[General] Role of observer, a deeper path to introspection

Fri Jul 28 16:43:00 PDT 2017

Wolf: My responses are within your email text below.
Chandra.

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org] On Behalf Of Wolfgang Baer
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 1:33 AM
To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org
Subject: Re: [General] Role of observer, a deeper path to introspection

Chandra:

you make a lot of sense and I will read the Chapter 12 in the next Email

"how five blinds can collaborate to construct a reasonable model of the Cosmic Elephant and then keep on iterating the model ad infinitum,' It is this iterating I see happening especially in High Energy physics  where new discoveries lead to new challenges that lead to new problems ... but who is willing to step back and ask whether the underlying assumptions are adequate for he next phase of evolution. [We just need a hundred very smart but “blind” physicists of all ages who will agree to work collaboratively, instead of rigidly hanging on to the “objective” observation that the elephant teeth are like spears and no more, or no less! It is coming. Otherwise, this one and many other forums, would not have been gathering so many participating hours.]

My interchange with Vivian centered around this point because interpretation of experimental results are made in the context of some assumption framework and therefore it is impossible to challenge a fundamental assumption if one is forced to interpret experiments in the existing framework. [We need to humbly accept something like this: “I have not yet succeeded in formulating THE unified field theory as yet, which is acceptable to everybody. I may not even succeed in spite of all the attempts within my life-time. But, can I facilitate a thinking-path that can assure the success by some future generation? So, I should keep on freely helping others and myself in a collective mode.”

The fame, the Nobel Prize, the wealth, etc., will not accompany us after our death. (However, the Egyptian Kings had a different opinion!) But, we can die peacefully knowing that our children, and grand children and their grandchildren, will be able live within a sustainable biosphere, if we succeed in changing the current culture of ruthless money-driven system towards a perpetually evolving culture, which starts paying attention that we first need to stabilize the biosphere to buy time against the Global Warming and then spend time how we can travel to different livable planets well before the Solar Warming starts engulfing the earth. This is what I mean by “Urgency of Evolution Process Congruent Thinking (see attached). If  we anchor our physics thinking to understand and leverage nature’s marvelous engineering rules to assure human evolution into many millions of years into the future; then we will begin to understand nature better. Our theories will start became more anchored to nature’s actual realities. Nature is a creative system engineer. It will be smarter for us to try to emulate her; instead of telling her how she ought behave simply based upon our mathematical logics and highly creative interpretations of data! WE will need novel rockets that can travel very fast without carrying millions of pounds of explosives. Can we invent such a space ship that re-cycles the energy of the space wherever it is? That is to me the long-term practical physics thinking. I do not get the sense that our current “particle physics” mode of thinking can provide us with this kind of long-term physics-thinking we badly need to assure our very long-term sustainable evolution. You may characterize me as an “Evolution” junkie! But, that is the only way I can find peace in my mind that my thousand generation grand-children down the line will be enjoying the cosmic system while traveling from stars to stars. ]

The speed of light question is a good example. If ones theory is not SRT compliant one is simply told one has a wrong theory and would never be allowed to use it to understand the measurements and their interpretation.

You say "we know that the velocity of light is dictated by both the medium and the velocity of the medium." if space is a perception tied to the material of the observer then the speed of light will always be constant in that observer's space and all experimental results by any moving observer in that space will be "corrected' to make the speed of light come out as a constant. In other words if an observer is convinced the space in front of his nose is absolute  independent reality then any physical parameter must be corrected to the value it "must be" in that absolute independent reality. The flaw is the independent physical reality assumption. [This is a tough paragraph for me to respond. Currently our interpretational propensities are divergent because we still do not understand  how much of our thinking logic under the guise of our old fashioned survivability . So, my response will be very much like my earlier response above.

Now that we are the “top dog” in the biosphere, we do not need many of the strongly programmed old-evolution demanded interpretation (“hallucination”) propensity. We can now start re-directing the evolution of our DNA-driven neural logics towards Consciously Constructing Purposeful but Diversity of Paths for our Sustainable evolution. This is where the Eastern tools of meditation and the Western tools of epigenomics will start converging to develop articulate-able guidance towards organizing our necessary future thinking logics. These will be science-facts within this century. We might as well proactively welcome the social process of consciously constructing the purposeful evolution of our minds. ]

Thank you for the paper. I'll comment sooon

Wolf

Dr. Wolfgang Baer

Research Director

Nascent Systems Inc.

tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432

E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com<mailto:wolf at NascentInc.com>
On 7/26/2017 9:52 AM, Roychoudhuri, Chandra wrote:
Wolf:
You have said it well:
“Concentrating on finding the mechanisms of connection between the Hallucination and the reality is my approach. I think the constant speed of light assumption is one of the first pillars that must fall. If there is such a constant it should in my opinion be interpreted as the speed of Now…”.

Yes, “constant c” is a fundamentally flawed postulate by the theoretician Einstein, so fond of “Gedanken Experiments”. Unfortunately, one can cook up wide varieties of logically self-consistent mathematical theories and then match them up with “Gedanken” experiments! We know that in the real world, we know that the velocity of light is dictated by both the medium and the velocity of the medium. Apparently, Einstein’s “Gedanken Experiment” of riding the crest of a light wave inspired him to construct SRT and sold all the mathematical physicists that nature if 4-diemsional. Out of the “Messiah Complex”, we now believe that the universe could be 5, or, 7, or 11, or, 13, …. dimensional system where many of the dimensions are “folded in” !!!! By the way, running time is not a measurable physical parameter. We can contract or dilate frequency of diverse oscillators, using proper physical influence, not the running time. Frequency of oscillators help us measure a period (or time interval).

