Wednesday, 13 June 2018

SPUKHAFTE FERNWIRKUNG....

The following is the abstraction of a  topic currently featured in V.H. Ironside, Behold! I Teach You Superman 


Truth be told, since measuring a  quantum particle in one part of the universe can affect the properties of its twin in quite another (even light years away), the notion of such  information being transmitted non-locally as “the sum of all parts,”  at once resolves the philosophical problem of “action at a distance,” or what Einstein called spukhafte Fernwirkung. Having first
determined that waves had a dual nature and could be treated as particles,  he now had to come to terms with the power of ‘entanglement’; i.e., with particles that appeared to be able to respond to an experiment carried out in another part of the universe. Here, the substance of the world is not in things, but in universal concepts whose properties in a perfectly synchronized way are the product of the measurement itself.  For even though nature has neglected to provide us with any means of dealing with this idea, far from being a rigidly discontinuous discipline, quantum non-locality prohibits the ‘dislocation in thought’ that occurs when  perceiving widely separated events as independent entities.
            For Feynman there was no such thing as an isolated particle in quantum field theory.
Basing his view on the necessary assumption that the photon cannot have a path from A to B, nor speed or position, when not being observed, he discarded the causal connection between distant events in favour of an immaterial continuum. It is  the virtual field that connects them, albeit that the field itself never actually exists in the real world of motion and force. But then, theories of real worlds are a weak basis for discounting concepts with no reference to the space in which we live, and if this is a positivist view, anathema to classical theories, it nevertheless demands that abstract conceptual systems should be taken  into account in any analysis of the links which may exist between synchronicity and kinematic force.
            Being, so it seems, is a mystery, a metaphysical property that we seek to explore in detail, and so misread its wholeness. Which is another reason, of course, for the want of explicitness and connectivity, that ultimately leads to it losing its power and its immediacy. For nothing impairs these conditions so much as causality, which squanders energy unproductively and inhibits Supersanity.  In fact, the classical understanding is incapable even of remotely encompassing the meaning of this property, for the principles inherent in it are nothing but a manifestation of apparently random effects calculated, if anything, to heighten and promote irrationality. Hence the equation of knowledge with causality, and the priority of a causal theory over the principle of Supersanity. 
            Meanwhile, of course, for all considerations other than conventional ones, holistic understanding has actually attained supremacy over the mechanics of strictly determinate interactions and is in the process of liberating itself from the constraint of a closed causal machinery, rendering the written principle and even language all but obsolete. Wolfgang Pauli’s conclusion was uncompromising: “We are speaking a language that is not sufficiently adequate to the simplicity and beauty of the quantum world.”[1] For on the question that had dogged physics for so many years, concerning the common ground shared by mind and matter, his simple conclusion was that it would be a mistake to separate physics from psychology; or from what he had decided was the essence of the scientific explanation: the relationship between the
two. More specifically, the contingent-choice experiment illustrates graphically that the quantum world possesses a kind of holism which transcends time as well as space in the same way that we experience the synchronistic knowledge directly. Which means that there are laws of synchronization for spacetime itself. Laws which not only determine how the detached observer becomes the anonymous agent of the action, but which become even more crucial to the development of a theory when you absorb the simple fact that it is not the synchronistic experience which is the critical unexplained aspect of the relation between the subject and the event, but the very relation itself.






[1]               Quoted in D. C. Cassidy, Uncertainty. The Life and Science of Werner Heisenberg. W. H. Freeman, N.Y. 1992, p. 194


No comments: