I could not find a realy nice title for this blog. Hopefully, it will capture well what I want to say. We begine by the question as to how much percentage of matter in the universe is contained within the stars. We can make a guess by considering the solar system. 98% of the mass of the solar system is the mass in the sun! So we extrapolate that 98% of the matter in the universe is contained in the stars.In the wikipedia article talking about magnetohydrodynamics, it begines by stating that the sun is a magnetohydrodynamic system that is not yet well understood. Lets put it together: 98% of the universe is said to be composed of stuffs that we know almost nothing about. These are termed dark matter and dark energy. So we know only of 2% of the universe! Then we donnot yet understand what goes on in the 98% of this remaining 2% stuff! The only statement that can capture this situation well is that our ignorance of astronomy is of astronomical amount!The modern scientific approach to understanding the universe tend to get stuck in reductionism. It says give me the detailed knowledge of the tiny parts and I will spit out all there is to know about the whole. However, this method encounters unsurmountable problems when the thing in question is incredibly complex such as the sun or our brains. As chaotic system, we can't get to be convinced that our understanding of the parts was even correct. In the 'star base reasoning' I am suggesting, we don't begine by studying the elements that we think they constitute the stars. We begine by contemplating on the stars themselves and then we try to understand the elements with the light of the stars instead of trying to do the vice versa. The star itself is perceived as a churning ocean in total chaos. Then out of these chaos, order emerges. This order creates the elements and everything we know of from the primodal substance that we term it as plasma. We don't presume that we understand what we think of as the fundamental forces as in nuclear or electromagnetism. It is the chaos in the sun that molds the nature of these forces as they would latter manifest to us in the elemens we know of.Let us consider how we can understand electromagnetism to illustrate how this approach works. Remember that in the othordoxed approach, we begine by studying the behaviour of magnets we discovered them on earth, then we now try to understand the sun's electromagnetism. However, we encounter a problem arising due to the sun's complexity. Meanwhile, we realy cannot answere such basic questions as why the electric current flowing away from you creates a magnetic field rotating in clockwise direction. How do narture knows what is clockwise or anticlockwise?It the star based model, electromagnetism laws are not regarded as that fundamental. They emergy from the chaotic behaviour of the sun. Then since all the elements we know ultimately came from the sun, they inherited the properties of the parent star. The star is pictured as a chaotic soup that is spinning. It is a huge vortex ring. This vortex ring in turn creates other smaller and smaller vortices in a fractal like manner. The spin of all the smaller vortices will tend to be alligned with the spin of the entire sun simply because it is the spinning sun itself that drives the smaller vortices. The microscopic vortices will form the atoms. In this way, the reason why the whole electromagnetism obeys a single handed rule such as Fleming's left hand rule is explicable. The origin of the sun's spin itself is taken to be the spinning galaxy. The spinning galaxy in turn is driven by an even greater system. So our Fleming's left hand rule is not due to a necesity. In some other perharps very distant regions, where their 'central sun' begun to spin the other way round, their electromagnetism is opposit to ours. The laws of physics is abit different in such a system.
Read more…
It is not understanding but rather Zeno's like paradoxes that we harvest from the seed of pure reductionism. In the antiguity, a guy expert in what I may term 'Einsteinian assertions' convinced his generation, and a couple of the ones to come that a cheetah, ranning at its top speed, can never overtake any tortoise! Like Einstein, of course he would only conclude that thus world is an illusion. Modern mathematicians amuse themselves that they have solved the riddle through the advent of calculus. However, calculus merely converted the question into an answer! Not that such expressions as phi or even 1/3 is not an answere to any question. Rather, it is unanswerable question. 1(divided by)3=? It is a mathematical kick back card.Here is Zeno's reasoning: lets say a cheetah is chasing a tortoise. At one moment, the tortoise is a head of the cheetah. Lets say it is at point p1. By the time the cheetah arives at point p1, the tortoise would have gone a little bit foward to a new point, p2. By the time the cheetah arives at p2, the tortoise will have gone to a new point, p3,..., it tortoises all the way foward! So the cheetah never gets to even catch up with the tortoise, let alone overtake it! So we must be seeing an illusion or something much worse!Do you spot a problem in Zeno's reasoning? Philosophers think that they have solved it but the only solution is that a whole is greater than the sum of parts! 0.9999999999999999999...is not equal to 1. the left hand side is a vain task of trying to constract a whole thing bit by bit.SPEED IS NOT DISTANCE/TIME!When you were 12 or so, you were introduced with the notion that s=d/t. You might have at first feel an inner refaree fire a tut tut tut but thanks to indoctrinations. It finaly became unquestionable that the wholistic idea of speed is reducable to notions of a tortoise moving along a d axis chasing another beast moving along a time axis.It is this over relying on the mathematical 'speed' that relativist suceeds in obfusicating simple things. By fully analysing speed in terms of distance moved as compared to time taken, they can create any confusion they want. But these relativistic arguments are bunk and its paradoxes are fully on the same par with Zeno's; solvable by discarding the notion that the idea of speed is fully analysable to distance/time taken. A cheetah have a good grip of speed. It knows that to catch a tortoise, it must move faster than it. However, cheetahs don't have clocks, rulers nor do algebra. Speed as d/t is a question and not an answere; d(divided by)t=?However, speed is to distance and time as color green is to blue and yellow. The notion of speed has a wholness that is not reducable to the analysis of distance and time. And so we sweep Zeno's arguments alongside the dirt of s=d/t. He hings on: 'by the time the cheetah is at x,...'. There is no such an x and such a time!! A moving thing is simply moving. It is not in places along some imaginary ruler. Fact is, we develope the notion of speed before we invent a clock. The sound idea is that we need neither ruler, clock nor algebra to tell the following:1.)Cheetah is moving slowlier than the tortoise2.)The cheetah is moving a fast as a tortoise3.)The cheetah is moving faster than the tortoise.All we need is clear our eyes of some 'cobwebs', shake our heads abit and take a strait look at the scenario. Otherwise only expert mathematicians would enjoy a racing competition! The knowledge of speed is fully abstract from the knowledges of distances and time taken.The bunkness of Einstein's relativity is straight foward. Speed is understood as wholistically as distance.If a cheetah is moving faster than a tortoise, and the tortoise is moving faster than the snail, then the cheetah receeds away from the snail faster than it does so away from the tortoise.If I donnot allow Einstein to introduce unbearable complexity of d/t etc, I win instantly! The above statement is just a logical one which must be true for the mathematical numberline to be true. It is IRREFUTABLE!IF X>Y, Y>T, then X-Y is not equal to X-T. Or rather, X-Y=X-T IF AND ONLY IF Y=T. If it can be otherwise, all the algebra they teach since kindagarten flashes down the toilet!A VARIANT OF ZENO'S PARADOX IN MATTERThere is often an attempt to understand flexibility and elasticity by thinking in terms of riggid objects seperated by empty spaces. This is yet another vain attempt rooted in the notion that density=m/v. We arrive at the cousin of Zeno's paradox. Here it goes: if elasticity is due to empty spaces seperating atoms, how do we explain the elasticity of the atoms themselves? Certainly we must go ahead and think of the atoms as to be made of even smaller subatomic particles. Again the tortoise has no bottom! We don't wind up with anything. Rather, elasticity is an inherent property of matter that cannot be understood in terms of anything else. We begine by working with an already existent matter that is single whole. Then we recon that we can keep dividing up the matter for all the eternity. It won't help understand anything! We cannot reduce the matter to sum of its parts.HEISENBERG'S UNCERTAINTY PRINCIPLEWith the above understanding of speed, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle become quite amusing. Remember that it states:The more certain is the location of an object, the more uncertain is its velocity and vice-versa.This is taken to have been a remarkable discovery of nartuer yet it is an obvious logical fact!! We only need to reinject the sanity lost when mathematicians amused themselves that calculus solves the Zeno's paradox. It doesn't! Zeno was working all along with both certain locations and certain velocities. But from the kindagarten lesson, we know that it is meaningless to talk of location of a moving object. We understand a moving object in terms of many locations. There is no such a thing as an instance.Here is how to understand Heisenberg's principle: subatomic particles are moving incesantly. It makes no sense to talk of be certain about the location of an object unless it remains confine in a certain region for a considerable time during which we can say that the particle is in that region. To do that, we need energy that binds the particle in such region. This energy makes the particle dart faster and with more uncertain velocity. Hence the more certain is the location of a quantum particle, the more uncertain is its velocity. It is arived at through pure reasoning!
Read more…
Often you will hear people claim that everything is vibration. The typical claim is that everything is energy vibrating at different frequencies. They will often crown their claims by saying that this is confirmed by quantum mechanics. To a good extend, they are correct but the accurate knowledge of quantum field theory is even more fantastic than this. A quantum field is an encemble of quantum harmonic oscillators. It is an ochestra of unlimited number of guitars pervading everywhere with unknown guitarists! The music emanates from everywhere. Object is a song. Something in space is somehow singing objects into existence!VIBRATION OF ENERGYDo an abstract concept as energy realy vibrate to form objects? Now vibration is originally nothing but a rapid to and fro motion of an object. However, we can generalise this notion to exceedingly abstract cases. We can then talk of an entity altering values of its property from one of its two extreem values to the other. So for instance if you rapidly keep waking and sleeping, we can say that your consciousness is vibrating. But it is still not that good language. Rather we can better say it is YOU who is vibration in the consciousness domain. In the case of the energy of an oscillator, there is a continuous alteration from energy being fully potential, to it being fully kinetic.QUANTUM HARMONIC OSCILLATORThere is this strange thing in quantum mechanics termed wavefunction. Think of it this way: in space is something with some amount of biggness. The biggness of this thing varies from point to point in space.Q: Big what?A: Now that one is a coffee time.We donnot know what the hell is this thing that is big or small in space. It might as well be the devil! We only know that it is big or small. So quantum mechanics is fond of saying there is something we don't know, in we don't know where, doing we don't know what and we don't know why!So I choose to call this entity spirit. Who told the physicist not to say what this thing is? You are going to picture an inhomogenius distribution of 'prana' in space. In some regions, this 'prana' is there in a lot of density while it is there in lesser density in other regions. Somehow, the particles love this 'prana' a lot. In regions with lots of 'prana', there you will find a particle most of the time.So this 'prana' is like a force that bind particles to some region. It is much like the forces that binds the atoms of the string making it capable of vibrating. It provides something like tension. So quantum particle keeps darting back and forth about some region just like a bee buzzing around an hive. It is not a simple to and fro motion. It is extreemly random. It is just like the bee. The energy such a particle would have is proportional to its haverage kinetic energy and hence to its average frequency. We will have energy, E=hf. The strange thing is that this energy increments in descrete amounts. We have hf, 2hf, 3hf, etc. Somehow it absorves photons that are vibrating in harmonic frequencies. An ensemble of such particles darting around and vibrating in harmonic frequencies forms what we call quantum field.
