Auditory Logic to better understand Subatomic Info Packets
Handwritten 5-5-13 6:19AM 1.1 hr
Reverse the Arrow from Subatomics to Thought
Thus far in our discussion of the behavior of subatomics, the arrow has pointed one way. The Author employs the auditory world of music and words to understand the subatomic world. Now we are going to reverse the arrow and attempt to employ the behavior of the subatomic world to understand the world of thought. These relationships are suggestive rather than definitive.
Summary: Electrons & Photons don’t fit into Traditional Categories
To provide context for where we are going, let us first summarize where we’ve been. It is undeniable that electrons and photons exhibit odd behavior. Physicists employ event arrows, ‘probability amplitudes’, to characterize the behavior of these subatomic entities. Squaring these arrows yields the probability of a subatomic event occurring – not the certainty of the event. This event could be wave or particle like, or it could reveal position or trajectory. We can only see, hear or measure the results of these subatomic behaviors. We cannot actually see any individual photons or electrons. In short, the behavior of these subatomic entities is probabilistic and they behave in contradictory ways. It is evident that they don’t fit into traditional categories, such waves or particles. Due to these facts, the Author suggests that these subatomic entities could be better characterized as information packets.
Science’s Sight based Logic does not reveal the nature of Info Packets
How are info packets to be understood? The either/or logic of the sight-based container metaphor does not reveal the nature of an info packet. However, the logic of the scientific community is based in sight (discussed elsewhere). Due to this ocular centrism, scientists have a difficult time with the notion of info packets. Instead the scientific establishment continues to refer to the subatomic entities as particles – even though they do not behave like the particles of our atom-based world. By likening them to the world we can see, this is perhaps a way of legitimizing their existence. Yet info packets are unavailable to this sight-based perspective.
Auditory Logic of Music reveals the nature of info packets.
However, if we take an auditory perspective, rather than an ocular one, we can begin to understand the subatomic world. The auditory world of music reveals the nature of info packets. A musical note is an info packet. It is impossible to see info packets; we can only perceive or experience the results. (Note: musical meaning has virtually nothing whatsoever to do with the pretty patterns that we see on an oscilloscope.) Both subatomic or auditory info packets are virtual with no reality until they manifest. The notes (info packets) of music only have meaning when a Listener hears them. Info packets, both subatomics and notes, spread out to manifest. When they interact with something, they give up their information to the Receiver and become real.
Subatomic Time Travel
Thoughts include verbal ideas & musical cognition.
Thoughts are a type of cognitive information packet. In terms of this discussion, thought is a general term that includes verbal ideas as well as the cognition behind a musical experience. The following directives suggest this inclusive definition. ‘Keep your thoughts on the task at hand.’ And ‘Focus your thoughts on the music’. In both cases, thoughts are not associated with words. In the second case, thoughts are instead associated with attending to the meaning behind an auditory sensation.
Electrons & Photons move forward and backward in time.
To understand what the subatomic world reveals about the world of thoughts, let us explore yet one more major divergence between the behavior of electrons and photons and the behavior of atom-based particles. According to experimental evidence, or to make sense of their results, theoretical physicists have had to take into account the possibility that photons and electrons move forward and backwards in time. In contrast, atoms only move forward through time. The particles of our atom-based world don’t provide us any way of understanding subatomic time travel.
Only 3 Laws in the Subatomic World of Electrons & Photons
There are only 3 laws in the subatomic world of electrons and photons. Electrons and photons move from place to place and electrons occasionally emit or absorb a photon. These 3 seemingly simple actions and interaction are able to precisely describe the empirical evidence regarding the behavior of electrons and photons. Internally, electrons are bound to the nucleus of the atom via the exchange of virtual photons. Externally, these subatomic interactions lay the foundations for chemistry and biology.
“The chemical properties of atoms and molecules are largely determined by the behavior of the electrons in their highest energy orbitals.” (Desk Encyclopedia p. 405)
Counterintuitive Subatomic Interactions permeate our Physical Universe
It is evident that these simple subatomic interactions permeate our physical world. However, we cannot see individual electrons and photons do their dance. To account for the results of the dance we can only employ counter-intuitive means: probability arrows that take into account the possibility that electrons and photons move forward and backward in time.
Music, as a means of understanding Subatomic Time Travel
Let us suggest a way to understand this seemingly paradoxical behavior via our sound-based metaphor.
To experience Music, Listener must reference the past.
