Quantum Physics for Burning Questions by George Schoenfelder

Dear Janko Kokošar,

I too enjoyed your essay. As engineers we have much in common that we could build on.

The idea that the brain is a protein-managed machine is solid, as are the citations which are a must read for anyone who takes QM and consciousness seriously. Of course, there are many opposite theories. Plato believed the mind and brain are not related. Aristotle thought the function of the brain was to cool the body and did not know the heart was a pump. Most brain theories are based in neurology and are almost as antiquated as Plato and Aristotle. The fact is that the human brain and its glia and neurons were created in the womb by proteins and not vice versa. After all humans come from an egg and sperm which are managed by proteins without brains.

Would you agree that entropy is less of a clue to describing how the universe works in general than embryo-self-governing assembly?

Let me ask that question in a different way. Let us assume that you know two video graphics programmers. One guy knows how to program a computer so that it changes the screen's pixels to simulate ink dispersing in a glass of water. In contrast, another guy knows how to program a computer so that it changes the screen's pixels to simulate human embryogenesis. Now you want one program to simulate both entropy and embryogenesis. Which guy will you hire? Why? You should say the second guy because it is exceedingly much easier to incorporate entropy into the embryogenesis program than vice versa. The point is that the same can be said for theories that describe how the universe works.

I look forward to your comments.

Sincerely,

George Schoenfelder

Dear George Schoenfelder

I am not sure, if I understand your entropy example:

"it is exceedingly much easier to incorporate entropy into the embryogenesis program than vice versa."

Do you think that embriogenesis is a typical statistical proces, which must to satisfied all entropy processes, because entropy (and so accidental statistics) is one of the basic processes in nature?

If so, what is your message of this reflection?

Do you hear about Gerald M. Edelman? He found one system how immunity work. Then he found that brains works in a same way, this means that arising of connections among some brain cells is more active between active cells.

I think that this is close to your suppositions about proteins.

Sincerely

Janko Kokošar

Dear Janko Kokošar,

I was good to hear from you. Yes I am intimate with five of Edelman's books. He is on the right track, but unfortunately sidesteps quantum mechanics.

Did you know that the adult human body's proteins manufacture over 200 kilometers of DNA per second per person? For 20 years I designed and managed automated factories. I can assure you that a reliable factory design is based on precision and not entropy and chaos. The simple FACT is that the most precise factories in the known universe are biological systems that operate at the elemental level of quantum mechanics via proteins.

A point from my last correspondence was that the universe either has one or many elemental ways it works. Einstein's general idea of a "unified field theory" is it has only one elemental way the universe works. I share that sentiment. Now if there is only one mechanism it is basically organized and entropy and chaos is a subset. Analogously, it is impossible to make a non-chaotic program from a chaotic program, e.g. garbage in garbage out. My point of 200 kilometers of DNA per second per person and embryogenesis is that the universe at leased when it comes to molecular biology proves that it is not always chaotic and entropic. So if the universe has just one elemental mechanism it is not chaotic at the elemental level but is instead as precise as DNA and embryo manufacture.

I submit the reason physics has focused on entropy rather than the precision of DNA manufacture and embryogenesis is that the founding fathers of quantum mechanics did not have the slightest idea of how biology is an atomic quantum system. Instead, entropy was fashionable at the time and thus became entrenched in the mathematics between the 52 years of 1901 (The year of Planck's "quantum" paper.) and 1953 (The year the structure of DNA was published.). If you recall Einstein died in 1955, which was far to soon for him to appreciate the organizational abilities of quantum systems. If he were still alive I can imagine him saying. "200 kilometers of DNA per second per person is not accomplished by 'playing dice.'"

It follows that if the universe is systematic and not intrinsically chaotic, the reason our math models must include mechanisms of probability is because the equations have insufficient initial conditions and are not complete enough to account for all the variables. In other words, the universe operates at the Planck scale and since our best measurements are not even close to that "probability theory" fills in the enormous gaps that are missing from our current models of how the universe works.

I look forward to your comments.

Sincerely,

George Schoenfelder

Hi George

I've identified a key and provable example of where math has fooled us - into preventing unification. See my posts.

Peter

George and Janko:

Consider how the body "globally" and "locally" organizes experience on a particle/wave, gravitational, and electromagnetic energy (or light) basis.

This unification, completion, balancing of scale is evident in dreams. (Dreams have a definite and general structure.) Dreams make thought more like sensory experience IN GENERAL, thereby demonstrating such regulation, potential, growth, and adjustment. Indeed, how space manifests as electromagnetic/gravitational energy is applicable to physics in general, and not only to dreams.