Read more…
When I searched through the net for more about DMT, many talk of it as to induce hallucinations. Hallucinations in turn is defined as perceiving things that donnot exist. So almost everybody is sure that DMT induces hallucinations. However, almost everyone also admit that they donot understands how the brain can induce such hallucinations. This is funny. It is like a roundabout way of saying that we don't freaking know what the DMT is doing. what makes people then so sure that DMT induces hallucinations?On the other side of the pendulum, the hallucinators who think they are perceiving something more than the usual reality use the following reasoning:1.) I was once an atheist2.) Then I chewed peyote3.)Voila! I begun to beleive in godBut peyote is not the answere. It is the question! We are asking; is there god or do people just beleive in a non existent mounster. That people can beleive in god for whatever motive is not the issue. We have known this for over 10000 years. Physicists wondered whether 'god particle' exists. Should they build a Large Hardron Colider or should they simply chew peyote too? If it doesn't work for physics, then it doesn't work for god too.MULTIDIMENSIONAL REALITY AND PERCEPTIONPeople talk of many realms existing in the same space. However, if we could see all these, it would all sum up to a white light. To make sense of it all, the brain has to select which signals that they should form our reality. We know that a substance termed serotonin is responsible for regulating which signals it would pass through synapses. So if you like it, serotonin might as well be seen as a nartural hallucinogen! DMT is said to be a substance whose chemical structure is closely similar to serotonin. So it can bind to neurotransmitter receptors that infact belongs to serotonin. We reason that if DMT closely looks like serotonin, it must behave in a way similar to serotonin. However, it must also behave in a different way to account for how they differ. As DMT mimics serotonin, it too begines to control which signals crosses the synaps. It controls on its own way such that signals from other realms are amplified.We use the following inductive reasoning: Now, every cell in your body has a chemical signal that helps other cells of your body to recognise that they are part of your body and not pathogens. We extend this to mean that even the atoms of our realms has unique 'vibratory signatures' that helps other atoms of this realm to recognise themselves as atoms of the same realm. So the entire universe is like a huge leaving being and the atoms are like its cells! We hypothesis that some of the atoms of DMT etc vibrates in a signature that transmite signals from other realms. So the process in which the DMT binds to the receptors of serotonin works like a band selection in your radio receiver. Remember that within the very same region of your head are coultless of other invisible heads interlaced on the same same space. This makes countless of other synapses interlaced on the same space.COSMIC HALLUCINOGENSMight the cosmos as a whole be hallucinating? Lets close exermine well if the 'empty space' is infact a brain. As we think, electric signals propagates through our neurones in a wave-like manner. If thoughts are some electric signals, why are electric signals elsewhere apart from the brain not thoughts albeit of other form? Close exerminning 'empty space', we find that it is a huge matter-antimatter potential. This matt and antimatter are of oposite charges. This matter-antimatter potential has plenty of energy which keeps generating waves of electric signals exactly similar to those propagating along the axons of neurones. The difference is that ether being less dense, the signals travels faster. Infact they are light signals.We have now seen what is analogous to axons in space. The next question is what is analogous to synapses. If we get this, we have the brain! But first of all why synapes at all? The answer is interpratation. As signals move all the way up to the synapse, the electric signal is then transduced to a chemical signal. This chemical crosses the synaps and it binds to the receptor in the next synaps. The signal that proceeds to the next neuron depends on which chemical (neurotransmitter) was released. Thus the signal is modified accordingly depending on the chemical. This modification constitutes interpratation of the signal.In the space, we saw that the signal in the axon is analogous to light that is randomly created due to quantum fluctuations. This light travels for some distance. Then suddenly, the light is converted into a pair of matter and antimatter. Henceforth the signal propagates slowlier as a matter untimatter pair. This is exactly like a synapse! This period of matter antimatter pair is very breif and the pair quickly recombines to form a photon that is neither necesarily of the same frequency as of the original photon nor of the same 'vibratory signature'. Exactly, the signal gets interprated depending on what particles they were created as the pair. Thes particles acts like neurotransmitters. The most abundant ones, cosmic serotonin, is electron-positron pair. There are several others, we have quarks, pions, kaons, neutrinos, neutrons, protons etc and their respective antiparticles. These particles acts as neurotransmitters in 'empty space'. Some are cosmic hallucinogens!
Read more…
Ever since the days of Galileo, 'measurement' has barrowed its way into becoming an important ritual in the temple of science. When we talk of measurement, many have in mind the act of gazing at some apparatus and then spitting out some number. However, such is not the true essence of the philosophy of measurement. Essentially, measurement mean just comparison. It is this misunderstanding of measurement that has lead to unhealthy distinction of what is falsely labled 'subjective' vs 'objective'. Actually, either everything is measurable or nothing is measurable.The human mind is capable of distinguishing three things: A is bigger than B, B is bigger than A, A is as big as B. This is essentially what we do even when we measure using a ruler. We keep saying oh, the book is longer than the 2cm mark, it is longer than 3cm mark, it is longer than the 4cm mark, it is shorter than the 8cm mark, it is equal to 6 cm mark. Due to experience, we do this so fast that we rarely think about what we are doing. That is why I often wish that we remain kindagarteners in some things. If we cannot simply tell whether a thing is simply bigger than, smaller than or equal to another thing, then we cannot even measure with a ruler. So every time you see someone trying to know if a table inside a house is perharps bigger than the house by taking some measurement using a ruler, then you know at once that you are dealing with an idiot.MEASUREMENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH NUMBERS!!A good example of measurement is the one done by shop keepers using beam balance. You more or less take some sexy stone by the river side and then you keep balancing it with the potatoes etc on the right. The shop keeper hardly need even to know 1 1=2 to do this. He only need sharp eyes. Numbers along a scale is empty lables only neaded to help in remembering what the thing was equal to in size! Thanks to the fact that we have memorised the sequence. We could have placed variety of colors along the scale or cards such as kick back and joker etc. Only that they are toucher to remember for most of us. Remember that when in kindagarten, we absolutely neaded numbers along the circumfrence of the clock. As we get used to the clock, we begine to include only 12, 9,6&3. Then we begun to drop numbers all together and leave only marks. Eventualy, we did away with even the marks and made a clock with only pointers in a plain 'scale'!!PHYSICS MEASUREMENTSActually, they should be better terme 'Galilean physics measurdments'. In healthy physics, we mean 'physical' and we incooperate everything ditectable including smells, tests colors etc. In galiliean physics, we ultimately measure something by forcing it to fit in a scale. This gives impression that such things as smells are imeasurable in themselves but only due to the fact that we can convert them to some motions. This is a terrible error! As long as we can distinguish the smell of iodine from that of say an orange, we say that in principle, smells are measurable in themselves without theorising that they are reducable to some motions.Mathematical physics has fooled us into thinking that there is such a thing in narture as a measure of a thing as in some standard. There is non! A standard is an arbitrary choice made by the profesors. A good illustration of the conundrum is this ambiquitos term we call 'mass'. At one moment, it is the quantity of matter. So we might say that one kilogram is the mass of such and such volume of water. So when we are talking of the mass of a stone, it is tempting to say that we are trying to figure out how much volume of water do we need to compress it to become of the same volume of the stone and of equal 'hardness'. But then we realise that 'hardness' is not the same thing as density, for instance water anomolously expand to become harder! We opt to use a beam balance. But then we realise that energy content of the thing affects gravity. THERE IS REALY NO SUCH A THING AS QUANTITY OF MATTER!! Matter is unquantifyable!!QUANTUM MEASUREMENTThis is just to extend the absurdity of trying to look for a measure of a thing. Even the physicists came to understand that there is a limit of such. The best way I may illustrate to you is using a drop of oil. We are trying to measure its diameter. Initially, it is almost perfectly spherical. However, you realise that fluid drops are highly adhesive and they will quickly get distorted if they get near to your ruler. So the simple act of measuring the length of something must always change that length! In classic world, we can savely niclect such. But even an hardly visible expansion is a couple of atoms longer. In quantum world, it is a behemoth eror!People think that quantum mechanics is talking of some voodoo happening between the conscious observation and the quantum world. Thats funny, how can we observe atoms? Can we observe something of length 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001mitres? worse is when they think that physicists are talking of something applicable in classic world. But it is quite easy to prove that there is no quantum effects in classic world. Just stare at your bag, then look somewhere else, then look back at your bag. I bet you can keep observing your bag and yet it will seat squarely on the same spot. I mean even if you want some cheap lift to the airport, you won't get it, not by merely observing it! But the reason is pretty simple: the cow is composed of horns, eyes, tail, head, legs etc. The legs would wanna go to andromeda when you observe, the nose wanna quantum jump to sirius, the head wanna wave to the moon etc. Eventualy the cancel each other. Too bad for the magician, too good for the cow. The bottom line is that if quantum effects were there in our world, the world would be utterly useless.
Read more…
"S=KlogW" BoltzmannLudwig Bolzmann brought about a deep understanding of entropy to physics. The flow of entropy is said to be due to just mere statistics! Due to the insight we understand that entropy of a system increases due to the fact that high entropy state is more likely to occur than the former. So as the presumably blind particles do their trial and error in finding for how to rearange themselves, they will tend to occupy a state that is more likely to be found in at a latter time; higher entropy.This picture of entropy at once creats unsurmountable problem. If the low entropy is an highly unlikely state, why was universe in such a state to begine with? There is no clear answer as to why entropy should be low in the past.In a state of maximum entropy, which is thermodynamic equilibrium, we donot realy have a true heat death. This is because Boltzmann does not make it impossible for entropy to reduce. It makes it astonishingly unlikely. A system (such as ocean) that is in thermodynamic equilibrium is never dead. It keeps boiling, spinning, dancing etc. It is a state of maximum chaos. These random eruptions is termed 'thermal fluctuations'. The zero point energy said to be in vacuume is in such a state. In the latter, we term it quantum fluctuation.Boltzmann reasoned that in a chaotic system, all manner of rearangements would eventually be acheived. If nothing forbids, it will happen! It is only a matter of time before anything can pop out from the ocean! In the extreem case, nothing will stop a brain from randomly poping. It isn't impossible. It is just unlikely! But given an infinit time, it approaches certainity that it would pop out!BOLTZMANN BRAINBoltzmann brain is a nightmare for many cosmologists. They try much to see how to avoid such a fate but they can't find a way out. The terror of gods can never escape from science. If we are here due to chances, then chances is god! Boltzmann man brain paradox clearly demonstrate that if you opt to explain everything by chances due to fear of demons, gods, angels etc, then you are a fool! A LITTERAL seven headed mounster that can erupt by pure chances in the quantum sea will serve as equal harm as any other devil! Quantum sea is just a sleeping anything!! Chances are not save either!Boltzmann thought that the universe, from broader perspective, is in a state of thermodynamic equilibrium already. So this view does away with the nagging problem as to why the entropy in the past was low. So as the sea was violently churning up and down, voila! Order was born from chaos. (btw see Daniel 7:2-3). Pop! The universe come. The obvious nagging question is why the universe and not something else. Apparently, this never stop to bother Boltzmann. It seems more probable for a brain to emerge from the soup than the entire universe. This brain would be dreaming of the entire universe. That is a Bolzmann brain.PROBLEM WITH BOLTZMANN BRAIN IDEAThe idea that we are a Boltzmann brain floating in the mid air and dreaming about the universe is problematic in one way. The very ideas of thermodynamics are gotten by observing the very same univers we are wishing to dismiss it as an illusion. If all the knowledge and the memory is false, then it must include the knowledge of thermodynamics. If the knowledge of thermodynamics is false, then the idea of Boltzmann brain must be also false because it is infered from thermodynamics. The idea is infact a paradox.It is not clear why Boltzmann, if he could think to this far, still artribute the cause of awareness to the brain. Brain is part of the universe which should be seen as an illusion too. If the brain is an illusion, we can't claim to realy know the cause of consciousness. If brain is an illusion, then we can't use the dream analogy to understand anything at all because the idea of a dream comes from the idea that the brain can creat a virtual reality. The 'virtual' vs 'real' is a dichotomy that can't get to make sense without the idea of a brain as in virtual=creation by the brain. If the brain is illusion, the idea that we are dreaming must be false!!One other problem is that perharps biology is too complicated for the simple mind of a physicist. There is a sharp difference between a dream and what we may term it as an experience in a realm. Indead there must be a difference. If there was no such difference, we might not have coined this term 'dream' at all. We would have simply talk of visiting some other realm. But the dream is fleating. It isn't a surprise because it is due to a volatile memory. If the brain can house such an imence data as to constitute a universe, including new daily discoveries, then we are smarter than we think! The only data bank that can house such a huge memory is the universe itself! So it defeats the original claim that the universe is more complex than the brain! What was the purpose of the entire drivel which aimed at saying that the brain is more likely to pop due to chances?MERIT OF BOLTZMANN BRAINSLike I have hinted, the idea of a Boltzmann brain makes sense only if the entire universe itself is a Boltzmann brain! But I don't beleive that this is so. I beleive that it will become so in future. It will not pop out surreptitiously like Boltzmann thought. It will evolve. We will then not be necesarily dreaming of this univers. We will dream of all the paradises we want! The paradises won't be volatile nor will we be solitary in the dream. Within the dream, we can communicate telepathicaly sinse we share a huge brain! Such a dream will be like a real experience for all relevant purposes.With this in mind, lets see if a dream is realy equivalent to reality. In quantum field theory, we have come to learn that what we think of them as isolate particles are infact pulses in a quantum field! One can also see that as we dream, what we are seeing in the dream is just a pulse in our neurons! So infact it makes lots of sense to say that the entire universe is a Boltzmann brain that is dreaming of a realm. As long as you think of the universe itself as to be dreaming, and not your own tiny brain, then it makes perfect sense. You are able to experience the dream of the universe simply because you are part of the cosmic Boltzmann brain.PROBLEMS WITH BILIARD BALL REASONINGStill Boltzmann was artributing everything to blind jiggling balls. So everything is under the mercy of chances. When a physicist talk of heat, what he have in mind is some entities that are in a blind, pointless dance. We tend to think of heat as chaotic stuff that can possibly creat only disorder. But is this realy so? Let us consider a diamond. When you ask of what converts sout to diamond, then it will be the very heat! Why would randomly moving particles ends up spitting out such exellently ordered crystals? The answer is simple, 'chaos' is a term we throw in when we have no better explanation! It reffers to not what we know but what we don't know. Such equations as S=KlogW are just a way of quantifying ignorance concerning what is actually going on. If a dragon pops out of the chaotic soup, it may be more prudent to admit that we don't know what went on than to hail 'chances'! Or 'chaos'! If you are to see the works of Paul Dirac, you might only see chaose till you understand the math! Boltzmann also assumed that distant particles don't interact in some way. He had in mind some sureal billiard ball entirely seperated from each other. These billiard balls can but only knock each other. But we know that particles also pull each other even over distance. If there is no such a thing as 'ideal gas' that Boltzmann was talking of but a physicist would always excuse himself by talking of forces, then what does Boltzmann's entropy got to do with reality?Perharps you may think that existence of such things as diamond is easy; the forces are symmetric. You are totally mistaken! 'Symmetry' is the question, not the answere. It merely kicks the ball somewhere else. Physicists now know that particles do decay. Things are not the way they are out of any necessity. There is a deep reason. It involves planck's constant and fine structure constants.
