Misbehaving Subatomics: Electrons & Photons
How can the unitary Subatomic World be disobedient?
As an intellectual rebel, whose Life’s motto is ‘All knowledge crumbles’, it delights me to highlight the disobedient nature of the Subatomic World.
In the prior article, Unitary Subatomics, the Author developed the notion that the material world is an ideal subject for the either/or logic of obedient equations due to the unitary nature of the 4 basic subatomic entities. How can the subatomic world be disobedient if the subatomics are unitary? What does disobedience mean in the subatomic context? What are the implications of subatomic disobedience? Addressing these questions is the purpose of the following article.
Obedient Equations, Either-or Logic, & Matter: A Perfect Fit
Equations are considered to be obedient if they obey the either-or logic of traditional set theory. As seen in the prior article, this either-or logic is perfect for describing the behavior of matter. This perfect fit is due to the fact that the subatomic building blocks of our atom-based world are unitary in nature. There are only four building blocks and each has a permanent essence. Remember 'permanent essence' is a key requirement for either-or logic.
2 subatomics well-behaved, 2 ill-behaved
Two of these subatomic building blocks (the protons and neutrons) are obedient particles that are well behaved. The other two (the electrons and photons) are disobedient entities that are not well behaved at all.
Electrons & Photons don't fit into Traditional Categories.
Sometimes they behave as waves and sometimes as particles. In other words, electrons and photons are disobedient entities because they don’t fit into traditional categories.
Disobedient entities at the foundation of Obedient Material Universe
Connecting the dots: The interaction of obedient subatomic particles and disobedient subatomic entities yields obedient atoms, which are the building blocks of obedient matter. In other words, the obedient world of matter has at its foundation disobedient subatomic entities.
Feynman: Interactions of electrons and photons determine all of chemistry and biology
Note the disobedient subatomic entities, electrons and photons, are not trivial in any way. In fact, they are highly significant. As Richard Feynman reports in his book QED:
"I want to tell you about the part of physics that we know best, the interaction of light and electrons. Most of the phenomena you are familiar with involve the interaction of light and electrons - all of chemistry and biology, for example. The only phenomena that are not covered by this theory are phenomena of gravitation and nuclear phenomena, everything else is contained in this theory." (QED, 1985, p. 77)
When Feynman says 'everything else is contained in this theory', he is, of course, referring to the general behavior of inert matter, not living matter.
Consistent behavior of 4 subatomics leads to perfect predictability
Although they don’t fit into the traditional categories, electrons and photons behave consistently as subatomic entities. Their behavior is predictable, at least, collectively. The consistent behavior of the 4 subatomic ‘building blocks’ leads to consistent, perfectly predictable behavior from the matter of our atom-based molecular world. The marvels of our technological world are a mute testament to the power of this perspective. If the 4 subatomics entities behave consistently, how different can they really be? And why does it matter?
Standard Definitions
Let's look at some standard definitions to better understand the disobedient nature of electrons and photons.
Dictionary Definition: Electron's properties depend upon context, unlike Atoms.
From the basic New American Desk Encyclopedia:
“Electrons, a stable subatomic particle … Free electrons in a gas or vacuum can usually be treated as classical particles, though their wave properties become more important when they interact with or are associated with atomic nuclei.” (p. 406)
Note that an electron is defined as a particle, even though it can only be treated a particle when it is free of a nucleus, and then only usually. However, electrons are most often associated with the nucleus of an atom, and then their wave properties become more important. In other words, the electron's context determines its properties. In contrast, atoms, the building blocks of our material universe, are always treated as particles, no matter which particles they are associated with. An atom's content determines its properties, not its context.
Dictionary Definitions: Photon, Light
“Photons, the quantum of electromagnetic energy, often thought of as the particle associated with light or other electromagnetic radiation.” (p. 976)
“Light, electromagnetic radiation to which the eye is sensitive. … Today physicists explain optical phenomena in terms either of waves (reflection, refraction, diffraction, interference) or quanta (blackbody radiation, photoelectric emission) as is required by each case.” (p. 734)
Light behaves as either a wave or a particle.
Note that a photon is defined as energy and thought of as a particle of light. In contrast, the heat and mechanical energy of our everyday world of atoms are always energy and never particles. Further, light sometimes behaves as a wave and other times as a particle.
Feynman: Light behaves like a particle.
In contrast to common thinking, Feynman believes that light definitely behaves like a particle.
