The Quantum World

Tuesday, April 28, 2015

The Holographic Nature of Reality

We could be living in a hologram according to some quantum physicists. Everything is a 3 dimensional projection of information that in reality lives on a 2 dimensional surface. Moreover, scientists have equations that seem to prove reality is a 2 dimensional structure projected onto a cosmic screen and the goal of researchers is to discover who controls or what laws control that screen...If they can control that information that gets projected, then they can control all information and all social reality.

Let us remind ourselves what the holographic principle is. The holographic principle is a property of string theories and a supposed property of quantum gravity that states that the description of a volume of space can be thought of as encoded on a boundary to the region—preferably a light-like boundary like a gravitational horizon. First proposed by Gerard t'Hooft, it was given a precise string-theory interpretation by theoretical physicist Leonard Susskind who combined his ideas with previous ones of t 'Hooft and Charles Thorn. 

As pointed out by Raphael Bousso, Thorn observed in 1978 that string theory admits a lower-dimensional description in which gravity emerges from it in what would now be called a holographic way. In a larger sense, the theory suggests that the entire universe can be seen as a two-dimensional information structure "painted" on the cosmological horizon.

Sounds like an abstract discussion with no foundation other than it being a good exercise for the social imagination. Precisely... The only one thing we can be sure of. The bigger question for a sociologist like me is why we seek to imagine this, design equations in our imagination to arrive at agreement with and among other social imaginations. You see, social reality is information and nothing more. Are we just discovering this? Are we and should we be curious as to who or what is the source of all information. Seems so... that is the latest pursuit.  

*God's social imagination was here before us... we are discovering it as it is a larger reality; we are discovering a larger portion of our imagination which is in His ever endless imagination.

Wednesday, April 22, 2015

Degrees of Freedom in the Social 'quantum' Imagination

Quantum systems, as we can read about, have a fixed number of particles, with each particle having a finite number of degrees of freedom. In contrast, the excited states of a quantum field theory can represent any number of particles. This makes quantum field theories especially useful for describing systems where the particle count/number may change over time, a crucial feature of relativistic dynamics.

As a sociologist of the ‘quantum’ social imagination, I have to smile at the above. Theories are man-made, and quantum field theory is just another way of saying that possibilities exist. Whatever is possible is only based on what man can imagine and get a number of other people to imagine and then agree that what they imagine is possible. They do this through ‘scientific’ method, which is a laid down set of steps agreed upon as the correct direction to address what might be.

Quantum field theory was conceived of by scientists who in their imagination don’t like when things appear to be fixed; they don’t like absolutes that get the way of else might be possible in their imagination. They like QFT because the quantum fields are continuous quantities over space, as in the idea of excited states with arbitrarily large numbers of particles in them, providing QFT systems with an effectively infinite number of degrees of freedom.

Every man/woman loves freedom. This is known to be 'true' through scientific method in social research; studies on the idea of ‘degrees of freedom’ in one’s life.  Is there a social theory to go with those results? Yes, in fact, many social theories whether intended to or not provide insight into the importance of personal freedom. For instance, Max Weber was the first, at least in my educated opinion, to suggest that choice as in making choices based on a person’s culture and social boundaries actually reveals more about the person and what they consider what it means to be free than any other aspect of social interaction; we are constantly making choices that reveal our limits we set for ourselves and what we want limited for others.  

In more modern thinking, but what is modern, Choice modeling was developed in parallel by economists and cognitive psychologists. The origins of choice modeling can be traced to Louis Thurstone’s research into food preferences in the 1920s and to random utility theory; either of which are not far from Weber’s original rationale. In the human imagination, there is only the opportunity to stand on the shoulders of those who cam before. Basically, choice modelling is Max Weber’s theory on choice.Choice modeling posits that with human choice there is an underlying rational decision process and that this process has a functional form.

Nonetheless, choice modeling does offer something more. It helps us to look at the behavioral context in choice; as a specific functional form may be selected as a candidate to model a certain behavior. Which means that a model form is necessary what Weber called ‘ideal type’ and it is commonly used as a good approximation of utility maximization. The 'ideal type is what human beings strive for and they attempt to maximize their total utility of this through choice.  And since we as humans really love freedom, we strive to maximize this through choice. Ironically, we are still confined by social boundaries, that provide identity and purpose to being. We are faced with degrees of freedom; and, still chose from those but only what we find both freeing and yet limited so as not to lose definition.

Scientists are not out of this social imagination. My point being, regarding degrees of freedom whether we talk about it in quantum mechanical systems and quantum field theories or in the social imagination, is that we have to accept that even in the quantum world certain limits appear because of choice. This applies to the social imagination. The world of quantum is bound too.

But what about the idea of relativistic quantum field theories; didn't it come out of the social imagination? Yes, it did. And it did because of 'degrees of freedom' in it. In the quantum social imagination, some like look at the QFT and possibles in this way...calling for a kind of agitated approach or perturbative (their word) approach to quantum field theory. This appears to allow more freedom as it presumes a full field interaction where there is an approximated agitated expansion in the number of particles involved.