Read more…
Modern physics is full of mind blowing ideas and claims. The extreem ones of course are quantum mechanics and relativity. It seems that Stephen Hawking wondered what might happen when we combine the weirdest claims of relativity, such as singularities with the wierdest ones from quantum mechanics such as non locality. Of course the resulting beast would far outperform such things as gods, angels and demons in what it can do. But the immovable walls colided with unstopable stones!Physicists were curious to see if we can harvest all these fantasies while dodging all the absurdities. So all the fantasies were attracted to the blackhole to see how they may dance. But a last man standing war broke! A tut tut menu from hell blew a wistle. Then the wrestling match was started in the blackhole with a ring of fire surrounding them in the even horizon; the firewall paradox!Of late, several minds are gravitating around blackholes. They are trapped in the event horizon. Clearly blackholes are powerfully attracting many people. You will hear of all the bizare claimes of modern physics getting around the fire wall paradox:1.)Blackholes and singularities2.)Wormholes3.)Quantum entanglements4.)Particles and antiparticles5.)Negative energy6.)Curved spaces7.)Quantum nonlocality etcAll of these are voicing something in the paradox.It all started with Hawking, the man who have been gawking at blackholes since 1970s. It is the Bekenstein-Hawking Radiation (BH radiation). Or rather Black- Hole radiation (BH radiation). Hawking finds that blackholes are not black at all. Rather, they are warmholes (not wormholes). They are hot and radiates photons. Every one is interested with what this can of event horizon might be enclosing. It is said that all the information about what is inside is written on the surface of this can. But of course curiosity never ends there. We realy want to open it. Pop! It is a fresh can of worms! Some of the worms are litteraly comming out from the wormholes!These warmholes are a can of worms enclosing wormholes.BLACKHOLE PARADOXESIt is said that nothing can come out of a black. It is a sink that doesn't source anything. However paradoxes are comming out of it day and night. It can only spit out paradoxes and swallow everything else. Lets put it all together. Nothing can come out of the blackhole and yet it can evaporate! As it do so, it doesn't violate the laws of conservation of matter and energy! Can even god perform this miracle? Its this way, at the event horizon, some strange, buzzing particles are said to be incesantly created and anihillated there. Some escapes and some are trapped there. It is those traped that reduces the mass of the blackhole. Say it again: as the particles from vacume gets trapped by the blackhole, it REDUCES, not INCREASES the mass of the blackhole!!You should be beginning to sense that whatever is getting sucked there must be something akin to a demon or even more bizare. It isn't even an antiparticle. Let me put it this way: we know that when a particle-antiparticle pair colide, they don't realy anihilate each other. Rather, they turn into photons. Energy is never lost in the process as the REST MASS of the pair is converted to energy and energy is still just the same as mass. It turns out that what enters the blackhole is a negative of energy. Granted, Paul Dirac was trying to deal with the nonsensical negative energy when he eventually concluded that antiparticles must exist. But these antiparticles did away with the need for negative energy. However, this does not mean that no one can massage Dirac's equations and mathematicaly split them in negative and positive frequency. Such is what Hawking does. Then he accelerates through space and voila the particles manifests from the void! Actually, it is always so in quantum field theory. There are always particles comming in and out of existence. However, in Hawking's case, they nolonger pops in and out. Rather, they begine to giggle around like any other ocean. So what quantum field theory is saying is that whether or not there are ordinary particles in vacuume depend on how you are accelerating while you are looking at the vacuume!!! This is called Unruh Effect.INFORMATIONWhat should 'information' mean in physics. Here it goes: supposing there was one thing in the universe, doing only one thing. Then the only thing to inform a guy from another universe about this universe is that one thing. So there would be only a single bit of information in that universe. But what does such got to do with quantum mechanics? In Qm, 'God play dice'. A dice can have say 6 sides. So there are 6 things to inform a guy about it if you were playing dice. We can't be certain about the outcome of a dice but we can be certain that it will be any one of the 6. It doesn't mean anything to say that we can through a dice and be uncertain that it is one of the six. The sum of all the probabilities must equal 1. In this case, (1/6)x6=1. The loose of quantum information would mean that we are tossing a six sided dice which does not exist; an absurdity.It is such demands that makes the solution of Schrodinger equation be something like:|w(t)>=U(t,t0)|w(t0)>;|w(t0)>=wave function at some initial time t0|w(t)>=wave funtion at some latter timeU(t,t0)=time evolution operatorThis equation states that given wavefunction at some time, t0, the wavefunction at some latter time, t follows. Specifically, |w(t)> , the wavefunction at latter time can only be zero if it was zero initially. It doesn't even make sense to talk of zero wave function cause it is a probability amplitude. As a sum of all possibilities, it can't be a variable that can latter disapear.For the wavefunction to disapear at some latter time, such as would happen if blackhole was to evaporate at some latter time, without anything comming out from it is fatal to quantum mechanics. That is why I have taken troubles to show the maths to you; that you may understand that it is not a trivial issue that demand just a modification. It demands that blackboards be wiped clean!! Thats why physicist would rather swallow a bizare claim as that particles are tunnelling out from wormholes.NEGATIVE FREQUENCYUnless we redefine the term 'frequency', the idea of a negative of frequency is just as ubsurd as the idea of a negative of probability. Yet the physicist boldly use this idea, without physical explanation, when deriving Hawking radiation. One wonders why they would be latter troubled of lose of information. Try to physically explain a negative of frequency and the root of problems unfold before your very eyes! The universe is nonlocal!Often, I have tried to show the true origin of planck's constant; spin. When a thing spin with velocity v, we easily see that the frequency is related to v by;2prf=vf=frequencyr=radiusp=phiso negative of f is just a spin in a counter clockwise direction. Then we will get the meaning of negative of energy from Einstein's equation:E=-hfh=planck's constantE=energySo if there exist a negative of energy, it means that the univers is spin polarized! It means that for everything spinning this way, there exists a mirrow image of it somewhere. The universe would have perfect copies of information in myriads of places. The universe is an hollogram in such sense, no paradox of loss of information. But this idea is fatal to Einstein's theory of locality! But I can show you that we have to fully abandon locality if we are to give a physical meaning to negative energy!
Read more…
What was christian baptism supposed to mean originally? Was it just a process of turning a dry sinner into a wet sinner? I think this is what modern christians insinuate when they speak of a it as a mere symbol that demonstrate to the world that one has crossed over and is now a member of another gang of beleivers. So they unwittingly admit that baptism is just a meaningless gesture. I don't think so! They must have lost a deep, esoteric meaning of babtism that was known to the original gnostics. Why take all the trouble to wet yourself in cold water to merely show that you are now a christian?When Nahman went to prophet Elisha for an healing work, Elisha never unlished a majic wand such as 'be healed'. He told Nahman to go to river Jordan and dip himself in and out seven times! This looked like just a mockery! I mean do this bald headed guy think that I never take bath in my home? What the hell do the water in river Jordan has? Of course the explanation a contemporary christian offers fo why Elisha opted to send Nahman to river jordan is absurd. That is why they don't understand the original meaning of baptism. The modern christian picture of God is an unintelligible being who can absurdly do everything, including colliding unstopable stones against immovable walls. Why then should such a being offer instructions to you exept just to test your faith? Allright that is it 'testing faith' is the explain it all term for the whatever motive behind every instruction in the bible. God sits somewhere in a throne watching for those who mess with the rules. The rules themselves have no meaning on their own. God just want to see if you are a rude guy or not!Similarly, in the account of genesis, we are told of a being who was alone in a place called nowhere speaking to the void. In modern christianity, miracles are ontological absurdities. It is this hard to swallow, nonsensical doctrines that modern christian philosophers as William Lane Graig are championing. Then they wonder why church buildings are being sold to be used for bars, prostitutions etc. They wonder why spiders are spinning their nets, and fungi is growing in church seats. Bible writers knew better. The genesis account is clear. By the time God was uttering commands, the heavens, the earth and the waters were already there only that they were formless, dark and empty. The bible doesn't tell us how God created the heavens and the earth. It stops at declaring that he did it.The picture of Yahweh is very clear and is not what christians teach. It is clearly shown when Moses wanted to see Yahweh. He gave him instructions. The instructions were not merely to test Moses's faith. They were not mere rituals with only a symbolic meaning. Yahweh was hiding in a place Moses could see him!! Yahweh was NOT an all pervading, nonsensical nothing that only amounts to an impotent, abstract concept. He was enthroned somewhere with an all pervading 'aura' termed Holy Spirit. The spirit of Yahweh is not homogenius everywhere at every time. It manifests as angels in other places.What then is the spirit? Modern philosophy says what it is not, i.e 'not matter'. This was not the original meaning of the word 'spirit'. First of all the word 'spirit' resorted to an entity and not an abstract concept. Originally, spirit was coined from 'Ruach' which means wind!Q:Just wind?A:Yep!:)Modern man nolonger find THINGS that sexy. He waves nonsensical abstract concepts all the day! To make people gawk, you have to mension waves, mind, consciousness, nothingness, dimensions, bla bla bla. Such things as stones, water, air soil? Mmh mmh mmh,..., no they are too dry! They seek 'prove' for spirit and deny everything that they see or that come to the mind as to be the spirit! The 'search for truth' is an endless chase after one's own shadow. But spirit is wind!! It is too simple for the proud mind to discern!The ancient men divided things into 4 categories; fire, air, eath and water. Out of these, all things came. The spirit belongs to the 'air' category of things. Air is a good analogy in this way: Supposing you somehow donnot feel the air rush past your skin. Then you will only see its effect out there. You will see trees sway, float etc. Unless you posit an invisible thing that exist out there such as 'wind', the world would work in an absurd way! That was why jesus told Nichodemus:"The wind blows wherever it please, you hear it sound but you cannot tell where it is comming from nor where it is going to. The same is true for everyone born of spirit and water"In physcics, air is an example of a field with an underlieing scalar field. Mathematically, air more or less behave like Higgs Field! It is more than a coincidence that higs is termed 'God particle' there is a high probability that we have found what ancient men termed 'Ruach' or 'prana' etc. Baptism is a full imersion. Even if we endorse the catholic verson of pouring the water to the top of your head, that would be similar to the case where the fire of kundalini entres the body from the head. Then baptism of the holy spirit and fire would be the real fire of kundalini. In the full imersion version, we have to consider the quantum field that pervades everywhere such as the higgs field.The spirit of God often comes and momentarily dwell in water! To think that it is equaly everywhere is misleading! It is more like electricity that can be tapped more by appropriate means. So in many cases, we gotta get imerced at the right time!! Muslims are thought to keep washing their heads as they pray. Remember also the case of the pool of siloam where the spirit of God came and stir the water. The water then aquired healing abilities. These are not ontological absurdities. To understand it even in physics, we have only to change how we understand thermodynamics abit. A Bose-Einstein condensate is near to becoming one such 'water of life'. Then the best one in the bible is genesis 1:1 where the spirit of God was said to hover upon the waters. It is this teaching that is lacking in christian baptism!We have seen that the important property of water and air that earned them the title 'spirit' is fluidity. This enables it to clean, replenish and connect different things. In modern physics, we have come to know of even more subtle fluids such as electromagnetic fields etc. In ancient times, people were contended with real things that the know they existed and they identified them as spirit. Similarly, we should embrace the quantum field as the spirit! It is endowed with even far more amazing properties than the wind. It is intelligent and can superimpose layers of realms. Our understanding of matter has improved. As a ripple in the quantum field, several waves can be superimposed on top of one another akin to how radio waves from different stations can be superimposed in the same space. We see one realm in myriads of others that are quantum superimposed on each other like the Schrodinger cats. The kingdom of God that is within, that Jesus talked of is nowadays understandable. We are nolonger ignorant of the 'how' of multidimensional reality. Our level of understanding has expanded.
