What drugs taught SWIM about quantum physics

[bcubed]

So...lizard has a scientific background, and often enjoys pondering the bizzarre ramifications of quantum mechanics (the physics so bizzarre even Einstein's mind recoiled at the thought). To be fair, this sort of combines Q.D. (the science of really small stuff) with relativity (the science of really big stuff) and philosophical determinism (the study of mind, and how it interacts with matter). Obvoiusly, this argument is effectively untestable, but it shares that with most of the theoretical physics out there today.

1. There are three distinct forms something can occupy in the universe--mass, energy, and intelligence--and one can translate between the three. Okay, so this is an extension of E=MC^2, governing the conversion between mass and energy (thanks, Al). The peculiar manner salvia has of anthropomorphising* inanimate objects led to this: even non-sentient, even non-living, things contain intelligence, and one could theoretically derive a way to translate between the three. As if the entire universe could be tought of as a computer, with a processing capacity defined by the total number of elementary particles within. The creepy thing about this is it's not inherently bunk: surely it takes energy to have a thought, or process data on a comptuer (consciousness' current "slutty sister"); that energy has a corresponding weight. I know it seems bizzarre to think of a rock having (currently untappable) intelligence; it also seems bizzarre to think of it as having enough untapped energy to annhialate a city, but it's been proven to be so! Also, if conservation of (the combination of) energy and mass extends to intelligence (no guarentees, but the universe seems to prefer symmetry), the intelligence contained in one's existence cannot be destroyed with death! (Though it may well be changed into a form currently unrecognizable to us mortals).

2. The inherent uncertainty of wave/particle extends to intelligence, and this uncertainty allows for free will without violating (b^3's newly expanded) quantum-psycho-physics. One strange fact of quantum dynamics is all matter (though noticeable only on the smallest scales) is simultaneously energy (wave) and matter (particle) until an observer "forces" it to occupy one or the other state. Although some hold this is a mere problem of lacking anything smaller than said particle to measure it, the prevailing view is that the particle itself (or God, the universe, as desired) is "uncertain" as to its own nature! (This really got Al in a state: "God does not play dice with the universe!") If we allow that consciousness is manifest physically in the smallest of scales, then point 1. suggests that something is simultaneously ALL THREE until observed, thus allowing sufficient "wiggle room" to allow for free will without triggering the dualistic trap (This is a bit too much to explain here; feel free to google "determinism.")

3. Quantum-psycho-physics serves to unify Q.D. (little) and relativity (big). The dirtly little secret of physcis is that Q.D. and relativity both do a great job of explaining their respective scale events, and both have been tested and passed (time dilation is a proven fact, for instance), yet they are mutually exclusive--can't both be right! Kind of like from Fiddler on the Roof, where there's one argument: "you're right!" counter-argument: "You're right!" / "Hey, they can't BOTH be right" /"You're right!" Specifically, relativity produces a more random background energy as scaled down (think of a "smooth" cue ball looking increasingly rough with magnification and you're close), breaking down into gibberish at really small distances. Well, if consciousness is such that it exists exclusively in distances below the minimum spatial quanta (i.e. the smallest indivisible unit of 3D space, and implying a time quantum--the 4th D), then it is of this background chaos that consciousness eminates! (Now, I'm aware that this is perhaps the weakest part: "The variable is unknowable, so we'll give it a value we like," but it's no more far-fetched than most of the "Theories of everything" floating out there--and requires far less math, to boot!)

Now, I'm not sure if this rises much above "stoned educated guesses," but then, I'm not really sure most theoretical physics today does.

* "Anthropomorphism" for lack of a better word: while salvia imbues inanimate objects with qualities usually associated with animate ones, it's not a "human" animation: the boulder has a sentience very much "boulder-like" in quality, if I'm explaining it correctly...

Reputation Comments on this post:

Well explained, thanks.