To experience/understand a piece of music or lecture, we must move forward and backwards in time – constantly referencing our memory of the past to experience the full dimensions of the concert or lecture. For instance in his fugue, Bach introduces a theme in one voice. He then gradually adds one voice after another in succession until 4 voices are eventually playing the original theme. He then introduces a 2nd theme. After developing this musical interlude, Bach returns to the main and first theme to finish off the composition. This technique creates familiarity with the primary theme; the secondary theme refreshes the attention; the return to the familiar initial theme evokes a sense of relief. This musical experience would not be possible without a constant self-referencing of past memories.
Familiarity with a musical composition leads to anticipation of the future.
Further, once the musician or audience becomes familiar with a piece, there is also a sense of anticipation or expectation associated with the piece. The Listener eagerly awaits his favorite part: perhaps the familiar chorus or maybe the booming bass line echoing through the church. This anticipation of the ‘good‘ parts further sweetens the musical experience. To indicate the importance of anticipation in music appreciation, note how many times we listen to a song. Fans clamor for their favorite tunes, not something new. Perhaps they are attempting extract the full meaning from the song. Or perhaps they crave the repetition of a satisfying musical experience. Perhaps these regular repetitions lead to a deeper pulse of experiences via the Living Algorithm’s digestive process. Could this pulse of experiences lead to a transcendent state of consciousness?
Self-referencing of Time: a crucial feature of Music Appreciation
The self-referencing of the past also reflects the future. So as we listen to the auditory information that is transmitted by a familiar piece of music, we are regularly moving from the past to the future, at least mentally. This self-referencing, which includes memory of the past and anticipation of the future, occurs within our brain spontaneously, without conscious effort. Just like the subatomics, it just happens. This self-referencing of time is a crucial feature of our ability to fully appreciate music.
Music weaves Past Experiences with the Present
One other temporal feature of the musical experience bears mentioning. Frequently, a piece of music will evoke memories of another time and place. Records that we heard as a teenager triggers recollections of friends and sensations from that era. Playing this music is a means of weaving past experiences with the present. This virtual experience is yet another way in which music enables us to transcend the space-time continuum of atom-based matter, just as do electrons and photons.
Probabilistic arrows indicate subatomic and musical behavior.
A probabilistic arrow describes the behavior of subatomics. This same arrow, we hypothesize, indicates the probability of human behavior. The arrow, Feynman’s name for the resultant vector after adding all the possibility vectors, points one way. The direction is towards the end of the piece in the case of our musical experience, and straight ahead in the case of light. However, as the composition is unfolding or the photon is moving ahead, all the other possibilities are experienced as well. One set of possibilities includes moving forward and backwards in time. To appreciate the composition, the Listener remembers the past and anticipates the future. To account for the data, photons include this time travel as well. This musical example is a way of understanding the movement of the subatomic entities forwards and backwards through time from an auditory perspective.
Now let us apply this same inferential structure to thoughts, as quanta of mental energy.
Thoughts, as quanta of mental energy
Handwritten 5:57AM 5-17-13 Fr 1.3 hrs
What can the subatomic realm tell us about thoughts?
Thus far in our discussion of subatomics we have focused upon understanding the counterintuitive, even paradoxical, features of the subatomic world from the perspective of the information packets of sound. This section concentrates the mental energy of our Attention upon what the subatomic world can tell us about our thoughts, more specifically the generation of ideas.
Thoughts: quanta of mental energy that interact with quanta of physical energy
Let us liken thoughts to quanta of mental energy. In this way of thinking, thoughts are the subatomics of the mind. Scientists speculate that subatomics operate beneath the uncertainty principle to impart the subtleties of our atom-based world. In similar fashion, we speculate that thoughts operate beneath the uncertainty principle to exert an effect upon our material world. Every time we make a mental decision to do something – anything, we employ mental energy to change the physical world. We speculate that this interaction occurs on subatomic levels.
What is the nature of this presumed subatomic interaction – this subtle exchange of mental and physical energies? Let us look to the subatomics for some parallels.
Context: a factor in Thoughts & Subatomic Behavior
No objectivity in the subatomic world because the Observer is part of the process.
In the subatomic world, the Observer influences the results of the experiment. Because the subatomic info packets are so small, the energy behind the observation interacts with the subatomics to skew the results. As such, in the subatomic world there is no such thing as the objective observer. Further because of the nature of electrons and photons as elemental info packets they give up some of their information each time they are measured. This feature also influences results. Because the Observer’s context is part of the equation, there is no such thing as an independent objective observation in the subatomic world.
Objectivity a possibility in our atom-based world
Conversely, objectivity is possible in our atom-based world. The observing photons required for observation are miniscule, should we say infinitesimal, in relationship to even the smallest atom, hydrogen. As such, they exert only a negligible effect upon the experimental results. Due to the minimal effect of the Observer, objective observations are possible.