Read more…
Causality is a phenomenon we understand intuitively but do find it difficult to define the word unambiguously. At one point we amuse ourselves that a cause of an event is that which necesarily comes prio to that event. However, we do understand that cause must come prio but that isn't the only essence of causality. For instance we understand that the cue ball must move prio to the billiard ball that is caused to move by the cue ball but in case the cue ball was just a shadow, it won't cause anything even if it necesarily came at that moment. So from a priori knowledge, it is true that all causes must come prio to the effect. But it is not true a priori that that which must come prio the effect is the cause. So time ordering is not the only essence of causality.It is no wonder that the idea of time symmetry present a conudrum when we try to understand causality. Some people seems to be impressed by the idea of time symmetry. They say like space, why is the time axis not symmetrical too? However, recent discoveries may burry those hopes in the grave of forget. Instead of thinking of another space-like symmetry such as a time axis, we should be questioning if space itself is symmetrical! When we were young, gravity seems simpler to understand because we thought that space is asymmetrical. There is a place in space, akin to past, wherein we come from but we cannot go to. Recent works in gravity suggest that we were not that wrong sinse it associate the thermodynamic 'arrow of time' with gravity.You should understand that what physicist mean by 'time riversable dynamics' or 'time symmetrical dynamics' may not be what you think. Most of the laws of physics are said to be time riversable. The second law of thermodynamics is not. Recently, it was shown that the electroweak force is not either! Electroweak, like thermodynamics waves bye bye to the past! It adds more 'arrows of time'. There is also the cosmological arrow. If the universe is expanding, it does so irretrivocably. So when you think of going backwards in time, have in mind that the entire cosmos won't halt, make a U turn and contract back to accomodate you! Gravity is a good example of a symmetry in that in ideal case, if you throw a stone upwards with a certain force, it comes back and arrives with the same force. It conserves information in this sense. Or in that a planet under gravity goes around, comes around, goes around,...,etc. Gravitantional 'arrow of time' is cyclic. But the thermodynamic 'arrow' and the cosmos at large is linear, whether you like it or not! What goes around does not always comes around. In this universe, both welcome and bye bye is real!You have seen that when we talk of time riversable dynamics, we don't mean anything absurd at all. It simply means that there exists a perfectly symmetrical riverse of the act. When you drive the car foward along an s-shaped path, you can at any point, swith to the riverse gear and move backwards as if we are rewinding the film of time and viewing it in backwards 'direction of time'. We say the dynamics at work (electrodynamics) in you is body is riversable. But you are thus not moving backwards in time. Moving in riverse is still a doing of something and not undoing the thing. You won't regain the fuel you used when you come back to the starting point. You will rather use more fuel! There is a beast that has no riverse gear; thermodynamics.But you see that the thermodynamics is not riversable for understandable reason. We have no way of telling the going smock to halt, make a U turn, come back to the exhaust pipe and remanufacture the petrol. The smock is too stupid to understand what we want! It is in this point do I link time symmetry to intelligence! It is here also where I identify the cause of a thing only to the thing felt within. A brute object cannot realy enjoy this property we call causing. It can only be caused. In cause, there is intend. A good way of showing you the relationship between time symmetry and intelligence is this way: gaining knowledge is time symmetric. If you see an house, the 'house' goes to your head. The same same 'house' can come from your head to the outer world. Then consider this other dynamics apart from thermodynamics. We can always wonder how a brute object as a magnet can tell north from south. Also we wonder how the moon seems to know where the earth is and remain faithfull to it and move around it endlessly. It seems a little bit intelligent. Again, it is because the path of moon is time symmetric. At least it understands one thing that only minds can understand: symmetry. We never wonder much on why the brute smock take the whatever path they take. It is the time symmetric dynamics (electrodynamics) that makes your brain. If you still doubt that electromagnetism is intelligent, just take a look at your own brain!
Read more…
Now this one may amuse the modern physicist. However, like I have been hinting, it is all due to the fact that the whole of physics is what I termed it 'Galilien physics.' It only solves half of the puzzles. This is the reason why modern science is quite impotent when it comes to explaining where the consciousness comes from. It is like we donnot even move along that direction at all because it is along an entirely different dimension.The only way to account for the existence of consciousness in this world is to include it alongside other things we never bother to explain where they come from. These are matter, space, time, energy, temperature etc. Excluding consciousness from this list is on no good grounds. Once we understand this way, consciousness becomes like anything else. It becomes like energy whereby we can now think of level or the measure of consciousness. For instance in unconsciousness, we say it is of zero amount etc.When I talk of 'amount of consciousness', it may not be the way you think. To 'measure' awareness, we can for instances say that a person who has stared at the moon for one hour has become more aware of the moon than the person who has stared at it for just seconds. So the level of consciousness is proportional to the time taken during which we are conscious. In this sense, quantized consciousnes is simple. It is just the flickering one. In the period during which we are conscious, there is a rapid alteration between moments of sleep and moments of wake.STROBOSCOPIC EFFECTOne interesting thing about flickering consciousness is that if we combine it with stroboscopic effect, it explains how layers of realms vibrating decoherently can coexist in the same space. We experience a reality that flickers coherently with our consciousness. This would be to say that the outer world is changing too. It flickers rapidly between several realms but it appears steady in the same realm due to stroboscopic effect.This should not be hard to appreciate as light itself comes in juncks. I only need to posit another superimposed vibration of light that is now coherent. The ordinary, visible coherence of light gives rise to LASERS. Stroboscopic effect can be used to explain lots of things. For instance now that you understand that we never explain where qualia comes from, we may regard the color of a thing as intrinsic property of the thing! So why then is color blue identified with a certain frequency? We say blue fundamental particles flickers very fast and the light itself vibrates not as any back and forth motion but as as levels of brightenss. Only the light flickering at such and such frequency will reveal to us a blue thing for blue things flickers at such and such frequency, i.e coherently with the light vibrating at a certain frequency.TIME DILLATIONHow can two observers experience two different amounts of the same duration? If consciousness itself is flickering alongside the outer world, this is easy to understand. The amount of duration you will experience is directly proportional to the frequency of your flickering. Alternatively, if be periods during which you are aware is increased, they will sum up into an experience of a longer duration of the same duration. It is an alteration in what I may term it as 'chronos density'.PLANCK'S TIMEPhysicists say that time itself 'happens' in juncks. Such a discontinuous time would naturaly imply that consciousness is quantized alongside time. However, we can take the advantage of moments during which 'there is no time' to infact squize other realms there. We happen to see this realm simply because it is coherent with our consciousness.
