Archive for November, 2011

Inter-Connectivity Of Everything

November 27, 2011




Physics Discussion Concluded

The following is my own (possible) solution to the problems discussed in the physics discussion preceding this post. This post, by the way, will again be posted at the conclusion of my next and last physics discussion, which takes place high in the Canadian Rocky Mountains (also on this bicycle trip).

Nov. 2011

Dialectical Freedom’s Structural Form, b~b~bb, Summarized:

[From within the context of the b~b~bb structure, the “seeming contradictions” that separate Relativity physics from the physics of Quantum Mechanics become logically necessary. In fact, not only does this structure explain some of the weirdness associated with Quantum Mechanics, it also identifies the origin of logical thinking per se. Here’s a quick breakdown of the b~b~bb structure—reading from right to left this structure is describing discontinuity occurring in continuity—time of mind, (~bb). Because of this structure a person like René Descartes can express the truism “Cogito ergo sum,”– I think therefore I am. But, “time of mind” only accounts for half of the b~b~bb structure. “Time of mind” occurs within the universe at large, (b~b, continuity occurring in discontinuity) i.e., growth, decay, fission, fusion, etc.]

Quantum Strangeness Structurally Explained

“Relativity,” according to Laszlo (2004), “did away with space and time as the backdrop of deterministic motion of mass points, but it preserved the unambiguous description of the basic entities of the physical universe.” In my structural theory opposites are necessary in order to preserve “wholeness,” so discontinuity, indeterminism, and non-locality become just as essential for a description of the physical universe as determinism, continuity, and locality. Levels of negation, in this new theory, answer the question: Why do contradictory aspects separate micro universe from macro universe or, put another way, why are micro events probable and macro events deterministic? Predictions for micro and macro events are possible (micro probable, macro deterministic) because the evolution of the universe takes place in the space that separates, embeds and connects—connects to the structural space of logical implication. So now we may ask: What are the pre-conditions for this state of affairs?

Determinism, locality and continuity allow for reductionist methods of science to work; that is, until science penetrates deep into that area where the integrity of the physical universe breaks down, where the deterministic motions of mass points no longer exist. At the depths of the “material world” there exists a fuzzy world that exhibits only statistical behavior, behavior only when we observe it– when we separate ourselves from it. There we find a physical reality with no uniquely determinable location, a physical reality that exists in several states at the same time, a physical reality structured by a mathematical equation. In the theory of freedom’s structural form, two “forms” stand out as a way to better understand the contradictory concepts, which remain at odds with one another in the theory of relativity and quantum physics.

The same attributes (discontinuity, indeterminism, and non-locality) that characterize self-consciousness characterize also the “double negation” that serves as the ground of freedom. Both of these “forms” generate implication. At “ground” implication remains open, while in self-consciousness, implication opens up the human world-historical-process. In other words, the negation that lies at the center of self-consciousness, the negation that permits our capacity to solve mathematical equations, lies also at the “ground level” of our experience with quantum physics. Because observation takes place in the space of continuity, determinism and locality– self-consciousness’s negative space— there is an unavoidable clash of worlds—the world of continuity, determinism and locality (relativity) clashes with the world of discontinuity, indeterminism, and non-locality (quantum physics). Bottom line—the theory of relativity accurately describes natural phenomena. Einstein’s equations, when applied to the world of physical events, provide accurate information concerning our status as participating agents in the physical universe. Likewise, quantum mechanics accurately describes natural phenomena. Only the phenomena being described are “fuzzy” because, as it is throughout freedom’s dialectic, the space that separates also embeds and connects. In other words, on the quantum level, self-consciousness confronts its own ground condition in the form of the “phenomenal strangeness” of quantum physics.

Ultimately, from its most holistic perspective, dialectical freedom’s structural form tells us: Were it not for the negative space/condition of determinism, continuity, and locality, the human consciousness of discontinuity, non-locality, and indeterminism (opposites are necessary to conserve wholeness) would not be free in a world of our own experience (by degrees, experience of our own choosing), seeking truth, justice, and religious meaning.