Concentrated Information of atom-based ‘particles’ only give up negligible info to device.
If we think of subatomics ‘particles’ as info packets, then atom-based ‘particles’ can be thought of as highly concentrated information (developed more completely in a previous article). Due to the concentrated nature of the information contained in the particulate nature of atoms, they don’t give up much of their information to the measuring device. More precisely, the amount given up is so negligible that it is of no consequence. Either way, the Observer is independent of the measurement. Objectivity is possible in our atom-based world.
Thoughts, as info packets, are dependent upon context.
Like the subatomics, thoughts are also info packets, according to our model. In similar fashion to the subatomics, we speculate that the observation of thoughts influence the outcome. The Observer’s frame of reference is a factor in the equation. Thoughts are not independent entities, like atoms, but are instead dependent upon context. The history of science exhibits the subjective feature of thoughts and ideas. Both Susan Langer and Einstein have stated that the framing of the question determines the nature of the answer. Subjectivity is an inherent feature of the investigation.
Example: Science’s Sight-based context blocks Sound-based understanding.
Here is an example. In their book, Where Mathematics Comes From, Drs. Lakoff and Nunez establish that the scientific community is almost completely based in the either/or logic of the sight-based container metaphor. Due to this ocular centrism, Physicists ‘see’ everything as particles. They are blinded, or are unable to ‘hear’ the process of info packets. While the sight based analysis has produced wonderful results, it ignores a significant part of the puzzle – the living component. In other words, science’s sight-based context blocks the sound-based understanding that we speculate is required to understand living systems. The context of scientific thought taints objectivity as it influences what is observed.
Science’s presumed Objectivity blocks progress.
Indeed science’s presumed objectivity frequently blocks progress. In his book, The Structure of Scientific Revolution, Thomas Kuhn effectively demonstrates that breakthroughs in science occur when an individual or a group is somehow able to see outside the supposedly objective framework of the prior generations. Einstein, Darwin, Newton, Galileo, Copernicus and Wegener, all were able to see beyond the current paradigm to propel the scientific community to a new level of understanding. The significant history of science consists of effective challenges to the current scientific mindset. The rest is refinement. This is yet another example of how the context of the Observer has an effect upon the content of the thoughts.
Supposedly Objective Sensory Organs provide us with Subjective Information.
Even our supposedly objective sensory organs provide us with subjective information due to context. Our eyes are programmed to create an image. They will inadvertently fill in the gaps through the inferential logic of their hard wiring. For instance, our visual cortex automatically augments the contrasts of edges and lines. Filling in the visual details supplies us with a coherent vision of our external reality. Optical illusions are examples of how we draw false conclusions due to these automatic processes. Sensory context determines the nature of our sensations, resultant thoughts and experiences.
Thoughts & Subatomic behavior subject to Observer’s Context
So it seems that both thoughts and subatomics are subject to context. Due to importance of the inherent context of the Observer, the notion of absolute objectivity must be abandoned when it comes to subatomics and thoughts. The experimenter’s expectations and/or the framework of his understanding determine the nature of his thoughts. These thoughts influence the nature of his experiments and subsequently what he will discover.
Nonlinear nature of Subatomics & Thoughts
We can also employ the nonlinear nature of subatomic behavior to inform our world of thoughts.
Subatomics & the Random Thought Generator
Photons, electrons, muons, and such pop in and out of existence – emerging and disappearing spontaneously, in a seemingly non-linear, i.e. non-consecutive, fashion. Similarly, individual thought trains seem to come in and out of existence in a non-linear fashion. Without conscious intent, we are suddenly thinking of our mother, then our job, retirement, the environment, children, and what not. The thought streams do not follow one another in a linear fashion, but jump from one topic to the next without any apparent connection.
Techniques to still the mind, not eliminate random thoughts
In fact, there are many techniques, such as meditation, prayer, Tai Chi, and Yoga, that are designed to allow us to gain a modicum of control over our random thought generator. Each form of practice is based upon stilling the mind. None of the techniques promise the elimination of random thoughts. Our random thought generator is here to stay.
Mechanistic Rules determine the Dimensions of Subatomic Probability Arrows
While the behavior of individual subatomics is impossible to predict, physicists can predict the behavior of large numbers of subatomics with the probability arrows that characterize their existence. Mechanistic rules determine the dimensions of these subatomic arrows. Further, subatomics operate in a closed system. As such, collective subatomic behavior is fixed. Although composed of unpredictable individual subatomics, hydrogen atoms always behave in an identical fashion. This is because subatomic behavior shows no variation on general levels.