"It is very important to know that light behaves like particles, especially for those of you who have gone to school, where you were probably told something about light behaving like waves. I'm telling you the way it does behave – like particles." (QED, p.15)
Photons and Atoms: Major divergence in Particle-like behavior
However, Feynman's particles are unlike any particle from atoms on up. Like electrons and unlike atoms, their existence is probabilistic. Stranger still, to make accurate predictions regarding these 'particles', one must employ probabilistic measures that take into account every possible path including moving forward and backward in time. In contrast, atoms only move forward in time on one path. These subatomic 'particles' certainly share certain features in common with standard particles, such as atoms and molecules. However, they diverge significantly with standard atom-based particles regarding major categories: as we’ve seen, time and probability, and, as we shall see, space and energy, as well.
Due to divergences, must expand notion of particle.
Due to these significant divergences from our traditional notion of particle, some questions emerge. Do these subatomic 'particles' belong to another category other than wave or particle. Or must we expand our notion of particle beyond the traditional understanding? If we expand our understanding of particle, what unusual perspectives can now enter in?
Before considering these questions, let us examine some more reasons that the subatomic world is distinctly different from our atom-based world.
Electrons, Photons & Life: Individual Unpredictability, Collective Predictability
There are other ways in which the disobedient subatomic entities – electrons and photons, differ significantly from atoms. In fact, we shall see that the logic of electrons is closer to the logic of humans than it is to the logic of our atom-based world of molecules and matter.
Electrons: Individual behavior is unpredictable; General behavior is predictable.
As mentioned, individual atoms are perfectly predictable. Not so with electrons. Schrödinger’s wave equation provides the best information that we have about an electron. In fact, this equation is introduced in beginning college Physics classes, as the way we characterize an electron. However, this equation does not precisely define the nature of the electron, nor does it precisely define the position or momentum of the electron. It only defines a range of positions and momentums. Because Schrödinger’s information pulse only reveals the probability of behavior it tells us very little about the behavior of individual electrons. The behavior of individual electrons and photons is as unpredictable as the throw of the dice. However, the collective behavior of enormous collections of photons and electrons is as predictable as the collective behavior of an enormous amount of coin throws.
Non-human Life: Individual behavior is unpredictable; General behavior is predictable.
The same holds true of living systems. Physicists can easily predict the behavior of any iron ball that is thrown into the air at any time in every location. Nobody can predict the behavior of an individual chicken when thrown into the air. However, ornithologists can make accurate predictions about the general behavior of a flock of chickens. In fact, the implicit assumption about non-human life is that there is a general consistency of species behavior that can be extended backward and forward in time. Even though they can't predict individual behavior, the scientific community assumes that bee colonies, wolf packs, schools of fish and flocks of birds behave consistently over time. Similarly, no scientist can predict the behavior of an individual electron and photon. Yet Physicists can make accurate predictions about large groups of electrons and photons. Conversely, they can precisely predict the behavior of individual atoms.
General behavior: Electrons perfectly predictable, Life predictable, Humans not.
Schrödinger’s equation, although helpless before an individual electron, can precisely predict the behavior of large groups of electrons. Similarly, biologists and botanists, although helpless before an individual bee or rose, can make fairly precise predictions about the general behavior of flora and fauna. There is, of course, a notable exception. Nobody can make precise predictions about either individuals or large groups of humans. While every form of life presumably goes through biological evolution, humans go through social evolution, as well. In fact, it was the notion of social evolution that suggested the idea of biological evolution. We've suggested elsewhere that the human capacity for self-reflection could be the reason for our divergence from other animals in this account. (This border is certainly fractalized as scientists have observed a limited amount of social evolution in both bears and crows.)
Disobedient Subatomics and Life diverge with Obedient Atoms on Individual Predictability
Let's summarize our findings. The behavior of individual atoms is totally predictable. In contrast, the behavior of individual photons and electrons is totally unpredictable. Similarly the behavior of living systems is also unpredictable on individual levels. While unpredictable on individual levels, the behavior of both the disobedient subatomics and non-human life is predictable on the collective level. Because human social structure evolves, even our general behavior is unpredictable. Thus the behavior of atoms diverges significantly from the behavior of photons, electrons, and life. Individual atoms are predictable, while the individual behavior of subatomic entities and living systems is unpredictable.
Electrons, Living Algorithm & Humans context-based; Atoms content-based
Electron context-based
It is evident that the electron is inherently ambiguous regarding the features that every proton, atom, molecule, hence all matter has. The behavior of an individual electron can’t be pinned down. In this regard, the electron is ultimately disobedient to its nature as a particle. Context determines the ultimate nature of the electron. In other words, the electron has no absolute content. Instead, the electron’s packet of information only reveals the probability of behavior at any particular point in time.
Atoms are pure content, as one of the most permanent Essences in the Universe.