Read more…
New age has borrowed lots of physics words notably 'energy' and 'frequency' and they think they have just done that; poetry and that what they talk about actually collaps when we accurately zero in on physics. Right? Wrong!! There is a one to one corespondence between what New Age is struggling to say and what physics is saying! If there is unseen world, then there is a one to one correspondence between that world and this world. As above, so below. We can for instance talk of 'rising of frequency' in poetic sence. However there is a symmetrical counterpart in physics!Atoms of elemens donnot absorb electromagnetic waves anyhowly. They absorb certain narow bandwiths and filter off the rest. Literaly, atoms only absorb frequencies that resonate with it and filters out those that it doesn't resonate with it. The set of frequencies that an atom of a given elemen absorbs and also emits are termed emision or absorbtion spectrum of that element. Absorbtion spectrum is unique for a given element so that each element has a vibratory signature given by the set of frequencies that resonate with it. I might look like I am talking of some new age idea yet I am using a dead accurate physics language!Once an astrophysicist has identified that this is hydrogen in distant galaxies, he finds that the distant hydrogen seems to be of lower frequency. This is termed redSHIfT and is interprated as to mean that the distant galaxies are speeding away from us and thus space is inferred to expand. Recently, however, I came across the idea of astronomer Halton Arp who says that rather, red shifting is an intrinsic property of a galaxy and that the cosmos might not be expanding at all! Scratching my head to understand this, I conclude that generaly, the frequency of the universe is exponentially increasing! With this, an entirely different picture of universe unfolds.DOPPLER EFFECTIf you have listened carefully to a car moving past you, you will hear a woosh! This is due to the fact that the frequency of anything sounding in the car, such, as an engine, shifts as the car, which was comming towards you now quickly head away from you. This is called Doppler effect. Doing some reasoning, we deduce that the frequency of a thing moving away from a given observer, as perceived by the observer is lower than it actualy is. So it is this usual non sequiter logic that physicists used to infer that galaxies are running away from us. Physicist extensively use the following reasoning: If I say abracadabra, then it rained, then if it rains, I must have said abracadabra! It doesn't matter how absurd it is. If they donnot see me, I must be made solely of dark matter!Let us now deduce that we can also think that the frequency of every atom in the univers is infact rather steadily increasing.If we do some simple calculation, we find that two frequencies are related this way:f/f'=1-v/cf'=the apparent frequency observed or heardf=the real frequencyv=the speed of the moving bodyc=the speed of the wave relaying the signal, e.g light or sound.Doing some massaging a bit, we find that:df'/f'=v/cdf'=small change in f'. Note that f' is the observed frequency, which we now wish to reinterprate it as the real frequency which was lower in the past. No more Doppler shift. Distant galaxies appear of lower frequency simply because the farther we look, the earlier the moment we observe!Now Edwin Hubble studied luminosities and redshifts of distant galaxies and concludes that the farther a galaxy, the faster it receeds away from us. He plots some graphs and finds the following formula; Hubble's law:v=Hxv=the speed of the galaxyx=distance to the galaxyH=hubble's constant which equals 2.3x10^-18(s^-1)So we can writev=Hcdtc=speed of lightdt=time taken for the light to cover the distance x, i.e for the light to reach us.So we replace the v in the equation: df'/f'=v/c with Hcdt and find:df'/dt'=f'Hsince the shift gives us how the frequency was at some earlier time, dt moments ago, df'/dt must be giving us the rate at which frequency changes with time in our model and we see that it is directly proportional to the frequency itself. The higher the frequency, the faster it increases. This equation resembles many equations in physics, for instance Newton's law of cooling; the lower the temperature in the body, the faster it cools. Also the law of radio activity is exactly of this form. The radio active matter decays exponentially. Also, the Boltzmann's law of entropy is exactly of this form. Using simple calculus, we can right the frequency explicitly:f=Fe^(Ht)F=Some arbitrary constant frequency.Or we can writeHt=ln(f/F)We can keep playing games abit. We can say that the universe is filled with particles incesantly vibrating and wiggling back and forth. Because it is jerking around, we can reintroduce hubble's law, v=Hx but keeping in mind that what is moving now is a tiny particle, not a galaxy and x is a tiny microscopic distanc. So we have H=v/x and:vt/x=ln(f/F)t/x is a reciprocal of some velocity, call it u. so we have:v/u=ln(f/F)=v^2/uv.let us say velocity is quantised so v=nu, n is intergerv^2/nu^2=ln(f/F)=mv^2/nmu^2=E'/nEE'=some energyE=energy at some other time.Since frequency of encemble of particles is closely related with their temperatures, at some medium, f/F is just the ratio of temperatures, T/T'. So finaly we haveE'=nEln(T/T')Which is Boltzmann's law of entrophy, explaining to us that our frequency increase in the cosmos is due to the change in entropy of the cosmos! However, as f increases, it is due to a GRAVITANTION and not an expansion. It is due to etheric contraction. So I arrive at almost the exact opposite of what the establishment arives at; BY READING THE SAME DATA!!QUANTISED RED SHIFTSSome scientists have reported that red shift is quantised. This is riduculus in the establishment's version as it implies that galaxies exists in concentric spheres around us making us to sit squarely at the centre of the cosmos! But in the model we saw, it is a no brainer. As df/dt=fH, we only need to say the various frequencies in the universe are all harmonic, which is consistent with quantum view of atomic frequencies.'AGE OF THE UNIVERSE'In this model, universe is eternal. When we calculate the time it takes for the frequency to double (analogy with radio activity testing), we get around 9.5 billion years. If the age of the earth is 4.5 billion years, we say after the frequency of the universe doubled, the earth was formed. After 4.5 billion years men discovers Hubble constant. This is a total of 14billion years. The age of the univers is said to be 13.8 billion years. But you now see that in the 'beginning' the universe was vibrating one octave lower. Making it of the realm unobservable, i.e a realm of too low frequency. After 9.5 years, there will new heaven and earth, the universe with a vibration of exactly one octave higher. It has been going on ad infinitum and so it will go on.
Read more…
The picture you get concerning the origins of the theories of relativity is that of a star treking superman, possibly a godman from 5th dimension. The whole world, so it is thought was barried in the dark ages of 'Newtonian physics' and the all over sudden, a guy of extraordinary intelligence was alone thinking of such mind bending ideas as bending spaces, bending time, bending spoons and other scientific magics. However what I will show you here is what may shake your faith in honesty of mainstream science.First of all understand that making a breath taking claim that you may not even understand it yourself does not require an extraordinary level of intelligence. Such dare devil claims that fly against common sense are very common in history. The first one was made by a philosopher of antiguity named Zeno. Zeno convinced his generation and some to come that a tortoise can never overtake a cheetah!The kind of behaviour that I wish to point out to you is one that many people suspect when they close exermine mathematical physics. This is that of beginning from answer and then looking out for a question! However, when the work is presented formally, people are generaly ignorant of the exact procedure that was used to tackle the issue. This has the effect of making the work of a scientist or a mathematician appear harder than it actually is. The reason for instance why many people find math difficult is because they ask the wrong questions while tackling them, and tricky enough, it is those wrong questions that are poused!The one that I would like to show you is what it may be hard to swallow: general relativity(GR) was known prior to special relativity (SR)! The mathematicians working on SR did so having GR somewhere at the back of their minds! This fly at odds with what you are taught because you think that GR was such a hard idea to come about as to require one to somehow tap the very mind of God but this is far from truth! The lie commonly told is that not only was Einstein the first one to think of GR, he was the only one thinking so in his time. The truth is that GR was an object of German mathematician's massages some 70 or so years before Einstein! The first person to wonder if gravity was a curvarture of space (not spacetime) was Bernhard Riemann. Not only was Riemann the first to say that we need not to think of universe as 3 dimensional but somewhere from 0 to infinite dimensional, he provided all the relevant visualization mathematical wayrounds this issue! The invisible fabric was already woven completely. All what remained was an emperor to buy it. Einstein turned out to be the emperor. (don't be surprised by mathematicians talking of more that 3 othornomal spatial axi. It is all because math only deal with numbers and magnitudes and not DIRECTIONS. Direction is a real, QUALITATIVE issue. It was earlier known that a physicist ought to be carefull when interprating a math equation). Riemann went ahead to show that the kind of universe Einstein would latter passionately beleive in was mathematically possible. This is the amusing universe where a 3d or more d 'space' bend around to form a higher dimensional version of a 'sphere'.Before I prove to you that all of relativist ideas of shrinking time, space etc could not have possibly eluded Riemann, let me warm the floor by showing you the simplicity of the true mechanism of gravity that makes 'curved spacetime' geometry usefull in accurately predicting trajectories in the vicinity of a massive object. The kendangen experiment is prety straight foward. Place a ruler verticaly perpendicular to the table and then place it horizontaly along the table. Since gravity act downwards and is UNSHIELDABLE, the ruler placed vertically will shrink as compared to the ruler placed horizontaly no matter how rigid it is. That is all!! It could not even elude Newton and Robert Hook as this is precisely what we do when measuring weight using a spring. It means for instance that if you now try to measure the lengths of some tringle using such a maleable ruler, it will seem to violate phythagorus theorem simply because the length of the ruler depends on its orientation. Riemannian geometry is just about measuring how infinitesimal triangles deviate from phythagorus theorem!Now let me show you the pieces that I put together to conclude that relativity theories was a concoction of German mathematicians and not realy a science discovery.1.)First of all, Riemann was generalising the work of his great teacher, Karl Friedich Gauss. Gauss showed mathematical ways of measuring the curvarture of a 2d surface without riferring to points outside the surface.2.)Gauss went ahead to apply his technique to measure the radius of the earth by measuring lengths entirely within the surface of the earth.3.)Since Riemann had already done the analogy of step 1 above, you can guess that the next step would be for him to demonstrate the usefullness of his math in solving practical problems. Then you are right! Such is what mathematicians do. Otherwise their works would be categorised alongside those of funny farms! It is well known that mathematicians market their methods to science etc alot.3.)It is well known that when Riemann was dieing, he was working on a curved space theory of gravity. Bear in mind the simplicity of the idea neaded to claim that noneuclidean geometry is usefull in describing measurements done near gravitating objects. Riemann could not possibly fail to see that all what is neaded for him to step in and sell his geometry, is rulers to shrink by various amounts depending on their orientations and distances in space.4.)Meanwhile, it is also well known that Riemann was claiming that gravity is caused by the fact that ether is steadily sucked towards the centres of gravitating objects. He even claimed that the ether emerges out to another universe!5.)It is quite easy to see that since objects shrink under the force of gravity, a gravity caused by ether must be able to shrink objects when it accelerates past objects. Therefore accelerating relative to ether must bring about length contractions. Since all objects moving must have accelerated somewhere, and if the whole of space is filled by ether, then all moving objects must be contracted as compared to stationary objects!6.)So we arive at a daunting conclusion that for Riemann's theory of etheric gravity to be correct, special relativity must be correct! Then the correctness of GR would necesarily follow in the vicinity of graviting objects.So Riemann could have found a way of testing his idea. We simply have to check if moving objects undergo length contraction. So Michelso-Morley experiment may have been designed to kill two birds with a single stone. And so you should begine, as you should in all cases, suspecting some confirmational bias amongst scientists when they perform their observation. They are almost always never without preconceived ideas and/or what they want it to be true.Not only is it necesary for lengths to contract in order to introduced curved space geometry, they must do so in the form given by Lorentz transform. This is because it is just a phythagoras theorem:c2-d2=a2. a is gotten from the height of the train which donot vary. Then a length of an 'hypotenus' that does not vary is all we play with in 'curved spaces'. It is so because in developing the ideas, Gauss was toying with to game of bending, twising munching etc surface without streatching them. I.e we should always consider some length, ds, that does not vary when we change the coordinate system by twistings, bendings, tiltings, streatchings etc. It is simply ridiculus to say that a person aware of Riemannian geometry can fail to see that all is neaded to introduce the use of the geometry is for lengths to stretch, shrink etc depending on some conditions and gravity is one such exellent condition and if gravity is due to the motion of ether, then motion through the ether is just the other condition. One lengths have contracted, time dillation etc follows logicaly as clocks work via some motion.
Read more…
"Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended (as fields). In this way the concept of an empty space loses its meaning...,...,...The particles can only appear as a limited region in space in which the field or the energy density are particularly high" EinsteinNeedless to say, our scientists donnot accept such things as long distance healing etc. They term them voodoo or magical thinking. However, such magics wands at times seem to work, to people's amazements. At times, a pastor shouts receeeiiive! And voila! The whole crowd sways and fall down! When they wake up, criples are walking, the deaf are hearing, the damp are talking etc! A witch doctor can shake his guard full of pebbles and shout abracadabra! Voila! The measles are gone! So you may guess that unless they become a little bit more clever, our scientists can easily be kicked out of their jobs with a declaration that they are a bunch of bozos. You are right! They invent a convenient term for such, placebo effect. They know that there is a stereotype that once scientists acknowledges a thing and gives it a fancy name, it has effectively crossed from the land of 'magics' into the land of the 'normal'.So at least our scientists are accepting some reality of a kind of internal 'therapeutic touch'. However, I can make this 'placebo effect' just another scientific 'abrakadabra' by simply spatially extending this placebo effect.OBJECTIVE FEELINGSOften, people tend to categorise knowledge in terms of the objective vs the subjective. Such things as the feeling of pain etc are understandably kept under the subjective folder. However, I don't like such categorisation. Either all knowledge is subjective or the whole of it is objective. By this, I summarily drag these words, 'objective' and 'subjective' to the dustpin folders.There is indead a difference between the site of say a stone on the table and the sensation of some pain in your back. This is because in the former, I can share the knowledge with anyone while in the latter I am the only one experiencing it. At least so do we think. However, that is the whole difference. There is nothing much different between seeing a stone existing in a realm you think it is outside your body and sensing pain existing within the realm you think it is part of your body. Rather think that your body is like a house locked tightly so that you alone can see what is inside. If other people cannot see the bed in your room, then other people are simply ignorant of the fact. We need not asign such a bed to a lesser important folder as 'subjective'. In the usual sense where we tend to use the word as a lable.When we close exermine how light wave propagate in space to bring say the information from 'outside' to your eyes, we find that it is esentially the same as how a signal from your back propagate to bring the information about pain from your back! Both are electromagnetic waves. With this, one can suggest an interconnecting, bionetwork that makes everything a single, huge leaving thing! We add this to Einstein's reasoning this way:Leaving things are not in space. Rather they are spatially extended (as biofields). In this way, the concept of a nonleaving thing loses its meaning.Light propagates through 'nerves' in 'vacuume'. So the objects we perceive, such as the stone on the table, is still subjective albeit within the huge cosmic body. We are able to share such knowledge because we are all a single being in some sense! You can IN PRINCIPLE sense another person's pain. You DONNOT do so because most of the signals carrying pain within his body bounces back and forth within the walls of his body. So you donnot perceive the pain because of a practicle limitation and not because of a limitation in principle. It is just like in principle, we can see the centre of the earth but it is practically impossible to do so because light from the centre bounces back and forth within the interior of the earth.Even within one's body, at times you may not sense other parts of your body. This is called numbing. For instance when you suffer from stroke, you may not feel half of your body. So I say that other thinks are just the numbed sides of us!!With such understanding of space, at once all 'magics' becomes possible. We see how telekinesis, telepathy, long distance healing, etc are possible. It is just a spatially extended placebo effect. There is also some huge bonus of helping us understand the so called non contact forces of narture such as gravity and the so called quantum weidness. Infact it is the latter persuite is the one that drove me to think of spatially extended placebo effect.