[humdroid]

Y didn't know anything of quantum physics, and although he has a geeky side, his short attention span dosen't allow for reading. The geeky side was overlooked most of Y's life, until he embraced it after a few steps in the world of psychoactives.
However, natural psychedelics, psychedelic chemicals, mdma, and the 'bis, paved the way, so Y could 'feel' quantum physics.
Sorry for the poor explanation.
Y does read, but could never study.
The drooooooooooogs seemed to create in Y an interest in dipping in and out of various sites, such as physorg, etc.
Y seems to learn from pictures, and concepts.

[robin_himself]

Swim always gets a brighter insight into the nature of the observer effect. Everyone familiar with quantum physics will recognize the observer effect as one of the first principals of Q.P. It focuses on the principal that the act of observing changes the universe/particles and creates the universe as we go along.

Also Anthropomorphism is very familiar with swim. A plant or tree lives and swim tends to give it more of a human kind of consiousness.

[Euthanatos93420]

Etherite Kundalini, nice.

Have you read Faster Than the Speed of Light: The Story of a Scientific Speculation by Joao Magueijo? Very interesting theories that line up with your ideas.

[Junket]

Interesting read, I like this post.

I always get kinda down when I think about knowledge as a whole though. Every time I finish a book, I feel ever so slightly more intelligent, but its like.. what good is the information to the majority?

[robin_himself]

Originally Posted by Junket

Interesting read, I like this post.

I always get kinda down when I think about knowledge as a whole though. Every time I finish a book, I feel ever so slightly more intelligent, but its like.. what good is the information to the majority?

Read the book by Gregg Braden "The Divine Matrix". It awnsers your question exactly. It takes Quantum Physics and builds a bridge to Social psychologie/Sociologie.

Reputation Comments on this post:

nice book suggestion

[Routemaster Flash]

What's "quantum dynamics"? Do you mean quantum mechanics, or quantum field theory?

I'm sure there are some interesting things to be discussed in this thread, but at the moment my bullshitometer is going off the scale. Untapped intelligent rocks? Please...

Edit: I mean, this -

3. Quantum-psycho-physics serves to unify Q.D. (big) and relativity (little). The dirtly little secret of physcis is that Q.D. and relativity both do a great job of explaining their respective scale events, and both have been tested and passed (time dilation is a proven fact, for instance), yet they are mutually exclusive--can't both be right! Kind of like from Fiddler on the Roof, where there's one argument: "you're right!" counter-argument: "You're right!" / "Hey, they can't BOTH be right" /"You're right!" Specifically, relativity produces a more random background energy as scaled down (think of a "smooth" cue ball looking increasingly rough with magnification and you're close), breaking down into gibberish at really small distances. Well, if consciousness is such that it exists exclusively in distances below the minimum spatial quanta (i.e. the smallest indivisible unit of 3D space, and implying a time quantum--the 4th D), then it is of this background chaos that consciousness eminates! (Now, I'm aware that this is perhaps the weakest part: "The variable is unknowable, so we'll give it a value we like," but it's no more far-fetched than most of the "Theories of everything" floating out there--and requires far less math, to boot!)

is just nonsense. For a start the OP seems unaware that are two meanings of the word 'relativity', depending on context. There's special relativity, which describes dynamics in a flat space-time and is eminently compatible with quantum mechanics - in fact the class of theories that have resulted from their union, namely quantum field theories, have allowed physicists to make the most accurate predictions in the history of science. Special relativity is however a special case of general relativity, which has not yet been unified with QM, with good reason. I have no idea what "a more random background energy as scaled down" means, though it seems like a garbled mention of zero-point energy (another frequently misinterpreted physics idea). The OP is right that QM and (general) relativity describe physics at different length scales, but has it the wrong way round: QM describes the very small, GR the very large. Mistakes as elementary as this sit rather uneasily with his claim to come from a scientific background...

I'm not writing this post to be an arsehole but just because it pisses me off that so many people seem to think they can write any old rubbish about physics because they've got the impression that relativity and quantum "dynamics" are theories in which 'anything goes', which could not be further from the truth. I mean, there was a there was a thread recently where someone said "I believe time travel is possible because of E = mc^2"...AAARGGH!!!

