoshi314 * throws in his two cents...

Re: Making quantum magic

?% | 2

Just to add a small thing to the topic, the movie showing that quantum physics is really something amazing.

http://video.google.pl/videoplay?docid=-4237751840526284618

"Life is a queue. You come in, hang around for a bit, get some service, then depart."

Mar 31, 2007 16:44 # 44293

smashedmotif * replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

http://video.google.pl/videoplay?docid=-4237751840526284618

Did I mention that it is great to be interested in quantum theory?

I love reading Russian Literature!!!

Apr 02, 2007 12:58 # 44319

yoshi314 * replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

?% | 1

Http://Bethe.Cornell.Edu/

some more goodies here.

"Life is a queue. You come in, hang around for a bit, get some service, then depart."

Apr 02, 2007 19:42 # 44322

smashedmotif * feels excited about...

Re: Making quantum magic

This is awesome!

When did you have knowledge of this site?

This is the sort of stuff I like, nice lectures by people who have dedicated their lives to such endeavors as quantum physics.

I love reading Russian Literature!!!

Mar 29, 2007 23:44 # 44276

smashedmotif * throws in his two cents...

Re: Making quantum magic

I like how you are interested in quantum theory.

You might be interested in visiting this website.

A short and really neat paper on quantum theory that may be of interest to you may be found here.

To find the paper:

1.) First click on the "faculty" button in the left column.
2.) Then, click on the director's link.
3.) Next, scroll down until you find the fourth title, of 2004 and click on it.

note:
Please do not mention the authors name or titles of the paper when replying to this post. I would like this post to not be picked up by any search engine on the topic.

Thank you.

I love reading Russian Literature!!!

Mar 30, 2007 21:36 # 44283

yoshi314 * replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

?% | 2

There is a game called quantum golf. Where the ball behaves according to quantum theory - each throw ends up as a field of possibilites (my quick description, see the screenshot).

Http://Quantumminigolf.Sourceforge.Net/

"Life is a queue. You come in, hang around for a bit, get some service, then depart."

Mar 30, 2007 23:45 # 44287

smashedmotif * replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

This is an excellent game, as is your post on quantum theory.

I'm just now reading about quatum theory, myself.

The figure next to the directions on how to play the game reminds me of when I was in physics class. We were studying waves and discussing light.

Where are you in regards to your study of quantum theory?

I am studying this on my own vice in an academic setting.

I love reading Russian Literature!!!

Mar 31, 2007 11:42 # 44289

yoshi314 * replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

?% | 1

Where are you in regards to your study of quantum theory?

Just like the ball after passing through the barrier. A bit here, and a bit there ;-)

i haven't tried to actually get decent knowledge about quantum theory yet. Maybe i will soon.

"Life is a queue. You come in, hang around for a bit, get some service, then depart."

Mar 31, 2007 16:03 # 44290

smashedmotif * replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

Maybe i will soon

The webpage I referred you to has papers you can access for free. It's free!:)

I love reading Russian Literature!!!

Apr 08, 2008 19:21 # 45679

Turings_child *** replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

?% | 1

I often think about schrodingers cat. While we tie ourselves in knots over the possibility matrix within the box the cat probably looks around itself curiously before dying from a decaying atom triggering a fatal gas attack.

Cats are not by definition intelligent, lucky aren't they, they never wonder whether they exist or not.

I thinks therefore I is

Apr 09, 2008 02:36 # 45681

harold_maude *** replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

I have something to say here. There are some things that I think your misunderstanding. The magic your refering to is actually spelled magik and not magic. The first is accomplished by slight of hand, and the second is accomplished by the simple act of entering a partnership with the energy that exists all around us.

Science in some of it's most basic statements when dealing with quantum mechanics is that all matter and all energy exist. Unless quantum mechanics is no longer built upon other scientific building blocks.

The notion that comes with all religions, and science is the modern day religion that demands that everything be brought under it's scrutiany to be declared valid or invalid, just as the church did just a few centuries ago, is that unless it can be done according to the model that is trying to be proved or disproved and have physical evidence that can be accomplished by doing the same experiement a thousand times, and it is then deemed that it has a high probablity of repeating itself a thouand and one times, it isn't real.

I think you need to watch the movie again and try listening this time.

This movie states plainly that we multi dimensional, and that we don't really understand what drives us, or the possiblities that we are capable of.
It stated that our emotions are chemically based, and they are, so what defines truth about what we feel.
It was saying that we don't really know who we are in truth.

The wonderment of quantium mechanics is that it tells science that more than just what you see with your eyes and can touch and measure is possible.

Leonardo Da Vinci was right. The only way to understand anything is to see the whole, not just the working parts but the whole.
Science and faith or belief or magic or what every you can't explain with a test tube or a beaker or a measuring stick.
Science can't explain the soul.
Does that mean that we are simply biomechanical computer programs wandering around doing stupid things and wonderful things too?

To understand anything about who we are, you have to look at what science can understand and explain and pare it with what belief and practice of that belief can understand and explain and see what it shows you.
The picture comes in a whole lot better if you have all the peices.

Try watching it again, and try listening with the same kind of wonderment that opened the doors of what if possiblities for many of the great minds through human history.

Apr 09, 2008 11:42 # 45687

Hawkeye *** replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

Magic has always been about unexplainable events. As you said yourself, many things which were thought to be magic have been proven to be explainable events thanks to Quantum Theory.

