#54 EPR, Bell Inequality, Aspect Experiments, Superdeterminism; biophysics trilogy book series: "Darwin Evolution replaced by Superdeterminism from Quantum Mechanics"
|
|
Thread rating:  |
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com - 18 Apr 2008 00:10 GMT Finally I reached a point where I wanted to reach in this trilogy series. And it is fitting that this is a trilogy series for all three books are interconnected that a change in one of the books instantly has a profound change in the other two books (spooky action at a distance)
Let me write this chapter to those readers who have never picked up a physics book. So if I can write this chapter so that those readers can understand what is said, then I have achieved my goal. That means little to no math.
Superdeterminism starts with a fight between Bohr and Einstein and called EPR (have to look up a historical date for EPR and some call it EPRB to include Bohm.) With EPR raging, in steps John Bell discovering a mathematical inequality in 1964 that can experimentally test whether Bohr was correct or Einstein was correct.
What was EPR? EPR was the fight between Bohr and Einstein where Bohr said that if you start two beams of light of information that are connected at the start and then transmit those two light beams in opposite directions clear across the Cosmos, that if you make a change or alteration in one beam of light when they are separated that the change instantly changes the other beam of light. Einstein said that a change in one beam cannot possible affect the other beam once separated.
Commonsense would have sided with Einstein, because, how in the world would a change or alteration in the information contained in beam A separated from beam B by half way across the Cosmos or even 90 percent of the way across the Cosmos, that a change in beam A could not possible affect beam B. Spooky action at a distance cannot exist. That is what Einstein believed. But Bohr was relying on the principles of Quantum Mechanics and those principles said that a change in either beam would instantly cause a change in the other beam, regardless of how far apart.
Now keep in mind, that EPR starts with a connected system, connected information and parameters and then separates. And once separated the question is whether a change or alteration of one beam affects the other beam.
After Bell gave his Inequality in 1964, we had for the first time a means of testing whether Bohr was correct or whether Einstein. Soon after Bell gave his Inequality, a Frenchman named Alain Aspect did the experiment to see who was right, was it Einstein or Bohr? It was Bohr and it means that everything in the Cosmos is connected even if a change occurs to a light beam that had travelled to the opposite end of the Cosmos. So Bohr was correct and Spooky Action at a Distance is true.
But the story does not stop there, but only gets far better.
John Bell made the next critical insight into the EPR then Bell Inequality then Aspect Experiment results. It is now 1985 and before the BBC in England, John Bell in a lecture talks of Superdeterminism as the way forward and resolution of Spooky Action at a Distance. Because Spooky Action means there must be light travelling faster than the speed of light to change beam A or beam B. So Spooky Action at a Distance means Superluminal speeds. But we all know there is no speed faster than the speed of light.
So to resolve this problem of connectedness clear across the Cosmos, Bell came up with his most brilliant concept of Superdeterminism. That the Universe has no free will and where everything is ordered or fated to happen. Here is what John Bell said in a BBC interview in 1985, and there are three quotes listed here:
--- quoting John Bell ---
[Superdeterminism] involves absolute determinism in the universe, the complete absence of free will. Suppose the world is super-deterministic, with not just inanimate nature running on behind-the-scenes clockwork, but with our behavior, including our belief that we are free to choose to do one experiment rather than another, absolutely predetermined, including the "decision" by the experimenter to carry out one set of measurements rather than another, the difficulty disappears. There is no need for a faster than light signal to tell particle A what measurement has been carried out on particle B, because the universe, including particle A, already "knows" what that measurement, and its outcome, will be.
......
There is a way to escape the inference of superluminal speeds and spooky action at a distance. But it involves absolute determinism in the universe, the complete absence of free will. Suppose the world is super-deterministic, with not just inanimate nature running on behind-the-scenes clockwork, but with our behavior, including our belief that we are free to choose to do one experiment rather than another, absolutely predetermined, including the "decision" by the experimenter to carry out one set of measurements rather than another, the difficulty disappears. There is no need for a faster than light signal to tell particle A what measurement has been carried out on particle B, because the universe, including particle A, already "knows" what that measurement, and its outcome, will be.
