• Blog

  • Quantum Physics and the End of Reality by Sabine Hossenfelder and Carlo Rovelli

Georgina Woodward

David Eagleman has shown perceived occurrence of events...

The problem is, if you can never even "perceive" that an "event" ever even occurred, that will never work. But that is exactly what many of Shannon inspired signals "look" like - events that have never occurred; just static noise that looks no different than if there actually were no events ever taking place.

As you can see I'd like to make quite a few modifications not just take what i have inherited as valid

I have indeed seen that, for a long time. The problem is, I have also seen that neither you, nor the physicists, in spite of your ardent desire, do not have the slightest clue of how to actually accomplish making any modifications that will get you out of the maze; because you all simply refuse to ever look at the incredible gift, that Shannon handed to you, because doing so, requires you to trash your entire inheritance, plus all the work you have put into it, to date.

That is why it has long been observed, as in Planck's principle, that revolutionary changes are usually only accepted, by people that have no such inheritance and have never wasted any of their own effort, trying to maintain them. No one ever succeeded in indoctrinating them (though many may have tried) into believing that their elders' ancient, sacred idols can never be desecrated and thrown in the trash - so they just go ahead and do exactly that. And they can succeed in doing so, precisely because there are no Laws of Nature prohibiting it - because there are no static Laws of Nature at all!

Reality is a process, still under construction; always was, always will be.

      Robert McEachern
      In order to function, find food, mate, avoid predators it is necessary for most animals to locomote . That requires construction of an internal map (The present). Processing of sensory data allows that. Hallucination and mistakes occur due to internally generated gap filling and overlay. I think some data processing errors can occur too as well as later on mistakes of perception. Not all that is experienced via the senses is a semblance of what exists or happens. However there must be sufficient likeness, for biological organisms to carry out their activities of living and survive to reproduce and so continue their kind. Evolved sensory systems and brains are able to extract meaning and build recognizable constructs from the noise of the stimuli in the environment. Specialized devices too are able to function contrary to your insistence. Sorry, I don't see how Shannon's work can be used as a guide , despite following up on your leads

          Georgina Woodward

          Sorry, I don't see how Shannon's work can be used

          There is nothing to be sorry about. Ignorance is bliss. Just be happy that others that have seen how Shannon's work can be used, have provided you with your phone, TV, Internet, etc., that add to your bliss. Be happy that your paycheck never accidentally gets deposited in someone else's account - as the result of a bit-error in a transmitted account number - a bit-error that Shannon discovered a sure-fire means to prevent.

          And as for living creatures - Mother Nature discovered Shannon's technique, eons before Shannon ever did - you see it in action with every DNA double-helix copying operation. Or do you believe that all the zillions of potential mutations (bit-errors) have be avoided, by magic? And how do you suppose the signals flowing through your brain, do not become hopelessly garbled, by all the zillions of copying errors that would occur, in the process of being sent from one neuron to another and another and...

          Ever wonder why neuron signals look like random spikes - like noise? As Shannon proved, only noise-like signals can be copied, without frequent errors, in a high-noise environment, like a brain. Shannon's technique is what makes complex life possible. Now you know. It is what makes all of Reality possible (well, at least all the deterministic parts) Now you know. And when even Shannon's technique becomes insufficient to prevent frequent copying errors, determinism itself, repeatable cause-and-effect processes, existing as a physical phenomenon, beginf to self-destruct, resulting in "the biggest, baddest boogey-man of them all - "Quantum Weirdness!" Now you know.

              Robert McEachern
              i don't know personally how to apply it in understanding existence and experience, though it is widely useful for technology. TV, computer , phone outputs are all products output by devices after transmission, so is the numerical bank balance. . A small part of what happens. I know there are DNA repair mechanisms. There's a lot i don't known i admit,

                  Georgina Woodward

                  There's a lot i don't known i admit

                  So why not also admit, at least to yourself, that you might profit from learning from the best, like Shannon, rather than continuing to bumble around in the dark, looking for a way to escape, from a maze with no apparent exit?

                      Robert McEachern
                      Finding explanations that work for me and that i can understand is what I do. Imagery experienced via TV ,computer or phone will be a self generated image, of a reconstructed semblance from transmitted data that was obtained from a relative semblance produced by a device, such as a camera, using data /stimuli transmitted from the source absolute material reality.