[robin_himself]

Originally Posted by Routemaster Flash

What's "quantum dynamics"? Do you mean quantum mechanics, or quantum field theory?

I'm sure there are some interesting things to be discussed in this thread, but at the moment my bullshitometer is going off the scale. Untapped intelligent rocks? Please...

Sorry, I made a typo! In my post I was referring to Quantum Psysics. Don't know why I typed Q.D.

[bcubed]

First, my understanding is that the special theory of relativity came first, and that--as you said, flat space-time--it focuses on two observers, moving relative to each other, in straight, unaccelerated motion, with no gravitational (or any other) forces present. (Obviously, no-one in existence has ever inhabited a scenario which met the artifcially stringnet requirements of special relativity.) This is a pretty well accepted principle in both pure and applied science: create a simplified model first, then see if it does and acceptably good job of prediction. Example: studying projectiles in Physics 101 (like a hit baseball) generally assumes 1. No forces acting after contact (i.e. no aero drag or lift/downforce) 2. constant accelerative forces of gravity 3. experiment occurrs in a static environment (such that coreolis+other forces don't apply). Note that this doesn't reflect reality; might be "good enough" for baseball, but for artillery, one must factor in 1. and 3. General relativity is just an expanded, "real life" form of special, with fewer assumptions.

Two: yes, typo in the third point; you can see I had it the other (correct) way in the opening paragraph. My understanding is that most of what supersymmetry/string/other "theories of everything" try to do is to unite and explain away the incompatabilities between relativity and q.m. (Oh, I think I might have misstepped with "quantum dynamics," thinking of quantum chromodynamics.

Three: No-one really knows what "intelligence" is. Electrical impulses are present where intelligence exists; chemical interactions influence the nature of the impulses mentioned (ought to be well apparent to any d-f members, or their friends, lol); but most people don't think either of these (measurable) things ARE intelligence. The Turing test (design a machine that mimcs intelligence in every measurable way and you HAVE intelligence) is not universally accepted, or even widely accepted. Until the advent of quantum mech, with "probatilistic" distributions of precise experiements, there was no way to allow for free will, because for one's will to effect a physical system (say I "choose" to type 'mju1xxa'), somewhere some physical interaction had to depend on will for outcome. My point is that if intelligence--whatever it is--works on suitably small scales, then the probabilistic nature of such small scales overcomes this.

Finally, if one buys the "universal mind", or any of the intelligence seperate from a living sentient being, where does it exist? If one allows that the universe itself is a source of great intelligence (which is basically a de-anthropomorhised "God,") it's basically a third state the universe can occupy, in addition to mass and energy. Hell, maybe intelligence is the as-yet-unexplained "dark energy!"

Finally, I studied physics for a while as a younger man, but the physics currently explored seemed to be essentially untestable, and running into "diminishing returns." Grown men spend lifetimes trying to determine the mass of a neutrino (something so weakly interacting with everything else that it may as well not exist); they'd be just about as productive trying to determine the "number of angels who can dance on the head of a pin."

[Euthanatos93420]

Um, that's a pretty big 'if' you've got in your first sentence there! Things like universal intelligence (which is starting to look a lot like God) are fine things to speculate about, but they belong in the realm of mysticism or metaphysics, not science. Yes, universal intelligence could be dark matter, but then, so could huge clouds of magic invisible bananas...

Universal intelligence? Poor terminology I think. Universal consciousness, or Collective (un)conscious are not realms of mysticism or fantasy and science has more than enough material to work with to explore these facets of our phenomenal existence, and does.

Euthanatos93420 added 208 Minutes and 44 Seconds later...

I wrote this in another thread. I think it applies here more than there so I posted it here instead of there.

Originally Posted by Ellainthesnow

Yep, we have, did it help you? Ella X

I think you may be missing the point. Herein this concept provides a reason to simulate empathy and familial connection. Alternatively one can convert this to actual empathy and familial love by understanding that everyone has their failings and that each relationship we are presented with has meaning and purpose and the more we cultivate that intimacy we gain multidimensional relativity. Sometimes those relationships show us the light(Knowledge, Wisdom, Awareness). Sometimes we are the lightbearers (Ditto). This is the ascension of consciousness.

The absolute truth is only available outside the subjective universe and as such is not the absolute truth because nothing so comprehensive could be truly represented by anything within the subjective universe that was not also everything. And thus we come unto that blatant observable absolute that our consciousness and our egos reject with such ferocity it is traumatizing to our established reality no matter how we try to explain it or rationalize it it seems to crop up in our peripherial vision but when we look it vanishes into solid reality. It's a Chaos factor, uncertainty in its most comprehensive definition. We observe, that things are different. We observe that other things are the same. This is original perception. comparison every other observation is a subjective comparison of statistical data.

When you realize we can never truly validate our own existence the only thing that appears to have the most definitive effect in substantiating things is consciousness. For if we did not have multidimensional capacity we could not envision the future; prophetically, fictitiously , in mockery, or even in syndication. Conscious perception of time declares that we are fundamentally at least capable of four dimensions of existence. If, as QED speculates there are other dimensions that sub-atomic particles interact with consistantly...it necessitates that the alternate possibilities within those dimensions are within some range of similitude and thus determines minutia of change.

If we know billions of possibilities exist and we are witnessing but one window of possibility with our consciousness (Which is essentially just: perception, memory, consideration [Comparison]) how do we know what determines the multidimensional path our perception follows. We know the statistics but we also know that statistics can't make anything impossible and thus make the impossible inevitable in that thing that is composed of every possibility. How do we know that we are in control at all? How do we know that we aren't just watching a program? We've been watching so long and forgotten everything that came before and actually thought we were interacting because it seem so real we were convinced that we came up with the ideas and chose to do things that were simply a series of observations by us during which we empathized completely with the individual facet of existence and we and our existence are reduce to but windows then the only thing that substantiates us is...conscious relativity. Whatever consciousness is...it is something greater than we are and is the only key to immortality because it must be beyond what we perceive as to what we are collectively and individually.

Relativity is then the supreme fabric of definition which is the product of perception.

[Routemaster Flash]

I'd just like to add I don't think it's illegal to discuss quantum mechanics or universal minds anywhere in the world, so it's OK to drop all this 'SWIM' stuff.

[Euthanatos93420]

Unless...say...Swim learned about it from drugs?

[Routemaster Flash]

Originally Posted by Euthanatos93420

Unless...say...Swim learned about it from drugs?

Fair point, I'd more or less ignored the drug element of this thread so far.

[Euthanatos93420]

I don't Swim all the time but I figure:

When in doubt, Swim.

[I>A\/I>]

I ain't arguing wit' nobody:
this quantum field and it's manifestation is so counter intuitive:

that as much as I've studied it, it still amazes me.

So I'll just make several comments that appear to me to be true:
they have arisen within me or come from outside me,
I can't be sure:

nor is there absolute discrimination attendant to each..

=============

The theory states that light speed in a vacuum
is an absolute maximum:
yet particles whose properties have been superimposed
maintain this indeterminately superimposed quality indefinitely:

and when well separated,
the determinancy of one, thru being "observed"
precipitates the complimentary state immediately in the other,
EVEN WHEN THE SPEED OF LIGHT has to be exceeded to do it:

and were not talking 1.2 X light speed:
were talking a thousand times as fast as light speed.

What is the field which exists that makes this happen?
Is there a "particle" that carries the force? (Field theory requires it..)

..........................
.

All righty THEN:
Inasmuch as this local universe is presumed to have begun
in a BIG BANG, (or a big bounce, perhaps..)
then ALL MATERIAL, energy, matter, dark matter, dark energy,
etc etc...
was once superimposed, was it not?