Funny, that the terms are: approximated agitated expansion. Each term in the expansion can be thought of as forces between particles being mediated by other particles. What is difficult for some to accept in opposition to this view is that there is also the notion of a force-mediating particle which itself comes from perturbation theory, and thus does not make sense with the idea of relativistic fields, because even those have bound states.

Given that, limits of freedom exist because of all possible freedom available. Once a choice is made, we understand that something directed that choice suggesting boundaries. We cannot make a truly free choice in this state of social reality. Our choices are bound. Is there anyway to determine that though this applies to social reality it may not apply to the world of quantum systems? No. Because, we bring boundaries into the equation. We exist in the quantum state and cannot escape that which binds us, and that which makes us free...the quantum state of things in the social imagination of God. 

*The Creator of Heaven and Earth, of all things seen and unseen, gives us a choice to make and that is to choose one possible out of all possibles for us... His is optimum = the most favorable degree. 

Monday, April 20, 2015

The Locus of Social Reality ~ The 'Kingdom' comes from Within

I posted and commented about Blackholes and Wormholes last week to interest you in the idea that even grand science is socially constructed and is only what we imagine. We truly seek to know what we are and what is in us rather than what is out there. Ironically, the approach is backwards. Social reality comes from within... there is no other reality we can know.

We can read often the debates between evolutionist thinkers vs. creationists. There are and have been conflicts between Evolution and Creationism for many years. They occur when evolutionists argue that creationism is not a scientific theory because it cannot be tested by the scientific method, whereas creationists argue that evolutionists do not take God into account and that evolution is just a theory rather than a fact. They argue that scientific methodology which is based on physical evidence can never be reconciled with the creationist faith-based account of creation.

They 'scientists' and science is only what men make of it. Science does not exist without man. In fact, all social reality that we think exits only exists in our social reality. American Sociologist Charles H. Cooley said that all social reality 'society' exists solely in the mind which is a vastness without end and is eternal. Likewise, we can understand what Luke knew and Leo Tolstoy later wrote ...that the Kingdom of God is within you. Sadly, this is information that we have yet to embrace.

We spend all our time on what is out there rather than what is inside, in our spirit, and in our mind. What is out there? One could imagine that it is an aspect of our own mind in full view, that we are yet to comprehend; it is the full imagination of the Creator.
The locus of all reality comes from within... the question is if we are the projectors, who is projecting. Some say we are. But projectors need a projectionist - The Creator. In some sense, we are projecting and  interacting information programs created to run within a greater program.

Yes, we often read that science provides us with information and answers to our being and the universe. Science exists in the minds of men. Does that mean God does too? Yes. We have yet to embrace that. We keep wandering off as we become absorbed in our projections and fail to recognize source of them. They then appear to be 'out there' and exist outside of us. Sociologists over the years have had trouble with this too and have come up with theories that suggest society is a kind of sui generis over and above us [Durkehim].

In this event, agreement of the agreement projection requires a hypothesis or theory to be testable and supported by physical evidence, whereas religion which I prefer to call faith requires acceptance of a doctrine or belief without analysis or judgment. Actually, both science and faith work in the same way - toward agreement reality. Whether we are talking about equations or scripture, it all comes from within. This is what any program seeks to do, know the creator of it and its purpose.

What comes from within man is his/her desire to know the Creator of Heaven and Earth of all things seen and unseen (the quantum level) but never for the sake of oneself but for the sake of oneself in the context of others- agreement. Some seek the Creator (who and how and why it all began) one way and others another. What creationists embrace 'accept' is not based on or because of 'religion' but based on information the same as any other scientist who can fall prey to his / her other theory which can become a religion.

Creationists know that the kingdom is an eternal kingdom, because all information as in every word of it comes from the mouth of God the Creator of all things seen and unseen. You may argue that men speak words and men wrote the Bible. Does that mean that men create themselves and through their words evolve to be God through use of 'words'? Yes and No. Yes, because this is what the Creator programmed us to do become like Him. We can accept that or not. It is our choice to accept the Kingdom within us. The commands programed in us 'command' each program to be like the Creator in order to be saved. No - because we are not God, we are created by God. No one is greater than the Creator, not even the creation.We can assume that by not accepting the commands, the program cannot be saved. Because, letting your sinful nature, indulgence in what the mind projects and that alone as a glorification of the self and not the Creator, only leads to death ~ Romans 8

What is out there is in us to discover...The Kingdom of God is Within. "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say , 'here it is', or 'there it is,' because the Kingdom of God is within you." Luke 17:21

"In the beginning there was the Word and the Word with was God and the Word was God..He was with God in the beginning. Through Him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made." John 1: 1-4 and without Him, nothing is alive nor can be saved.

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Wormholes in the 'Kingdom' of the Social Imagination?

In 1935, physicists Albert Einstein and Nathan Rosen used the theory of general relativity to propose the existence of "bridges" through space-time. These paths, called Einstein-Rosen bridges or wormholes, connect two different points in space-time, theoretically creating a shortcut that could reduce travel time and distance. Wormholes contain two mouths, with a throat connecting the two. The mouths would most likely be spheroidal. The throat might be a straight stretch, but it could also wind around, taking a longer path than a more conventional route might require.