                          Georgina Woodward

                          Most people do find it "pleasing", which is why they like to believe in magic, fairies, heroes, gods and unwarranted speculation, that will save them from whatever they fear, and from ever having to think about, what is on the other side of their coin - their "Picture of Reality." Their belief is the illusion; they have simply accepted the illusion as their reality. Ignorance is Bliss.

                            4 days later

                            One of a generated pair of photon particles is sent to Alice. She uses some apparatus set to a certain orientation to detect it. Bob selects the same orientation of apparatus. by doing so they have chosen the same relative 'seen this way' reference frame. This reveals the relationship of the particle pair at creation of the pair that is retained until interaction disturbs it. At measurement the resulting outcome is newly formed but not the particle pair. The particles pre-exist the measurement. The problem is with the theory assuming that the pair are randomly appearing individually at measurement ,and therefore need to co-ordinate their measured states. The fact that things can exist before measurement and choosing the same reference frame for generating the relative measurement takes care of that.

                              Georgina Woodward
                              Prior to observation, or measurement involving orientation of apparatus, there can not be a definite relative outcome state, involving orientation, because the outcome is a relative determination.
                              That does not mean that the subject under investigation does not have an orientation within the pattern of all currently existing things. Which is different from one singled out and described relation. This is showing the error of both QM and ERP. ERP is wrong for assuming the relative outcome is predetermined before measurement, prior to the choosing of individual viewpoint. QM is wrong for not considering absolute observer independent orientation of the subject, and therefore a pre-measurement relation of orientations of a particle pair.

                                a month later

                                maxwell
                                Lets not call it belief then, but soething thatt can be posited on the basis of copious examples of material things not dematerializing when out of view and which can be revealed or relocated (learned within first few years of life) ,also the fact ofmagical illusion being enabled by manipulation of material reality when unseen by audience. I do not belive a rabbit is materialized upon removing it from a hat . But a new relative, singular, observation product, or sequence of them as the rabbit moves, is formed by the audience member,when sensory data reaches the visual system, of eyes and part of CNS, where as such input was not possible with , material,rabbit hidden. From experience of this trick, including having my own,magic, hat I know that nothing can be removed from it that is not already there.. Though it may be concaled in lining and obscurd from view by lack of illumination. If such 'belief' in external material reality does not belong in science and I must instead believe that unseen a material objects ceases to exist contrary to lifetimes experience as well as materializaation and magic being real not illusion contrary to copious later life experience there is a double standard at play wqhich is biased against thinking a particular way. i do not accept that it is less rational thought 5than the alternative.

                                  9 days later

                                  Georgina Woodward
                                  The cost to science of not accepting that there can be material existence and continuing of it in the absence of sensoy outpiut verificarion, modeling of imature perception, and alowing modelihng of magic illusion appearance rather than facts of their production.

                                    @"Georgina Woodward"#p167789That's not quite right. Imature perception modelling and illusion modelling would have nothiñg rather than multiple imagined outcomes.

                                      Georgina Woodward
                                      Imature perception of a young infant, and deception by illusion are similar in the observer not having a mental model corresponding to a concealed material reality. Superposition is a mental model but not of material reality unsensed.
                                      There is a temporal component to the cat thought experiment that ought to only allows one version of the material cat. Only, the time at which transition from live to dead material cat occurs is not known to the ouside observer , because the reality is concealed. Concealment of material reality is the common ground of imature perception, deception by illusion, and this kind of thought experiment.

                                          Georgina Woodward
                                          Thinking about concealed possibilities;
                                          Possibility, defined by Oxford languages 1. “noun
                                          a thing that may happen or be the case.”
                                          The Schrodinger cat thought experiment showcases the type of situation where a possibility may have been extinguished but this is not known so the now impossible is retained as a possibility, though this is incorrect. Smelling poison fumes escaping the closed box could be used as an indication that the live possibility has been extinguished.

                                          Viewpoint or context ‘seen this way’ measurement protocol yet to be established is a different situation. The possibilities remain vital, only being extinguished when a relative viewpoint or measurement protocol is used to give a new singular observation or measurement outcome.

                                          For a macroscopic object subsequent observation or measurement is still possible, depending on how the experiment is conducted. So to say that other possible outcomes have been extinguished is not necessarily true. It is true where only one outcome can be obtained. Such as in subatomic scale experiments or a destructive measurement protocol. At any scale is used. Application of different viewpoints or different measurements can give different outcomes.
                                          This is relativity, an extraction from the absolute, existing, material template that embodies many possibilities. The ‘many worlds’ of possibility are not in the limited relative outcomes, but preceding them as a material. observation independent, Object reality.

                                            a month later