The situation is reversed in our atom-based world. Atoms, the ultimate particle, are pure content. Context has nothing to do with the essence of an atom. As mentioned, atoms are one of the most permanent essences in the universe. They have no life span and, under normal circumstances, could easily last billions of years. Their absolute content is the delight and security of material scientists. The assumption is that hydrogen atoms everywhere in all times and places are identical in content and behavior. Atoms are the ultimate well-behaved particle. Their behavior is perfectly predictable over eternity. While an atom is pure content, an electron’s essence in based in context. In this sense, electrons and atoms are opposites, not belonging in the same category box at all.
Both Living Algorithm and Electron are context-based.
In similar fashion to the electron’s pulse of information, the Living Algorithm’s Pulse of Attention reveals information about a data stream’s linear context. While these measures are based in the content of the data stream, this content is immediately discarded once it has been consumed. In terms of the significant context/content polarity, the electron with its information wave has more in common with the Living Algorithm System than it does with the atom.
Environmental Context, not internal Content, determines Human Behavior
The same holds true of humans. Psychologists have shown that the behavior of humans is situation-specific rather than globally consistent. In other words, human behavior is not automatic. Instead environmental context, not internal content, determines human behavior. In addition, our internal content, in fact the content of all biological organisms, is constantly changing. We continually ingest new material, extract sustenance, and eliminate waste. Our dynamic content enables us to regenerate and thereby survive as an organism. Further, even our dynamic content is shaped by environmental conditions. At all levels of the biological hierarchy, from the single cell to multi-cellular organisms such as humans, external events determine internal content. This is not true of atoms, whose content is permanent and unchanged by external events. Similarly, context, not content, determines the behavior of electrons and photons. These results suggest that neither humans nor these subatomics have the absolute content of an atom.
This content/context polarity reveals yet one more divergence between atoms and the subatomic entities that they consist of. Context, not content, drives the behavior of subatomics and biological systems. Content determines the behavior of atoms.
Electrons, Photons & Humans: The Probability of Behavior
Squaring electron's amplitude determines behavior probability.
Before moving on, we would like to point out another similarity between humans and our disobedient subatomic entities – electrons and photons. The probability of the behavior of humans, electrons and photons is determined in the exact same way. Squaring the amplitude of electron's information wave yields the probability of the electron's location/momentum synergy.
"The square of the amplitude at any point in space gives the probability of finding the electron at that point." (Physics for Poets, p.223)
Squaring Photon's amplitude arrow determines behavior probability.
Nobel Prize winner, Richard Feynman employs the same technique to calculate the probability of a photon's behavior in Quantum Electrodynamics. Speaking about the photon:
"Arrows were multiplied and then added to produce a final arrow (the amplitude for the event), whose square is the probability of the event. … No matter how many arrows we draw, add, or multiply, our objective is to calculate a single final arrow for the event. [Feynman's italics]" (QED, p. 75)
Squaring Human's behavior amplitude arrow determines behavior probability.
In similar fashion, the Author squares what he calls his Pollution Equation to determine the probability of an individual human's behavior. The Pollution Equation is based in two orthogonal behaviors. The Living Algorithm determines the amplitude of these orthogonal 'events'. Squaring the Pollution equation, the Author theorizes, determines the probability of true, false, or polluted behavior. One of the reasons this technique works is that behavior waves, just like material waves such as radio waves, are independent of each other. (A more thorough discussion of this unusual phenomenon is contained in the Author's Firing Process book, beginning Chapter 39.)
Probability not required for the certainty of our Atom-based world.
Note: our atom-based world does not need to rely on probability. As mentioned, scientists can precisely determine the position and trajectory of a single atom. In other words, there is no uncertainty when it comes to the atom. In contrast, the behavior of the disobedient subatomic entities, both the electron and photon, is based in probability. In similar fashion, the behavior of humans is also based in probability. The same equation is employed to determine the behavior probability of the electron, photon, and human – squaring the amplitude of the event.
Summary Link
This article demonstrated that subatomic entities, such as electrons and photons, are disobedient to traditional atom-based particles in a variety of ways. Electrons and photons behave ambiguously, while atoms always behave as particles. The behavior of individual electrons and photons is unpredictable, while the behavior of individual atoms is perfectly predictable. The nature of electrons and photons is determined by context, while the content of indestructible atoms is inviolable. Further, living systems share many of the characteristics of photons and electrons. The behavior of living systems is context-based and unpredictable on individual levels. Finally, the probability of behavior of living systems is computed in a similar fashion to that of photons and electrons - squaring the amplitude of the event wave.
Just as electrons and photons are disobedient to traditional categories, the subatomic world is disobedient to crucial features of our atom-based world. To understand how these two worlds differ, check out the next article in the stream – The Disobedient Subatomic World.