Einstein's theory of general relativity mathematically predicts the existence of wormholes, but none have been discovered to date. A negative mass wormhole might be spotted by the way its gravity affects light that passes by. Certain solutions in general relativity allow for the existence of wormholes where the mouth of each is a blackhole. However, a naturally occurring blackhole, formed by the collapse of a dying star, does not by itself create a wormhole.

Ironically, this is idea of wormholes and blackholes exists in the social imagination. Scientists use the social imagination, there is no other. They do not have some special access by use of equations to another kind of imagination, but theirs is one we could call expanded as in they have a willingness or desire to stretch the imagination they have gained socially.

What is interesting for me as a sociologist who sees only the social imagination as the source of reality even cosmic is that in the discussion between physicists and cosmologists about the existences of wormholes and blackholes and including all others kinds of matter that they have imagined and experimentally interacted with, sounds like and is simply proof of the workings of the social imagination daring its own abilities.

This is made evident when we we read that the first problem among them to discussed is the size of wormholes. Some imagine that primordial wormholes are microscopic. However, as the universe expands, others imagine that it is possible that some may have been stretched to larger sizes.

Another problem for these scientists in their social imagination comes in the form of stability. Can the social imagination sustain this idea over a period of time... this idea of wormholes and blackholes? You see, the social imagination even among scientists changes.  I smile when I see that their imaginations change as they discuss how a wormhole can contain "exotic" matter which could stay open and unchanging for longer periods of time. And, yet, they seem to shrink in their social imagination when imagining how when adding exotic matter to a wormhole might stabilize it, there is still the possibility that the addition of "regular" matter would be sufficient to destabilize the portal - wormhole.

So, you see that it all depends on the social imagination!

*used a reference ~  http://www.space.com/20881-wormholes.html

Thursday, April 9, 2015

CERN and its LHC ~ Year of Light

CERN is the European Organization for Nuclear Research, physicists and engineers are probing the fundamental structure of the universe. They use the world's largest and most complex scientific instruments to study the basic constituents of matter – the fundamental particles. The particles are made to collide together at close to the speed of light. The process gives the physicists clues about how the particles interact, and provides insights into the fundamental laws of nature.

CERN 2015 was declared the International Year of Light with regard to all technologies that are light based. This was declared by the UN General Assembly on the occasion of the centenary of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity. CERN is taking this wonderful opportunity to communicate about the High Luminosity LHC project and CERN’s involvement in the SESAME synchrotron project in Amman Jordan very near Israel's border.

The current Members (2014) of SESAME are Bahrain, Cyprus, Egypt, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Israel, Jordan, Pakistan, the Palestinian Authority, and Turkey.
Current Observers (2014) are Brazil, China (People’s Republic of), France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Portugal, Russian Federation, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. Through the SESAME Council, the Members of SESAME have full control over the development and exploitation of the Centre, and its financial matters.

What is interesting for me as a social reality observer are the projects and cooperation we find at CERN. It is very interesting to observe the names and or titles given to things which are socially created. SESAME is a word used to request entry into something... "open Sesame!" I also find very note worthy as I like to pay attention to symbols used to illustrate places and agendas or projects which actually reveal hidden agendas in the imagination. For instance, there is a statue at CERN that catches my attention in this respect. It is the Hindu Shiva dancer performing so to speak at the CERN. This statue has meaning and my being a sociologist, meaning means everything in the social reality.  The depiction of the Hindu god Shiva is of a cosmic dancer who performs his/her divine dance to destroy a weary universe and make preparations for god Brahma to start the process of creation. Mmm...

Speaking also as a sociologist that gets excited about quantum physics, I can only try to imagine what scientists are up to at CERN given their statuesque inspiration; but do I want to??? What are they looking for, imagining and even hoping for?

Just this week, CERN restarted its LHC program after a lengthy pause. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is the world’s largest and most powerful particle accelerator. It first started up on 10 September 2008, and remains the latest addition to CERN’s accelerator complex. The LHC consists of a 27-kilometre ring of superconducting magnets with a number of accelerating structures to boost the energy of the particles along the way. Inside the accelerator, two high-energy particle beams travel at close to the speed of light before they are made to collide.

What does the LHC mean for social reality? Good question. We must first ask what is the interest we and we as in 'scientists' have in creating something like the LHC? Is it for the betterment of all social imagination as in all humanity? If yes, in what way? What do we gain from such experimentation? Some say information about what black holes. I can tell you that black holes are attractive to us only because we are collectively using our social imagination as in socially engaged in learning about the universe. So, what could be wrong with that? Nothing, I might suppose. But, what would understanding a black hole mean to us in our socially imagined universe? That is the question. And, what if it proves not good as in not wise for social reality? We could imagine gaining some kind of cosmic insight into our social imagination, but that simply would be a stretch of the imagination... how flexible is the fabric of the social imagination without losing our humanity? Is that risky? I suppose it is.  Could it be bad for social imagination? Don't know yet.

So, hang on to your hats as we 'open Sesame'!

*FYI - the first photo above was taken by me in my kitchen with a simple camera. I guess I have a social quantum imagination and don't need LHC to prove it.