Wise human thinkers have recognized this “Hallucination” problem from ancient times, which are obvious (i) from Asian perspective of how five blinds can collaborate to construct a reasonable model of the Cosmic Elephant and then keep on iterating the model ad infinitum, or (ii) Western perspective of “shadows of external objects projected inside a cave wall”. Unfortunately, we become “groupies” of our contemporary “messiahs” to survive economically and feel “belonging to the sociaety”. The result is the current sad state of moribund physics thinking. Fortunately, many people have started challenging this moribund status quo with papers, books, and web forums.

So, I see well-recognizable renaissance in physics coming within a few decades! Yes, it will take time. Einstein’s “indivisible quanta” of 1905 still dominates our vocabulary; even though no optical engineer ever try to propagate an “indivisible quanta”; they always propagate light waves. Unfortunately, they propagate Fourier monochromatic modes that neither exits in nature; nor is a causal signal. [I have been trying to correct this fundamental confusion through my book, “Causal Physics”.]

Coming back to our methodology of thinking, I have defined an iterative approach in the Ch.12 of the above book. I have now generalized the approach by anchoring our sustainable evolution to remain anchored with the reality of nature! “Urgency of Evolution Process Congruent Thinking” [see attached].

However, one can immediately bring a challenge. If all our interpretations are cooked up by our neural network for survival; then who has the authority to define objective reality? Everybody, but collaboratively, like modeling the “Cosmic Elephant”.

Let us realize the fact that the seeing “color” is an interpretation by the brain. It is a complete figment of our neuro-genetic interpretation! That is why none of us will succeed in quantitatively defining the subtlety of color variation of any magnificent color painting without a quantitative spectrometer. The “color” is not an objective parameter; but the frequency is (not wavelength, though!). One can now recognize the subtle difference, from seeing “color”, to quantifying energy content per frequency interval. This is “objective” science determined by instruments without a “mind”, which is reproducible outside of human interpretations.

And, we have already mastered this technology quite a bit. The biosphere exists. It has been nurturing biological lives for over 3.5 billion years without the intervention of humans. We are a very late product of this evolution. This is an objective recognition on our part! Our, successful evolution needed “instantaneous color” recognition to survive for our day-to-day living in our earlier stage. We have now overcome our survival mode as a species. And we now have become a pest in the biosphere, instead of becoming the caretaker of it for our own long-term future. This is the sad break in our wisdom. This is why I am promoting the concept, “Urgency of Evolution Process Congruent Thinking”. This approach helps generate a common, but perpetually evolving thinking platform for all thinkers, whether working to understand Nature’s Engineering (Physics, Chemistry, Biology, etc.) or, to carry out our Social Engineering (Economics, Politics, Religions, etc.).

Sincerely,
Chandra.

From: General [mailto:general-bounces+chandra.roychoudhuri=uconn.edu at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org]On Behalf Of Wolfgang Baer
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2017 12:40 AM
To: general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org<mailto:general at lists.natureoflightandparticles.org>
Subject: Re: [General] Role of observer, a deeper path to introspection

Chandra:

Unfortunately the TED talk does not work on my machine but the transcript is available and Anl Seth states what many people studying the human psyche as well as eastern philosophy have said for centuries , Yes we are Hallucinating reality and our physics is built upon that hallucination, but it works so well, or does it?

However  as Don Hoffmancognitive scientist UC Irvine  contends https://www.ted.com/talks/donald_hoffman_do_we_see_reality_as_it_is

What we see is like the icons on a computer screen, a file icon may only be a symbol of what is real on the disk, but these icons as well as the "hallucinations" are connected to some reality and we must take them seriously. Deleting the icon also deletes the disk which may have disastrous consequences.

For our discussion group it means we can take Albrechts route and try to understand the universe and photons first based upon the idea that it is independently real and then solve the human consciousness problem or we can take the opposite approach and rebuild a  physics without the independent physical reality assumption and see if we cannot build out a truly macroscopic quantum theory. Concentrating on finding the mechanisms of connection between the Hallucination and the reality is my approach. I think the constant speed of light assumption is one of the first pillars that must fall. If there is such a constant it should in my opinion be interpreted as the speed of Now , a property we individually apply to all our observations.

best

Wolf

Dr. Wolfgang Baer

Research Director

Nascent Systems Inc.

tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432

E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com<mailto:wolf at NascentInc.com>
On 7/23/2017 2:44 PM, Roychoudhuri, Chandra wrote:
Dear colleagues:
Lately there has been continuing discussion on the role of observer and the reality. I view that to be healthy.

We must guide ourselves to understand and model the universe without human mind shaping the cosmic system and its working rules. This suggestion comes from the fact that our own logic puts the universe to be at least 13 billion years old, while we, in the human form, have started evolving barely 5 million years ago (give or take).

However, we are not smart enough to determine a well-defined and decisive path, as yet. Our search must accommodate perpetual iteration of thinking strategy as we keep on advancing. This is well justified in the following TED-talk.
Enjoy:

https://www.ted.com/talks/anil_seth_how_your_brain_hallucinates_your_conscious_reality?utm_source=newsletter_weekly_2017-07-22&utm_campaign=newsletter_weekly&utm_medium=email&utm_content=talk_of_the_week_image

Chandra.

_______________________________________________

If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at Wolf at nascentinc.com<mailto:Wolf at nascentinc.com>

<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"<http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>>

Click here to unsubscribe

</a>

_______________________________________________

If you no longer wish to receive communication from the Nature of Light and Particles General Discussion List at Wolf at nascentinc.com<mailto:Wolf at nascentinc.com>

<a href="http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1"<http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/options.cgi/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/wolf%40nascentinc.com?unsub=1&unsubconfirm=1>>

Click here to unsubscribe

</a>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170728/3c1b868c/attachment.htm>