Read more…
Reductionism is the fuel and the engine that propells the train of science from past to future. If your remove this joker card from the house of cards, the entire wavefunction of science collapses in picoseconds when we observe it carefully. The philosophy of reductionism says give me all the knowledge about the parts and I will give you the knowledge about the whole. So our modern scientist is ever busy studying the components in their isolate conditions dubed 'controlled conditions' in the hope that this will shed enough insight as to how the universe work. But something disturbing still boils in the background. Consider for instance the following quote from a physicist named Philip Warren Anderson:"The ability to reduce everything to simple fundamental laws does not imply the ability to start from those laws and reconstract the universe. The constractionist hypothesis break down when confronted with the twin difficulties of scale and complexity. At each level of complexity entirely new properties appear. Psychology is not applied biology, nor is biology applied chemistry. We can now see that the whole becomes not merely more, but very different from sum of its parts."One thing that you should be able to note here is that we can isolate the components and study the laws governing their behaviour as individuals. However, we cannot use such knowledge to say how the system as a whole works! Then what makes Anderson and a bucketfull of other physicists so sure that the laws governing the system as a whole are the laws gorvening each of the components?In the days of Galileo and Newton the train of reductionism received a major switch of gears. It is so because Newton evacuated the whole universe and remained only with the earth and the moon. Studying the laws governing the motion of the earth and the moon, he was soon amusing himself and lots of his fellows that they understood how the entire heavens work! Modern physicists, including Einstein and Schrodinger merely imitate Newton! Einstein evacuates the universe and remains with his train alone. Similarly, all of quantum kendagen experiments majory involves some leprechaun guys named Alice and Bob! It is this thinking in terms of only Alice and Bob that is thought to give us all there is to know about how the entire universe works! Einstein for instance would latter make a whole of space made up of his trains speeding here and there, shrinking, bending, dillating, getting swallowed in black holes etc. This, he terms 'spacetime continum'.A very big nail in the coffin of reductionism was hammered by Poincare. He showed that Newton type reasoning cannot even lead us to definitely understand how 3 heavenly bodies move, let alone the entire heavens! Physicists are, however, yet to learn the true lesson; if we cannot predict the trajectories in a 3-body system using the knowledge we gain from the 2-body system, what basis do we have in insisting that the laws governing the two bodies is the same laws governing the 3 bodies?I had used such reasoning in refuting Sean Caroll's argument against the existence of the soul. Just because he understands the behaviour of some two electrons leads him to think that he understands the physics at work in the brain that involves gazzilions of such particles!! I suggest that you try that by studying the behaviour of a single bee busy sucking some nectar, you can even hit it abit, watch it shy away and then conclude that such is how a swam of bees surrounding the queen behaves! Extrapolation is a very dangerous game. Intrapolation is saver. This happened also when physicists watched how galaxies are spinning to their amazement. Just because we understand the laws gorvening solar system does not mean we understand the laws governing a galaxy. Rather, narture knows better. It does not follow the laws like some blind robot. The laws should be seen as rules. When moving alone on the road, you are not necesarily obeying the traffic rules in a city!Reductionism is even more futile when we attempt to understand awareness in terms of the so thought, fundamental laws, that are each supposed to be understood as blind. But hollism has a good answer. The entire leaving organism behaves as a single whole with its own rules such as freewill that are not necesarily understandable by watching how the individual particles behaves. The entire system such as the brain should not be understood as the behaviour of parts summing up to make the behaviour of the whole. Rather, the behaviour of the whole determines the behaviour of the parts such that how the parts behave in the system is not deducable at all from how they behave in the isolation. Use the case of bees as an analogy. Or you can use some shy guy! When alone, there are some things you can do that you can't do in the streets. You can walk naked etc. But the street out there influence your behaviour as much as you influence the behaviour of the street.
Read more…
You will often hear of people talk of light body. A physicicist would be drawn abit. Did he hear 'light'? But if next, he is told of such things as 'light body is beyond understanding', he will probably get bored. Why after all was 'light' invorked? Is it invorked so, alongside 'energy' and 'vibration' merely to fool those who might not know details of physics that they are talking of well established scientific facts? Well, I would have thought so but fortunately some paranormal scientists seems to have some realy good idea of what 'light' might got to do with some subtle body we may have. But to me, the existence of a light body is quite obvious! The question is not even whether or not we have a light body, the question is what is the use of this body?It is good to begine by close exermining what exactly light is. Next, we then see whether indead it can form a 'body'. Light is an electromagnetic wave. But it is said that at times, it can pretend to be a particle! A good candidate of a light body of course would be made of these particles. But it is still trickier than this. In classical mechanics, light was described by Maxwell's Theory as a vibration of electric field that is propagated through space just like a wave. But what exactly is electric field? It is the force that moves charged particles or is caused by charged particles such as electrons. So the most logical model of a 'vacume' is not a simple emptiness. It should be composed of some fine stuff that is capable of aquiring electric charge. That was how James Clerk Maxwell conceived 'vacume'.UNDERSTANDING WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITYFirst, we must get to know that quantum mechanics donnot deal with forces such as those of Maxwell that can be said to alternate back and forth. It deals with the concept 'energy' as if to leave it to you to ruminate on what kinda forces are involved in this energy. And this is what we are going to do here. But first lets get to understand why wave can behave like a particle.A wave can be defined as a distubance in some medium that is propagated (not moved) away. There isn't any material thing moving foward in a wave. So it isn't clear how such a motion of an immaterial 'thing' as a disturbance can behave as a real particle! Well, it isn't that hard for an electromagnetic wave. The characteristic of 'particle' that we are gonna harvest is that we naively notice it as 'knocking' other particles. Essentially 'knocking' is an elecromagnetic repulsion. So we only have to consider a case where we have two 'billiard balls' next to each other. One of them is negatively charged and the other one is neutral. If we then suddenly somehow charge the neutral one negatively, then it will suddenly repell the other one, creating the effect of kicking it away. We can easily understand though how 'charging' can propagate as a wave without any material moving foward. So quantum particles can be seen as a mere 'distubance' in 'vacume'. Indead such is how quantum field theory treats fundamental particles!PHOTON, MATTER AND ANTIMATTERI said earlier that quantum mechanics donnot talk of forces when describing waves. It solely talk of their energy content. However, I myself like talking of forces. Because photons mediate electromagnetic waves and these waves in turn eventualy can be seen as charges moving up and down as the wave propagate foward, it makes me (not quantum scientists) model a photon as to be composed of two charges of opposite signs that causes themselves to swing up and down like a pendulum or to spin around each other like a binary star system. These two particles are half an electron and half a positron (matter and antimatter). So in my model, neither the photon nor the electrons are fundamental particles. They are composite particles that are made up of even smaller particles. The electron is not the smallest negative charge possible. It is just the smallest one we can currently ditect. Why would that which isn't infinitesmall charge be an unsurmountable limit? What is the point of the concept of fundamental particle in the first place? It is this stubbornly held notion that there has to be fundamental particles that makes us unable to understand many things. This model of photon is consistent with the following accepted properties of photon:1.)Photon is neutral. (the overal charge in my case)2.) When two photons colide, their energies combine to form an electron and a positron.NON EINSTEINIAN PHOTONSAccording to mainstream physics photons are said never to rest! (what kinda worker bees are these?) So when a mainstream physicist hear of such things as 'light body', at best, it is amusing to him! It absolutely requires a blackhole to trap photons into forming a light body! But lets see who should realy diserve a laugh. The same same photon can crash into the atom and then what happens? Does it all over sudden stop after all? Does it immediately aquire a different lable? Are physicists merely calling a standing still photon by another name? Lets consider my model, photons also rifers to just electromagnetic forces that can, for all relevant purposes, behave as though 'kicking' other particles.THE BODYAs we have seen, space is made of some very fine stuffs able of being electrically charged. Such is how light would propagate. This fine stuff in vacume can be seen as the matter-untimatter potential. The ordinary matter, which can be termed ponderable matter, is also composed negative and positive charges bound together by electroweak forces. There are immence spaces seperating particles of the ordinary matter. A negatively charged particle would attract positive charges from the vacume. This creates an electrical polarization in vacume termed as vacume polarization. So for every charge in your body, there is a coresponding cloud of oposit charges from vacume that surrounds it. So the mere presence of your entire body creates an entire quasi body in vacume! This can be defined as a light body. Its existence is almost unquestionable as vacume polarization is a proven fact!!OUT OF THE BODYSo you might have seen why a light body is pretty obvious to me. The next question is perharps if such a body can come out of the ponderable body. Such would explain such things as astral projection, near death experiences or OBE in short. Again, for me, the question is not whether or not such a light body can come out of the body or not. The question is how fast does it come out?I know you can see some challenges here and there. The light body is strongly bonded to the ponderable body. But this can explain why it is so hard to acheive an OBE as to requer nearing death. Near death, some electrical charges in the body presumable becomes weak releasing the bondage to the light body.But one such a good way the light body can get out of the ponderable body is just the usual way light gets out of energetic bodies! The photons realy need not move balistically like a material body. Like we saw, it can just propagate wavelike. This is how photons propagates. Initially, charges from vacuume surounds a charged, ponderable matter. Then naturaly, the ponderable matter also vibrates. So during its moments of zero charge, the photon gets the chanse to escape away a little bit. When the charge of the ponderable matter again rise, it re collects the imponderable matter. Such creats radiating waves in vacume. For this to happen to a body composed of many charges, some COHERENCE is neaded in vibration.So the explanation of how awareness can be immortal is not hard at all. Awareness is corelated with energy. So it is just the law of conservation of energy!! Once the life energy apparently die from the body, it has rather been disipated to the surrounding. If the vibration is quantum coherent, then it obeys the law of conservation of information as well. It is not hard to figure it out. You can just see it in waves If a pattern dies somewhere, a perfectly similar pattern reemerges somewhere else propagating the pattern foward. Such is how TV waves carying all the information manages to be propagated all the way from a transmitting station to your receiver.