Behavior influences the Dimensions of Human Probability Arrows
Just as probability arrows determine the collective behavior of subatomics, they also play a part in determining human behavior. While the subatomic arrows are determined mechanistically, the dimensions of the human probability arrows are partially determined by what we choose to do. In other words, our behavior exerts an effect upon our arrows. Repeating a behavior increases its probability, while interrupting a behavior decreases its probability. This process applies to our external world of matter, as well as to our internal world of thoughts.
Probability arrows of human world are ever changing.
Ongoing events or experiences exert an influence upon the probability of behavior, mental or physical. As such, our probability arrows are ever changing. In other words, the dimensions of the probability arrow are not fixed by any absolute essences, such as genetics, family upbringing or subatomic 'particles'. These absolute essences certainly play a part in determining possibilities, but they are not the sole determiner. Life can influence behavior, at least according to the model. This influence is, of course, restricted by the dimensions of the probability arrow.
Individual Behavioral Arrows: Atoms 1 possibility; Subatomics & Humans Multiple
With these ideas in mind, let us compare and contrast the behavioral arrows of atoms, subatomics, and humans. In our atom-based world individual particles have only one behavioral possibility once the initial conditions are set. In contrast, the behavior of individual subatomics and individual humans is unpredictable. Instead, event arrows, i.e. probability amplitudes, are employed to characterize subatomic and human behavior. Instead of being limited to one alternative, these event arrows are pregnant with possibility.
Collective Behavioral Arrows: Atoms & Subatomics 1 possibility; Humans multiple
The probability arrows can't predict the behavior of individual subatomics. However, the arrows can predict the collective behavior of subatomics just as well as they can predict the collective behavior of atoms. However, the collective behavior of humans is still unpredictable because mind intent can influence the behavior and behavior influences the dimensions of the arrows.
Mind Intent generates a Pulse of Experience, which can change behavior.
We can choose where to focus the mental energy of our Attention.
How is this influence exerted?
Just as scientists can focus individual photons with their experimental devices, so can we focus the mental energy of Attention upon a particular train of thought. Individual thoughts can and do pop up randomly. However, we can choose to focus Attention, our mind intent, upon a particular thought stream, just as we have a choice as to which environmental data stream we focus upon. As such, mind intent provides an opening to the probability arrow. In contrast, the subatomic probability arrows are closed to the outside.
Sustaining Attention generates a Pulse of Experience or Organization.
Sustaining the mental energy of our Attention upon a particular data stream generates a pulse that allows us to experience the sensual world. This process can also generate an experience that organizes our mental world. Just as the context of the subatomic experiment influences the nature of the results, similarly context exerts an influence upon where we can focus the mental energy of our Attention. Just as probability arrows determine the behavior of subatomics, they also determine the propensities of our mental behavior.
Sustaining Attention upon a negative thought chain generates an Experience that increases the probability amplitude.
Let us look at the meditation process as an example. We turn our gaze inward, close our eyes, and turn off the music. Yet we are still bombarded by thought streams just as visual data streams bombard our eyes when they are open. Many, though not all, of these thought streams are invested with emotion. If we inadvertently sustain our Attention upon one of these emotional thought streams, it generates a mental experience. According to our model, this experience increases the probability that this thought chain will return.
Choosing to ignore a negative thought chain decreases the probability amplitude.
If we instead resist the urge to focus our mental energy upon these emotional thought trains, then it reduces the chances that the thought train will return. Stilling our mind through meditation enables us to exert some control over our mental behavior. Rather than being buffeted about by forces that are seemingly beyond our control, we can choose not to participate. We can deliberately choose to ignore destructive thoughts and encourage positive ones.
Sustained Attention generates an Experience which influences the Probability Amplitude
The mental energy of Attention determines which mental data stream to turn into an experience. This experience reduces or augments the probability of behavior. Each repetition increases the probability of this thought chain and resultant behavior for better or worse. Each interruption decreases the probability of said behavior. Due to the probabilistic nature of these interactions, the behavior is never eliminated, just lessened. Constant repetitions increase the probability amplitudes. Regular interruptions decrease these probabilities.
Living Algorithm generates Experience Pulse & Probability Amplitudes
The Living Algorithm’s digestion process generates the Pulse of Attention that generates an experience. The Living Algorithm also generates the probability amplitudes that determine behavior. Because the Living Algorithm is open to external input, there is a possibility of changing the probability arrows. Because the obedient equations that characterize matter are closed to input, there is no possibility of change. Everything is predetermined in the physical world. There is the possibility of change in the mental world of thoughts.
Link
For more, check out the next article in the stream – Subtlety between the Cracks of Approximation.