Essay Abstract

I do not notice the word "paradox" in Wigner's essay, but central theme of the essay has paradox written all over it. To see, try substituting the word "unreasonable" with the word "random", and then the word "effectiveness" with the word "nonrandom," and voila we shall have a new paradox: random-nonrandom. I am going to discuss Wigner's paradox within the framework of the thesis that Nature is "Analogical."

Author Bio

Than Tin is a graduate of science and technology and a student of all things cognitive.

Download Essay PDF File

Dear Than Tin,

Yours is a very powerful essay, beginning with your examples illustrating the importance of duals, followed by instances of use of these duals in analogy. It certainly captures the essence of the way we think, which you summarize as figure/background.

You analyze energy costs of the separation process and seem to conclude that zero energy would make the world chaotic and magical. On the other hand, some feel (as I do) that the 'Big Bang' was a zero cost event with the kinetic (positive) energy of the out-flowing substance exactly equal to the (negative) gravitational binding energy of the whole. You discuss the balance Nature must make. There is one problem with viewing Planck's constant as minimum energy. It is not energy, but action, which is (energy) x (time). That is a very big difference, and if you spend time thinking about it you may find it is even better at balancing the "freedom versus determinism" and taming the chaos. In other words I think it supports your argument.

You note the different formulations and interpretations of quantum theory, specifically concerning its wave-particle nature and entanglement. I have addressed the wave-particle nature in an earlier FQXi essay, and attempt to shed light on entanglement in my current essay, which I hope you will read and comment upon.

I very much applaud your approach to grasping the whole.

Best wishes,

Edwin Eugene Klingman

10 days later

Dear Mr. Tin,

I mean no disrespect to you or your essay. I disagree with your comment that nobody has access to the correct assessment of reality for the following real reason:

Do let me know what you think about this: This is my single unified theorem of how the real Universe is occurring: Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of abstract NOTHING. Proof exists that every real astronomer looking through a real telescope has failed to notice that each of the real galaxies he has observed is unique as to its structure and its perceived distance from all other real galaxies. Each real star is unique as to its structure and its perceived distance apart from all other real stars. Every real scientist who has peered at real snowflakes through a real microscope has concluded that each real snowflake is unique as to its structure. Real structure is unique, once. Unique, once does not consist of abstract amounts of abstract quanta. Based on one's normal observation, one must conclude that all of the stars, all of the planets, all of the asteroids, all of the comets, all of the meteors, all of the specks of astral dust and all real objects have only one real thing in common. Each real object has a real material surface that seems to be attached to a material sub-surface. All surfaces, no matter the apparent degree of separation, must travel at the same constant speed. No matter in which direction one looks, one will only ever see a plethora of real surfaces and those surfaces must all be traveling at the same constant speed or else it would be physically impossible for one to observe them instantly and simultaneously. Real surfaces are easy to spot because they are well lighted. Real light does not travel far from its source as can be confirmed by looking at the real stars, or a real lightning bolt. Reflected light needs to adhere to a surface in order for it to be observed, which means that real light cannot have a surface of its own. Real light must be the only stationary substance in the real Universe. The stars remain in place due to astral radiation. The planets orbit because of atmospheric accumulation. There is no space.

Warm regards,

Joe Fisher

    Dear Joe:

    Thanks for reading my essay.

    I believe that we have no direct access to reality, only an indirect one through the creativity of our minds.

    We build models of reality, and hope that our models behave in some fashion with a certain degree of verisimilitude to the reality of which we are apart.

    Science and mysticism has been the main modes we use to approach reality since time immemorial, and so far we found science to be more reliable and productive.

    I believe science to be an excellent tool for accessing reality.

    Best regards,

    Than Tin

    Dear Than Tin,

    You can do nothing else but access reality. You can only see. hear, touch, taste and feel real things.

    Joe Fisher

    Hi Joe:

    We may be talking about "apples" and "oranges": the reality you are talking about is a classical reality, which you can actually "see, hear, touch ...".

    However, I am talking about a non-classical reality of quantum phenomena, which we can't see, hear, touch ... and therefore to access it, we are bound to use indirect means.

    Anyway, I think we're talking metaphysics that never seem to halt.

    Than Tin

    16 days later

    Dear Than,

    I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of NOTHING.

    All I ask is that you give my essay WHY THE REAL UNIVERSE IS NOT MATHEMATICAL a fair reading and that you allow me to answer any objections you may leave in my comment box about it.

    Joe Fisher

    4 years later

    while mathematics requires that its propositions conform to pure logic, empirical science requires in addition that its propositions conform to empirical data. 192.168.0.1 "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

    a month later
    2 months later
    6 months later

    If you have exhausted all other password recovery options such as known router passwords and common password lists then it's time to fire up the Advanced Password Generator. This should really be a last option because password router 192.168.1.1 admin passwords lists are so effective at logging in to many routers.

    Write a Reply...