......
The only alternative to quantum probabilities, superpositions of states, collapse of the wavefunction, and spooky action at a distance, is that everything is superdetermined. For me it is a dilemma. I think it is a deep dilemma, and the resolution of it will not be trivial; it will require a substantial change in the way we look at things.
--- end of John Bell quotes ---
So that is physics and those experiments are repeatable. The Bell Inequality and the Aspect experiments are here to stay.
Whenever Quantum Mechanics had something say about a topic in physics or any science, whatever it was the QM said, it turned out that the QM was correct and all the other ideas were wrong.
But noone has applied that Superdeterminism to biology. One of the reasons is because Bell died in 1990 at a very young age and was not able to thus apply his Superdeterminism. Another reason is that Superdeterminism does not work in a Big Bang model of the Cosmos and when Bell was alive there was only the Big Bang Cosmology. In order to work, puppets need a puppetmaster. So what makes Superdeterminism work is a Atom Totality theory where galaxies and stars are bits and pieces of the last electrons of one big atom. Now we have a puppetmaster as the Nucleus of the Atom Totality. So as we look at the night sky and see stars and galaxies we really see is the dots of the electron dot cloud of the last electrons of a Atom Totality. The nucleus of this Cosmic Atom is not easily seen. It is in the direction of what the astronomers call the Great Attractor.
Now we can sew together biology with Quantum Mechanics. Can we have Darwin Evolution and yet no "free will"? Can we have Evolution if all living creatures are puppets to a puppetmaster? No, of course not. What we can have is Darwin Evolution of its three components: 1) mutation 2) genetic recombination 3) reproductive isolation
But we cannot have Natural Selection (differential reproductive success) since that is based on probabilities and free-will.
But we need more components if the Universe is run by Superdeterminism. Superdeterminism accomodates those four components but adds at least two new components that biology is contained within photons of light itself. This bridges physics with biology.
The two new components are that Photons or Neutrinos can duplicate themselves and the second new component is that Photons or Neutrinos have "perfect DNA/RNA" inside themselves.
Darwin Evolution can never explain how life itself started and this is where physics adds the two new components. The gulf between nonliving and living is bridged by Quantum Mechanics in saying that within light or photons is packaged DNA and RNA. This also answers how a puppetmaster can control all life, in that a mind or brain does not do the thinking but that a brain has a photon shot into the brain coming from the Nucleus and where that photon is descrambled into its "thought or idea".
First life was not created by billions of years of chemicals sloshing around and zapped by lightning. First life was created when a photon or neutrino imparted its energy and within the internal parts of the photon came out a blue green algae cell. Earth is bombarded daily by cosmic rays packing energy as high as 10^14 MeV which is enough energy to create a small insect on the spot.
Now I hope I have made the above as clear and easy as possible for newcomers to understand but if I have failed in that desire, it behooves me in future editions of this book to keep trying to simplify.
Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com - 18 Apr 2008 18:06 GMT This post does not appear in a timely manner in a Google Search. As previously, someone is attaching "no display".
Can NANA check into this
Newsgroups: sci.physics, sci.bio.technology, sci.bio.misc From: plutonium.archime...@gmail.com Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 16:10:27 -0700 (PDT) Local: Thurs, Apr 17 2008 6:10 pm Subject: #54 EPR, Bell Inequality, Aspect Experiments, Superdeterminism; biophysics trilogy book series: "Darwin Evolution replaced by Superdeterminism from Quantum Mechanics"
plutonium.archime...@gmail.com wrote:
> Finally I reached a point where I wanted to reach in this trilogy > series. And it is fitting [quoted text clipped - 220 lines] > whole entire Universe is just one big atom > where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com - 18 Apr 2008 18:48 GMT Alright, let me run through the logic of Superdeterminism again only more in summary form.