Read more…
One may say that the mainstream science assumes that consciousness is an emergent property. This is to say that if we are to understand everything about the neural wiring of the brain, together with some chemistry, then we will somehow figure out how awareness emerge from the fundamental laws of physics and chemistry. Needless to say, consciousness keeps on eluding them.From history of science, we have come to know that when a phenomenon stubbonly defy an explanation, then we are likely to be wrong in assuming that the phenomenon is emergent. So we try to overturn the tables right side up. It is a kinda 'if you can't beat em, join em' I will give you two examples of such. In the days before Newton, scientists were wondering why things move. It was because they thought that a stationary thing was fundamental and motion was an emergent property. But Newton showd them a way foward; a thing moving steadily is as much a fundamental property of an object as a thing standing still. In other words, we say that Newton included motion in the fundamental way he understands the universe.FUNDAMENTAL QUALIAAccording to mainstream physics, the engine of science, fundamental things are such things as mass, time, energy, force, temperature, charge etc. They seek to derive everything else from this very limited list! But of course you should spot the problem. Lets consider say 'love'. You will waste your time trying to derive this from concepts of forces, energy, mass, time etc. To account for 'love' in the universe, you must add it in the list above of fundamental properties!In the mainstream science, we can safely talk of the following as the property of an object; length of the object, its mass, its temperature, its charge etc. But when you talk of its smell, they somehow tend to associate this to your own brain. But the exclution of smell was excluded just by fiat by Galileo and his future disciples followed his footsteps without question! But infact if we want to say that smell has something to do with your brain than the object you are smelling, then one can also argue that even length, mass, charge etc tells us something about our own brains than the object! This seemingly innocent act of Galileo is the birth of all the consciousness problems. We are now left with a futile task of wondering how the brain generate this other left out properties as smells. It does not!!! The 'brain' as an object in Galileo's view would only contain such properties as mass etc. However, if we included smells as part of properties of objects, we would have no problem figuring out where it come from in the brain any more than we have a problem figuring out where the shape of the brain comes from!Newton said that of course no one can explain how the brain creats the phantasm of colors. But there is still something he assumes; that the brain creates it. It does not! Colors are fundamental properties of the universe. When you are starring at a mangoe, your brain does not creat the green color any more than it creats the round shape of the mangoe or if you like, the brain creats the shape of the mangoe EQUALLY as it does the color of the mangoe. Erwin Schrodinger almost gets it but he misses it by attributing 'objective' to the wave model of light. He says;"the sensation of color cannot be accounted for by the physicist's objective picture of light-waves could the psychologist account for it, if he had fuller knowledge than he has of the processes in the retina and the nervous processes set up by them in the optical nerve bundles and in the brain? I don't think so.Waves are as much subjective things in our awareness as colors are! Now, what a physicist should be interested with is the corelation between say color blue and a high frequency vibration. What does rapid motion got to do with colors? I guess a hint is gotten by watching how a bee buzz near some blue flowers! How does a blue jacket pull you towards it in a supermarket? Where do colors get this magical power from? I hope that you will understand this force by exermining how it acts from within.NON GALILIEAN MEASUREMENTyou might think that such things as lengths, mass etc can be measured and smells cannot. Right? Wrong! Even scientists misses the true philosophy of measurement which is just a comparison. Can't you compare the smell of perfumes? Yes you can. When measuring the length of an object, you are just comparing it with the length of a ruler. Similarly, you might not be able to tell the amount of whitness in a give hue of blue but given another color adjuscent to it, you can tell that either one or the other has more whitness or they are of the same amount of whitness. With such a proceedure, we can soon constract a scale with an ascending order of increasing whitness. We can lable them 1,2,3,.., etc. Then we will use such a scale to gauge other blue. No ruler like strips, just varying blue hues.FUNDAMENTAL CONSCIOUSNESSWhen scientists saw that our brains are made up of the same things that makes up the supposed nonconscious things, they sort out to attempt to explain consciousness in terms of unconscious events. However, the vice-versa could and should also be considered. If our brains are conscious but it is made of the same stuff that makes rocks, then rocks should have some form of consciousness too. This means that we cannot get to understand everything about the rock by studying it the way scientists do. This inturn explains alot of mysteries in physics such as those of quantum mechanics etc.
Read more…
The beleif that one's on consciousness is eternal is quite universal amongst people. It may be tempting to think that it is due to the universal fear of death but it is nothing of the sort! It rather due to the way the concept of own's awareness is closely related to the concept of time.The philosopher Thomas Aquinas once said; I know what time is but when I am asked to define it, I am not able. Like many philosophers, Aquinas neaded a breif tour back to kindagarten! There is not such a thing in this world as 'defining things'. Words, we define, things, we point to and name them. Aquinas only neaded to point to a phenomenon and utter 'time' and he would have adequately defined the word 'time'. Definitions are essentiall ostensive in nature. We use a nonostensive definition for pure convenience due to the need for worded communication. So in the following paragraph, I will define the words 'time' and 'consciousness'.Now, I go as per this guide: what if my reader is an ET from andromeda who knows no English, how will I guide him to know what I mean by consciousness? The only way is to make him sleep and then wake and then call the wake state; 'conscious'. Similarly I will tell him that you were asleep at another time and you are awake at another time. So he gets to know what I might mean by 'time'.Consciousness is as much a quale like those others. Let us make some comparisons. Consider the following quales1.)Space as a collection of locations that can be pointed to by the 3 mutually othorgonal axi2.)Rainbow as a collection of colors that can be formed by mixing the 3 primary colors.3.)Time as a colection of different moments4.)Different states of consciousnessThere is something that I want you to notice concerning the quale of time. There is something that it enjoys that is different from space and rainbow. The rainbow can be farther subdivided to 3 other qualia we term them primary colors. Each of those quale is unique in that for instance we can't understand redness in terms of blueness at all in the same way we may understand violetness in terms of redness and blueness. But for 'time' it appears as a unique quale that can't be subdivided into dimensions of any sort. Same case applies to the quale of consciousness.Let me go on to illustrate the symmetry of consciousness and time. When conceptualising, we often understand things in terms of that which the thing in question is not. For such quales as blueness etc we can conceive that which is not blue at the same time albeit at some other place. However, for one's own awareness, there is no such an equivalences. The state of being aware and the state of not being aware must come at two different moments. Of course you can form an idea of awareness and a lack of awareness of another person apart from you but you can't experience both of them in the same way you might experience two different colors at a go. Similarly, we find that we can only experience a series of a single set of nownesses we term 'time'. We have no idea of another set somehow running paralel to this.Another symmetry goes this way: the concepts of locations, moments, stages and states are closely related. Though we may assign states and stages to colors, we can also assign intensities to them. The concept 'color' tends to be symmetrical to concept force, energy etc. However we find no much meaning of intensity of location or intensity of a moment. Same applies to the states of one's own consciouses. The concept of a 'level of consciousness' might be more symmetrical to another location or another moment.On another note, we see that indead consciousness is a quale symmetrical to other qualia. The integration of several things in the same awareness such as to form a set of one's personal experiences is symmetrical to putting several things on the same spatial level, letting several things happen at the same moment, painting several things with the same color etc.CONSCIOUSNESS IS ETERNITY!So I have drawn lots of symmetry enough to intimately link consciousness with time. By principle of bidirectional causality, if time causes consciousness, consciousness causes time. Since all these terms: time, space, consciousness, reality etc are defined by awareness, it is a bit meaningless to talk of these other existences without the existence of awareness. There is no meaning of the word 'reality' apart from what we give it. Therefore some 'reality entirely without us' is a meaningless phrase. The word 'reality' there, like any other word has no meaning.A philosopher named Gotfried Leibniz once said that there are some things we think we have an idea of but in fact we have no such idea. Then he went ahead to give his own example of such things. The example that I give is the idea of a future enternity during which we are not conscious. When we are not conscious, no time pass at all from our point of view. So a state of everlasting death, from once's point of view, tantamounts to what philosophers term it as 'actual infinite' which is impossible. So at some point in future, one must regain one own's consciousness. However long this duration is, it doesn't appear as a duration at all, so awareness is a continuously experienced thing in the whole of future eternity. Don't ask me how!
Read more…
By NDE, I mean Near Death Experience and OBE means Out Of Body Experience. By 'real', I mean that which can happen independent of picture that can be formed in the awareness but that is corelated to neural signals. So when one wishes to say there is no objective reality, he should understand what he might be implying concerning NDE; The opposite of what he wishes himself and us to beleive! The reason we desire an objective reality of NDE is that that is the question; can we explain NDE using the current understanding of cognitive neuroscience or do we need a more esoteric science?One big reason as to why scientists generally reject paranormal ideas is that there is no consistent theory of it! Paranormal proponents are yet to understand the importance of theory in science. The reject and even fight theories!! Their only hing is on claims like 'this phenomenon cannot be explained by cognitive neuroscience, therefore it must be paranormal'. Right? Utterly wrong! We cannot rely on a lack of explanation to explain a phenomenon! Paranormal proponents donnot understand science! There is never a shortage of theories in science. We donnot buy into quantum mechanics because no one can concoct a far fetched ptolemaic explanation of subatomic world using classic physics. We do so because qm itself is a compelling theory; consistent and plausible.In the days of Newton, we could posit the existence of a soul as a means of afterlife. However, when a scientists asks for an explanation as to why we don't perceive a soul, one could answere using the famous joker card, 'it is beyond understanding'. Over time, we begun to fall in love with 'beyond understanding' till it became the thing we are after, completely forgeting the original intent. To use this phrase in modern times, to brush aside questions arising from the soul hypothesis is to completely neglect the great scientific advancement of 19-20th centuary such as the discovery of x-rays etc that almost turned it upside down how we understand energy and matter. In Newton's time, we thought that the phenomenon we term 'touch' was not related to 'sight'. We did not understand what light is and so it was incredibly implausible for a thing to exist without being seen. Unfortunately, people still stick to this notion of matter. However, science advancement showed that light is an electromagnetic wave and is responsible not for sight alone but FOR ALL THE FIVE SENSES!! This makes a spiritual reality extreemly plausible because we nolonger need five independent, unreasonable ad-hocs to explain for instance why we don't perceive a soul which would make the idea seem coocked. So Occam's Razor realy favours a theory of soul and/or of spiritual realms which simply states the spiritual world does not interact with our EM radiation. Farthermore, we now understand that things donnot necesarily interact with EM radiations. Neutrino, for instance, doesn't and is thus extreemly hard to ditect one. It requires upto a 4 light years thick lead to stop a speeding one!BIOLOGICAL REASONSI can go on and on trying to convince you of physics and metaphysics underpinnings for unseen worlds wherein a soul can dwell. But let me switch gears to biology and metabiological reasons to beleive that NDE is an actual soul travel. First, I must say there is some corespondence between nartural selection and a teleological evolution. No matter what mechanism driving evolution or creation, we can agree that if a state of a biological organism is beneficial to that organism, then it will be selected for! So according to the laws of biology, a soul has only to be POSSIBLE for it to a REALITY!!How do we define 'benefit' in biology? It is just anything that ensures that the genes keeps on surviving. The longer the genes survives, the more successfull the biological organism. So one can safely say that immortality is the ultimate goal of a biological organism. Biologically, it is simply incorrect to say that 'death is part of life'. Death is what a biological organism strifes to avoid and would do all necesary means to circumvert it! Our desire to leave forever is just a speel over to the conscious mind what the subconscious mind strifes to achieve! We desire to eat, sleep, sex etc because these are beneficial to us. Similarly, we desire to leave for ever because this will be the ultimate success.A question that should eat the mind of a biologist is what evolutionary benefits of NDE and OBE. Why should a dieing brain merely entertain you? A good answere would be the personality is indead trying to escape the impeding danger by trying to move out of the body! Let me use the following analogy. Supposing you are aware that your computer is in danger of breaking down. What do you do? The best thing to do is to quicly save files and programs in a back up memory. We only need to figure out this memory capacity in space to realise that the idea of soul is the most reasonable evolutionary explanation of NDE. This we will see in the next section. Then REINCARNATION would be a mechanism that selects the personality capeable of projecting out of the body. It is metabiology of being literaly born again!CHEMISTRY REASONSIf thinking and awareness is corelated with chemistry in the brain, then it only makes sense to corelate awareness with the metachemistry of the soul as well. When I understood DNA and enzyme activities, it was a great ah-ha moments. Metachemistry can easily explain how DNA can have more strands other than the two. This in turn illustrate how a biological system can easily invent a back-up memory of itself in other realms.Understand the body-soul relationship this way: body is to DNA as soul is to protein molecules. Also the vice-versa is valid. We know that originaly, DNA was plausibly all there was. However, we know that there is a one to one correspondence between amino acids and neucliotides of DNA. So DNA acts as a scalfholding for the formation of protein molecules. This inturn means that the data in the DNA has some back up, which is the protein molecules.The principle of scalfholding is straight foward and is also called catalysis. There is however no reason to limit what a DNA scalfhold as it mearly need to attract a body so that it comes near. However, we know that space is full of extreemly tiny particles. Some can be charged. So the body easily 'distorts' these fields it is baptised in leaving an impression of itself in the other realm. It is much in the same way that when you walk along a sandy road, you will most probably leave foot prints. Once has seaded another body, different particles in such 'etheric realms' are now brought together and they can now bind to form a body that is a perfect copy of the visible body. Literaly, you are born again!One can also view it the other way round. The soul is older than the body and it provided scalfholding for the formation of the body. Then we have some realy fascinating understanding of the origin of life!