Therefore then it follows that it's all connected at a quantum level, yeah?

Even now?

And YOU BE LOOKIN' at it, and
"condensing the indeterminancy"
Oh Brother and Sister of mine.

This fact (oid) is what made my derivitive little mind
come up with the following simple circular saying
with a comedian's line:
most folks dismiss it as an amusing 'lil thing,
but it has a deeper lilt:

What you see is what you get.
What you get is what you look for.
What you look for is what you see.

Repeat, until you start looking for what you want:
and MORE IMPORTANTLY
start DOING what you want:
there's far to many sub-humans on the planet
that r' doing what somebody ELSE wants:
and that's a BIG problem, Jesus and Allah:
ReaL big. problem.

( Oh yeah, by the way "DOING WHAT YOU WANT"
is a HIGH, HIGH and
NON trivial task assignment...)

If you do something you think you want,
and it doesn't get you what you want,
for gods sake quit doing it!
DO SOMETHING ELSE!

OK back to the quantum field...

So anyway, there's far far away red shifted galaxies,
which appeared first a few hundred thousand years
after the BIG CRUNCH
that are on the far side of the universe from us...

and it can be shown that they were too far away,

and travelling too fast the other direction

for their light to have even reached us yet..

And yet it does.

Obviously, something is amiss.

........................



The QUALITIES of the quantum field are not fully elucidated.

there is a speculation, by spiritually "awake" persons,
that "the field" is also the "Field of (S)spirit" or "(V)void"
which eternally sustains and creates the universe.
(And is regarded as calm, unchanging, and "supportive"..)

=============

next comment:

(PURE theory, appeared to me in a dream)

As regards the spontaneously erupting pairs
of superposed particles
which continuously are created and destroyed
in the "background energy" of pure space
(which has been measured, by the way..)
that energy
(which is tremendously more powerful than we can imagine..)
has as it's origin all the matter
which has ever fallen into a black hole's singularity.

I falls into the billion or trillions of black holes
and appears as pure potential
throughout the universe.
Maybe it's the way that "interconnectedness" is maintained.

How many times has the STARDUST that YOU are made of
been cycled thru a black hole??
Freaking awesome to contemplate..

(For those who can meditate or get still,
think about this fact:
every cell made of material that has gone thru a black hole,
probably several times:
..it gives me a feeling
of connectedness to something..)

========
Final comment:

String theory appears to be dead, or nearly so.

11 dimensions?? Hell, you can think of anything and prove it.

Quantum loop theory appears more "useful": we'll see.

Meanwhile, we live in a Universe that is a MYstery,
and here we are using abstract symbols
to communicate images and ideas ABOUT the mystery,
and we pretend to have familiarity with what is going on.

========================

I prefer to think about the "mystical" interpretations
of these strange scientific leading edge ideas..



The human brain is the most complicated "thing" in the known universe.

The number of cells in it is more than the stars in the galaxy.

The ancient sages said

"As Above, so Below,
in accordance with the action
of
The One Thing."

Hmmmmmmm.

Reputation Comments on this post:

I always love a good mindfuck. Thanks!

[Expat98]

Please make sure that all posts in this thread are on the subject of the relationship between quantum physics and drug experiences. Any posts from this point forward that do not clearly relate to drug experiences will be deleted.

[Routemaster Flash]

Originally Posted by Expat98

Please make sure that all posts in this thread are on the subject of the relationship between quantum physics and drug experiences. Any posts from this point forward that do not clearly relate to drug experiences will be deleted.

To be fair, most of them have had fuck-all to do with quantum mechanics, full stop.

[Expat98]

^^Feel free to address that issue as well then.

[Euthanatos93420]

Originally Posted by Routemaster Flash

To be fair, most of them have had fuck-all to do with quantum mechanics, full stop.

I disagree. The mystical insights gleaned from psychedelics and those gleaned from Quantum physics are much the same thing. It makes perfect sense that the conceptual ideas about each would correlate. They have for Swim and his studies of Quantum Physics.