EPR was started around 1935 and later on with Bohm included EPRB was a fight between Bohr and Einstein. Was Bohr with Quantum Mechanics correct or was Einstein who favored Classical Newtonian Mechanics correct? The fight was whether a packet of information was divided and separated and then moved to opposite sides of the Cosmos, and with a change or alteration in one of the split packets causes a change in the opposite direction moving split packet. If Bohr and QM is correct then a change in packet B automatically changes packet A regardless of the distance between the packets. If Einstein is correct, then a change in either packet could never induce a change in the other packet.
By 1964, an engineer named John Bell found a way of experimentally testing EPRB which is famously known as Bell Inequality. By the early 1980s Alain Aspect in France set up and conducted the experiment. The results of the experiment proved that Bohr and Quantum Mechanics won.
But the story does not end there for the most incredible and pretty part of the story is yet to come. In 1985, at a talk with the BBC, John Bell announced what is probably his most famous contribution to science-- Superdeterminism. I cannot say it any better than John Bell of 1985, so here are two of his quotes:
--- quoting John Bell ---
There is a way to escape the inference of superluminal speeds and spooky action at a distance. But it involves absolute determinism in the universe, the complete absence of free will. Suppose the world is super-deterministic, with not just inanimate nature running on behind-the-scenes clockwork, but with our behavior, including our belief that we are free to choose to do one experiment rather than another, absolutely predetermined, including the "decision" by the experimenter to carry out one set of measurements rather than another, the difficulty disappears. There is no need for a faster than light signal to tell particle A what measurement has been carried out on particle B, because the universe, including particle A, already "knows" what that measurement, and its outcome, will be.
......
The only alternative to quantum probabilities, superpositions of states, collapse of the wavefunction, and spooky action at a distance, is that everything is superdetermined. For me it is a dilemma. I think it is a deep dilemma, and the resolution of it will not be trivial; it will require a substantial change in the way we look at things.
--- end of John Bell quotes ---
So by 1985, as a result to the Bell Inequality and the Aspect Experimental Results that the world of physics now has superluminal speeds and has Spooky Action at a Distance. Now most physicists are not both physicists and mathematicians at once. Sometimes in the history of science we have a person gifted in both physics and math where they are at ease in both fields. Gauss was one of them and so was Poincare.
So between 1985 and 2008, the physics community is dumbfounded in interpretating and understanding and explaining EPRB to Bell Inequalty to Aspect Experiments to Superdeterminism. The community of physicists are dumbfounded in understanding and explaining this chain of events. But to a mathematician, he can easily see what the true interpretation is. He can see that there is a contradiction of physics the moment you have Spooky Action at a Distance and once you have Superluminal Speeds. So the mathematician would say "Yes sir, here is a contradiction and the only true relief is something that eliminates the contradiction."
What eliminates the contradiction of physics is Superdeterminism.
Now this is not the first time in the history of science where a field of scientists of a subject had a difficult time of "interpreting their findings". Where they simply failed to put the logic together and were so illogical that they kept rummaging on the edges of the data and test results. Where they kept saying, well it is inconclusive or there are loopholes and other nonsense excuses. Sort of reminds me of Global Warming denialists.
Anyway, there are no loopholes. EPRB through Bell Inequality through Aspect Experiments leads to one conclusion, that Quantum Mechanics exists over the entire Cosmos and that Superdeterminism is how the Universe operates.
It is sad that Bell died in the year 1990 and October of 1990, and it is sad because November of 1990 was discovered the Atom Totality theory. Sad because Superdeterminism cannot work in a Big Bang theory for there is no puppetmaster in a Big Bang that controls all puppets. In the Atom Totality theory, there is the Nucleus of the Atom Totality which is the control center of the Cosmos and thus we have a puppetmaster.
Now I made some mistakes in axiomatizing the Modern Synthesis of Darwin Evolution. I made a mistake by saying that Natural Selection does not fit with Superdeterminism. I maybe wrong on that but this post is already too long.
Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
Archimedes Plutonium - 18 Apr 2008 19:36 GMT Archimedes Plutonium wrote: (snipped)
> Now I made some mistakes in axiomatizing the Modern Synthesis of > Darwin Evolution. I made > a mistake by saying that Natural Selection does not fit with > Superdeterminism. I maybe wrong > on that but this post is already too long. Previously Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
(cut)
> So, now, the new axioms of biology under the theory of > Superdeterminism would go like this:
> 1) Photons and neutrinos of physics can duplicate > 2) Photons and neutrinos of physics pack inside themselves "perfect [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > 6) Genetic Recombination > 7) Reproductive Isolation I made some mistakes above. I thought the axiom that falsifies Darwin Evolution is the Natural Selection axiom (differential reproductive success). It is not the axiom that tears apart Darwin Evolution, for what tears apart Darwin Evolution is not even stated in these four axioms of (1) mutation (2) genetic recombination (3) Natural Selection (4) Reproductive Isolation.
Now I got those four axioms from this old book which started my adventure way back in the 1970s, specifically 1975, when I ventured out to find a mathematization of Darwin Evolution theory. I wanted to axiomatize the Darwin Evolution. So here I am in 2008, some 25 plus 8 equals 33 years later and finally doing what I started doing.
The book that started me on this road of adventure is Concepts of Biology, Buffaloe & Throneberry, 1973, and on pages 239 through 250 gives the Modern Synthesis of Darwin Evolution theory as four operating axioms (1) Mutation (2) Genetic Recombination (3) Natural Selection and (4) Reproductive Isolation.
Now what if all four of those concepts merged into Superdeterminism. Where all 4 concepts agreed and were a part of Superdeterminism. Where none of those 4 concepts disagreed with Superdeterminism. Then, would Darwin Evolution theory be a subset and that Superdeterminism would be merely an Extension of Darwin Evolution and so in this manner, an extension of Darwin Evolution keeps the theory all intact and all correct.
I wish it were so simple, but I am afraid that Darwin Evolution is not a subset of Superdeterminism and that Superdeterminism is not a extension of Darwin Evolution.
I was wrong in an earlier post where I said that the concept of Natural Selection was the offending concept that contradicted Superdeterminism. It is more complex than that.
Upon reflection and more thought, I come to realize the troublespot. The Modern Synthesis is not a complete list of the axioms with its mere set of 4 axioms listed above.
What Buffaloe & Throneberry missed and all the other biologists missed in listing the 4 axioms of the Modern Synthesis are two hidden and implied axioms.
If Buffaloe & Throneberry and all the other Darwin writers had read Darwin's book on Evolution would have realized that Darwin had two hidden assumed axioms of these two:
(5) world operates on Free-Will (6) events and actions have probabilities in a Cosmos of Newtonian Mechanics.
If any scientist carefully reads Darwins famous books on the Origin of Species and all of his other works of science. If anyone reads them, cannot fail to miss the fact that throughout his works of science, that Darwin has two hidden assumptions that permeate his work. Those two assumptions are that the world is Newtonian Mechanics with probabilities of events or actions taking place and second hidden assumption is that there exists Free Will and choices.
So the proper and more correct Modern Synthesis of Darwin Evolution that Buffaloe & Throneberry should have enumerated into a list that contains not 4 axioms but 6 axioms of these:
(1) Newtonian Mechanics Cosmos where life events and actions have probabilities (2) there exists Free-Will and choice in the Cosmos (3) mutation (4) genetic recombination (5) Natural Selection (differential reproductive success) (6) reproductive isolation
So the four axioms that Buffaloe & Throneberry gave for the Modern Synthesis never really contradicted Superdeterminism and as such would have Darwin Evolution theory as a extension of the Superdeterminism theory. But the trouble was that Darwin Evolution theory as given by only those four axioms is not a complete listing of Darwin Evolution theory. Once a complete listing is given then we see the contradictions between Darwin Evolution and Superdeterminism.
Mutations in Darwin Evolution are based on probabilities of the Cosmos. Mutations in Superdeterminism were fated and ordered up to occurr. So here we immediately see where Evolution contradicts Superdeterminism and where Superdeterminism cannot be a Extension of Darwin Evolution.
Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
|
|
|