Read more…
Like a whoshing eagle, science snatched the words 'origin of the universe' off the mouth of religion. Now, it has come to snatch the words 'destiny of the universe' off the mouths of the 'spiritual'. It is called physical eschatology. And you know, once scientists have taken over some stuff, it may nolonger be that comfortable to hear about it!The question of ultimate fate of the universe is intimately tied to the question of ultimate origin of the universe. If for instance you beleif that the universe is eternal from past, then you tend to beleive that the universe is eternal in the future. Then how it all started tend to determine how it will all end.There is a need to define well the word 'universe' to mean that which can be perceived using the five senses. If everything we see, for instance, disapeared and then a completely new different looking set of things reapears, we say a universe has disapeared and another universe has reemerged. So the concept 'universe' does not include everything there is. The concept 'multiverse' should. So the idea of a beginning of the universe is pretty easy to conceive. Other universes coexisting in the same space with this one, seperated by such things as 'levels of vibrations' or interlaced with this one are termed 'spiritual realms'. Otherwise other universes simply distant away from this are termed 'parallel universes'.THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICSBefore physicists could concoct such ideas as big bangs, they had already felt that a beginningless universe was problematic. This is due to the second law of thermodynamics. Despite the fact that this law is simple, it is very unpopular! We do see that when you release an egg down, it will break. But if a riverse was to happen, it tantamounts to a mirracle. The broken egg has to spontaneously repair itself! Since we never observe such things happen; even with intelligent intervention it can't happen, we say a powerfull law forbids such.The law says that energy flows from a hot place to a cold place up until the temperature is even, henceforth, the energy can flow no more. This leads physicist to conclude that the flow of energy in the current universe was due to the fact that in earlier times, there was realy good stock of useful energy (low entropy). Since then, the entropy of the universe is steadily increasing (the amount of useless energy is increasing). So according to this understanding, heat death might be the ultimate fate of the universe. It is a time when no more usefull fuel is available. All we have is 'smocks'!There is however something puzzling in this view. First of all it is obvious that thus the universe had a beginning. In the beginning, we must picture a scenario with regions having high energy concentrations then seperated by voids. This suggests a powerfull and intelligent cause of the universe. A being who could tell a void from a filled place right from the start!EXPANDING SPACEIt is said that the universe begun when 'space' rapidly expanded. It is beleived to be still expanding even up to now. It is said to be accelerating. This immediately creats two possible scenarios for future. One is a big crunch and another might be called a big whimper. The big crunch is better followed by a big bounce of a new universe.Now, for 'space' to expand, it better be something and not nothing! The picturesque normally used is that of an expanding baloon attatched to which is some round shaped objects to represent galaxies. But if you were to streatch some rubber, you realise that it cant streatch forever! It reaches a critical point where the rubber suddenly becomes very hard. The force stretching the rubber can either be effectively stoped by the rubber or if the force is big it can suddenly break the rubber. Such is how baloons or buble gasses bursts.THE RIVER OF GRAVITY AND DECAYING PARTICLESAs implosive mechanisim, it looks as though gravity violets the second law of thermodynamics. But the second law cannot be said to be so much an explosive mechanism any more than gravity. This is because other than thinking that the cause of heat flow is the hot reserver, you can as well think of it as a sucktion from the cold reserver. A good way is to consider both ways. A place of less heat has some attractive force towards the hot particles and a place of much heat repels the hot particles (the concept 'heat' is not entirely reducable to the concept of jiggling balls. It is more of in a CAUSAL relationship with the jiggling than being the jiggling itself). It is as valid as thinking of the positive charges flowing in a battery instead of thinking of the negative charges flowing the other way round.With this understanding, gravity is so much reconcilable with the law of entropy. We can picture of space to be field with lots of particles. Unless gravity repels some particles, such as photons, it can't get to suck other particles, such as gravitons. So it is a circuit that must be complet for current to flow. But it is a hypetoroidally shaped vortex! So this provides some other way for understanding the fate of the universe. The gravitons too has energy though the gone photons never need to come back, the comming in gravitons will always replenish the matter. Existence is a journey from infinity to infinity! Energy comes from infinite edge and in eternal future, then it flows to the centre, then it goes back to infinity edge but now as the eternal past.A good way of illustrating what I am saying is to consider protons. Now, the protons have never been observed to decay. So there is never good reason to think that protons will ever disapear off the universe. But the explanation of how the bonding of quarks can never be broken is interesting. The energy neaded to remove quark from the hadron is enough to create another quark! To understand such things, it is helpfull to think of 'energy' to be some extreemly fine stuff. The finest of such stuff known in our cosmos is photons. Think of the photons as to pervade everywhere. Then when we say that ordinary matter is made of 'energy', we simply means something somehow traps the photons such as in some vortex. So the explanation of permanence of quark bond is not realy to say that an individual quark is indestructable. It is to say that for the energy of the field of photons surounding a quark to implode to a tiny region to form a quark, the quark already occupying the region must explode away. Or riversing the argument, kicking the quark away is immediately replaces by another quark formed by the nearby photons that have to implode to the region left by the quark. So again, it is the law of completing circuit in order for energy to flow. Then again, the shape of the circuit is better seen not as toroidal loops but as hypertoroidal ones (tori in higher dimensions)
Read more…
When the question of origin of life is tabled, at many times it opens a can of worms. Immediately, the groud gets polarized. A 'them vs us' battle arises which clouds reasoning. Ultimately the issue is all about trying to prove or disprove how life came into being or did not come into being and not trying to understand how life might have come into being. So the words 'origin of life' has long gone out from the mouths of the curious to the mouths of those enthusiastic about using the 'origin of life' to prove and/or disprove something. Not so to me. I am more interested with understanding than even knowing.If the creationists whish to win the game, then I suggest that the current way in which they are playing isn't promising. They should kick the ball off the penalty area all the way to the middle of the field. What I am saying is that, amongst other things, they should shift the battle ground off biology and chemistry all the way to physics and metaphysics. Currently, the creationist reasoning isn't that sound. It seems to say:1.)If a phenomenon cannot be explained by science, then automatically, God did it.2.)Given biological laws, chemistry laws and physics laws, spontaneous abiogenesis is impossible.Considering '1', it gives atheist the opportunity to form an inverted and equally perveted version that has plagued reasoning for long:1.)If a phenomenon can be explained by science, then we need no intelligent designerConsidering '2', the arguments of creationists self destruct! Why agree with all what scientists say all the way from physics, to chemistry, to biology then holus bolus we turn we escape through the window when 'evolution' comes through the door? Essentially, creationist try to use science against science! If we need to say that if science can explain something, then we need no god, then by admitting that physics and chemistry are correct without invorking God, then they have already lost the battle!So the only way to use scientific reasoning well when talking of God is to bring 'God' within science! In other words, we completely do away with the false claim that if a phenomenon can be explained by science, then it needs no 'hand of God'. What is it for after all, if 'science' can explain everything but ultimately cannot explain itself? What if God is the ultimate author of science itself? Then the all issue is just a huge jock!Ok, lets see it. 'Science' is coined from latin word: 'scientia' which means 'knowledge'. 'Knowledge' on the other hand is inconceivable without a mind. The mere fact that universe can be known means that it has some deep and fundamental connection to the mind. Farthermore, it is a causal link. Lets consider the riversable dynamics the mind is most probably corelated with as it is corelated to the reversable electrodynamics in the brain. The principle of riversability states: If the universe can cause knowledge about itself in some mind, then knowledge about the universe in some mind can cause the universe. This is far from being far fetched. All dynamics in physics, exept thermodynamics obey this principle! Consider electromagnetism for instance: if an electric current can move a magnet in remort, then motion of a magnet in remort can cause electric current.THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICSWell, let me begine by some warm up. When you mension the word 'energy', everyone comes through the door. However, when you mension thermodynamics, especially the second law, almost everyone goes through the window! This is funny! It is like realy loving cars and hating stearing wheels. Even wishing that they were not there!The way creationists at times use the second law to undermine spontaneous evolution and/or abiogenesis is futile. However this does not mean it is entirely futile. If we use the insight itself in some fundamental way, then there is a strong point!The law states: a closed system spontaneously evolves from order to chaos and never the vice-versa! But the earth is an open system in that it receives energy from the sun. You can understand it this way: if you are to ask a scientist to explain what goes on in your body in luxury of details up to molecular level as you arrange some blocks, I bet it will sound like some 'spontaneous' nartural processes. However, by arranging the blocks, the system is evolving from chaos to order!But even another good example is spontaneous formation of crystals with their dazzling order.The only way for a creationist is to attack this word 'spontaneous'. I mean if the processes going on in your skull can ultimately be termed 'spontaneous', might this word refers to a mere perspective? Remember that the hypothesis of God is arived at via analogy. We see life looks like what we make. Then we should stop at saying that the world was created due to processes like those that happens in our brains as we make things. So we force the atheist to a dilema. Either admit that the interlect is ubsent in nartural processes and the brain requires a supernatural explanation or that interlect is inherent in nartural phenomena and 'spontaneous' is nolonger a valid argument agains the need for god. In whichever way they choose, one can argue for god!!So you see the eror! But let me use an analogy. There is a wrist watch powered by wound spring that was built to rewind itself using random motions of your hand while working! So you see the watch was designed to wind itself spontaneously! This sumarily refutes any attempt to say that a thing happening spontaneously necesarily makes a designer unecesary. This even shows very well in crystal formations. One can reasonably hold that crystals are things designed to assemble spontaneously. Same applies to DNA etc. Infact such things as diamonds, buckyministefulerene etc convinces me of an intelligent designer than even DNA!To harvest well the insight of the second law of thermodynamics, we need to go deeper to understand it alongside other dynamics. But it is pretty simple. We can consider a tornado etc and ask why the whirling wind eventually die. Even if the energy present around is enough to form a whirlwind, the particles needs some fantastic timings to maintain the pattern. Such timings can only be achieved by a mind! However, such things as electromagnetism, gravity etc can achieve eternal vortices yet they don't violate the second. So a good way of explaining the other dynamics is to inject a mind in the ocean! So because crystals are governed by quantum electrodynamics, I can indead claim that it has some designer! To understand it, try to imagine the 15 billiard balls somehow arranging themselves on the centre to form a tringle. It requires a mind to achieve that. So if neutral balls plus mind=order, and neutral tiny 'balls' in crystals plus electric charges=order, then it follows that electric charges have the same effect as a mind, or is infact equivalent. This is consistent because the brain that was involved in arranging the billiard balls is indead electric charges!! I find such to be powerfull argument for God immanent in narture.
Read more…