The behavior in Quantum Theory is very much unlike the macro world that has already been said, though I see what you imply when you say that it works in a way much like we would have described 'magic' to work in the days of superstition.

There is a tremendous amount of knowledge yet to accumulate, and by tremendous, I mean a grain of sand on one of the endless beaches on this planet. Quantum Theory, in fact, says very little other than that the behavior of particles on a small scale is very probabilistic and can only be 'guessed' as to where a given particle is at any particular moment with varying probability. Though in a sense, this is not much different than the macro-scale physics theory which says that when you throw a ball up, it must come down. The only difference is that one is far easier to predict.

Though, what is the connection? Why does behavior change when scale changes? The evidence suggests that the only difference is frequency. That is to say, if you flip a coin once, what is the probability it will be 100% tails? You have fairly good odds of having 100% tails. However, if you flip the coin 1,000,000 times and ask the same question, how much less likely are you that you will receive 100% tails? The case is virtually impossible, though not impossible.

Apply that now to a single electron. The chance that a single electron will disappear and reappear 10 meters away is not so unlikely. Now imagine you have all the atoms required to create a glass cue ball and apply the same logic, only this time you're not dealing with a single electron but millions of millions of atoms. What is the probability that that glass cue ball will disappear and reappear 10 meters away?

The answer: Virtually impossible, but not impossible. That is to say technically it is possible, though it has likely never happened in the existence of the universe in its entirety. That is the connection between the macro and micro world. Behavior gets normalized by exponential amounts so that you never see the really improbable cases but only the most frequent cases.

I'll give you another example. Take a glass of water. If you take that glass of water and throw it to the ground, you'd expect it to shatter, wouldn't you? The reality is that you throw a multi-faceted die in which the side which turns up is the state the glass of water that will turn up as as a result of impact with the ground. There are almost an infinite ways in which that glass could shatter based on the direction and force of the glass hitting the ground, though technically, there exists also a handful of ways in which that same glass could bounce off the floor and not shatter at all. Therefore, when you roll the die, statistically you have incredibly high odds that the glass will shatter in some manner and incredibly low odds that it will not shatter at all. Therefore, the glass of water shatters.

If I were to drop that glass of water rather than throw it (less force), there become far more chances in which that glass of water will now shatter, therefore the odds that that glass of water will break is slightly lessened.

It's as if the reason why physical objects exist at all is because the chance of disappearing is incredibly improbable. The moment in which this probability wave fluctuates due to change is the moment in which you see objects change state, since it becomes incredibly improbable that the object would not change state under the application of force to an object (for example if I had hit a cue ball with my cue stick). Though again, Quantum Theory tells us everything is technically possible, albeit very unlikely.

Depends on your point of view, but I'd argue everything in science has its own sense of wonder that I find rather magical. Just because we can predict behavior with a theory doesn't make it any less fascinating for me. So in a sense, everything is magic.

If the world should blow itself up,the last audible voice would be an expert saying it can't be done

This post was edited by Hawkeye on Apr 09, 2008.

Apr 09, 2008 12:48 # 45691

harold_maude *** replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

The only problem I have with either courses is that they are seperated by people into compartments.
While science teaches that only what can be proved exists, phillosphy teaches that belief in the unseen is what is real.

If kept seperate, the two remain at odds. But when you put the two together, it changes everything.

There are things that quantum mechanics are showing science that it cannot deny.
That's why I do believe that Leonardo was right, and that's why I am very sure that the church which ended up orignally in possession of his work, distroyed about 75% of it.
Because his writings would have shown that the church is by no means the final authority on what is real or not real.
At that time the church, like the world of science today was the be all end all authority that existed.

We've done a flip of the coin, so to speak, and now science is the new religion that is the be all end all authority that exists.

Seems that the two disciplines cannot accept that they need each other to complete themselves.
And that I do think is what that movie was more about, that there are things that exist that cannot be explained simply by the scientific method.
That's where quantum mechanics comes in and says what about this?

Science and phillosophy are like the two sides of a pair of glasses or binocoluars, if you have just one half your view will be rather strange, but when you use both, you get a clear immage. That's what I have thought for a long time.

Your right about science having it's own wonderment, but on it's own it's limited and can only answer things so far.

Phillosophy can't accept many things that science teaches, because it has limited itself in so many ways as well.
Hence the war that exists between them.

Jun 12, 2008 23:01 # 45814

Hawkeye *** replies...

Re: Making quantum magic

Well I agree that science and religion go hand in hand, though I can see why so many would be black and white on the issue, favoring one or the other. In a sense, they're complete opposites, so naturally, to believe in both could be easily viewed as hypocritical.

Though in reality, science needs religion or else no scientist would ever hypothesize unless given direct empirical evidence first, and religion needs science to keep our minds grounded so to speak.

Even though science is the new religion, I'm going to stick by my personal belief that even if science has yet to prove God exists I must realize that one devoted to science would never admit God no matter what empirical evidence you threw at him, as the concept of a god existing is by definition against what science has taught us. Doesn't mean He doesn't exist. Rather, perhaps the only reason science exists at all is because of the world created by a just and reasonable god.

If the world should blow itself up,the last audible voice would be an expert saying it can't be done


Small text Large text

Netalive Amp (Skin for Winamp)