Physics is in crisis. Quantum cosmology can save it and point us...

Physics is in crisis. Quantum cosmology can save it and point us toward the theory of everything

Heinrich Päs 

[*]Heinrich Päs is a German theoretical physicist and professor at TU Dortmund University.
[*]In this excerpt from his book The One, Päs connects quantum physics to an ancient idea about the foundations of reality known as "monism."
[*]Arguing that physics is in crisis, Päs draws on science and philosophy to take a mind-expanding look at the nature of the universe, with his ultimate goal being to "save the soul of science."

[*]

“Hold on,” you may object. “Quantum mechanics applies only to tiny things: atoms, elementary particles, maybe molecules. Applying it to the universe doesn’t make sense.” You will be surprised to learn that there are increasingly many good hints that this conviction is wrong. Between 1996 and 2016 alone, six Nobel Prizes were awarded for so-called macroscopic quantum phenomena. Quantum mechanics seems to apply universally, a finding whose consequences are just starting to be explored.

You may throw up your hands and protest that such a discussion is pointless. Physics seems to work just fine without any such metaphysical pondering. Fact is, it doesn’t. At present, physics is facing a crisis that forces us to reconsider what we understand as “fundamental” in the first place. Right now, the most brilliant particle physicists and cosmologists are alienated by experimental findings of extremely unlikely coincidences that so far defy any explanation. At the same time, the quest for a theory of everything is bereaving physics of its foundational concepts, such as matter, space, and time. If these are gone, what remains?

...Decoherence is the agent protecting our daily-life experience from too much quantum weirdness. And it realizes the rest of Heraclitus’s tenet: “from One all things.”

As a consequence, we will have to work out how such a notion changes our perspective on philosophy’s deepest questions—“What is matter? ” “What is space? ” “What is time? ” “How did the universe come into being?”—and even on what religious people call “God” (since for centuries, the concept of an all-encompassing unity was identified with God). We will also have to confront why monism is not more popular, if it follows so straightforwardly from quantum mechanics. Why does it sound so bizarre to us? Where does our intuitive, deprecative reflex come from? To really understand this bias, we have to venture into the history of monism.

Physics is in crisis. Quantum cosmology can save it and point us toward the theory of everything

Heinrich Päs 

[*]

This is a great under-graduate relaxed talk by Nima that gives the simplest outline of his work... however you can just jump to just before 1h:28m right at the end, and hear him say those words...



As far as I'm concerned, that combinatorial object/structure out there that knows about all these things.. unitarity, locality, spacetime etc, is a highly conserved biological structure within us.

One slaps ones forehead, and goes, of course, how did I not spot this before. It's me having this experience, how could I be having this experience of spacetime with unitarity and locality, unless the combinatorial object/structure is within me. It's not out there... it's in here... because it's me who is experiencing spacetime, unitarity and locality.

And that's what I did in 2020... and became a little depressed as it dawned on me that there is no way out by mining our shared patterns (science), we're never going to find anything more here, than us... and finding us, seems to be the very thing they won't go near, and won't let us go near... as soon as we start getting close... they point us in another direction.

Honestly, some bloke knew this around 2000 years ago... how he achieved that 2000 years ago is a perfect example of how the damn thing is hiding in plain sight all the time... because nature is made of it... and that he knew the same stuff in his own way 2000 years ago, just goes to show we're no further forward. Soon after that, the Orthodox church wiped out this knowledge, but someone hid some of this knowledge in Nag Hammadi, and when it was rediscovered last century, it demonstrated just how advanced they were in their thinking 2000 years ago, and just how they had deliberately twisted the message since then.

They take the knowledge for themselves, but tell us that there is nothing to see here... I was just talking to a friend this weekend, and we agreed, the BBC doesn't take time and money to broadcast programs about the paranormal, which are then rebutted, and used to cast doubt on paranormal claims, twist them, or rubbish them unless someone was directing them to do so. They often contain such low grade debunking, the most stupid explanations (nothing to see here), but we know they are cleverer than that.

This is a great under-graduate relaxed talk by Nima that gives the simplest outline of his work... however you can just jump to just before 1h:28m right at the end, and hear him say those words...



As far as I'm concerned, that combinatorial object/structure out there that knows about all these things.. unitarity, locality, spacetime etc, is a highly conserved biological structure within us.

One slaps ones forehead, and goes, of course, how did I not spot this before. It's me having this experience, how could I be having this experience of spacetime with unitarity and locality, unless the combinatorial object/structure is within me. It's not out there... it's in here... because it's me who is experiencing spacetime, unitarity and locality.

And that's what I did in 2020... and became a little depressed as it dawned on me that there is no way out by mining our shared patterns (science), we're never going to find anything more here, than us... and finding us, seems to be the very thing they won't go near, and won't let us go near... as soon as we start getting close... they point us in another direction.

Honestly, some bloke knew this around 2000 years ago... how he achieved that 2000 years ago is a perfect example of how the damn thing is hiding in plain sight all the time... because nature is made of it... and that he knew the same stuff in his own way 2000 years ago, just goes to show we're no further forward. Soon after that, the Orthodox church wiped out this knowledge, but someone hid some of this knowledge in Nag Hammadi, and when it was rediscovered last century, it demonstrated just how advanced they were in their thinking 2000 years ago, and just how they had deliberately twisted the message since then.

They take the knowledge for themselves, but tell us that there is nothing to see here... I was just talking to a friend this weekend, and we agreed, the BBC doesn't take time and money to broadcast programs about the paranormal, which are then rebutted, and used to cast doubt on paranormal claims, twist them, or rubbish them unless someone was directing them to do so. They often contain such low grade debunking, the most stupid explanations (nothing to see here), but we know they are cleverer than that.

Who's the "they" here Max?  I really struggle with the conjuring of the proverbial they in this conspiratorial posture.

The BBC's actions, for example, could be explained simply through capitalistic forces.  No need to summon a mysterious "they" puppetmaster IMO.

Who's the "they" here Max?  I really struggle with the conjuring of the proverbial they in this conspiratorial posture.

The BBC's actions, for example, could be explained simply through capitalistic forces.  No need to summon a mysterious "they" puppetmaster IMO.

Struggling is good... whatever the UK state broadcaster is, it's not simple. But you miss the thrust of my post, which is Nima's presentation, and the conclusion at the end.

Who's the "they" here Max?  I really struggle with the conjuring of the proverbial they in this conspiratorial posture.

The BBC's actions, for example, could be explained simply through capitalistic forces.  No need to summon a mysterious "they" puppetmaster IMO.

Regardless of ideas of conspiracies or otherwise, the BBC has changed. The content has become narrower in scope - while exploration and discovery used to be a an important feature, limitation and shoehorning topics past-and-present into a particular framework is the current approach. A lot like the old 19th-century idea of physics as being almost complete, with just a few i's to be dotted and t's to be crossed. I suppose one could call it over-confidence.

With apologies to @Max_B for neglecting the main topic. Sorry.

Who's the "they" here Max?  I really struggle with the conjuring of the proverbial they in this conspiratorial posture.

The BBC's actions, for example, could be explained simply through capitalistic forces.  No need to summon a mysterious "they" puppetmaster IMO.

I was reading about something else, and I stumbled across a good example of a minor member of the ‘theys’

Edward Bernays 1891-1995

I was reading about something else, and I stumbled across a good example of a minor member of the  ‘theys’

Edward Bernays 1891-1995

Yeah, scary stuff.  If you purposefully being vague in terms of 'theys', that's fine.  I acknowledge there are 'theys' everywhere.

Yeah, scary stuff.  If you purposefully being vague in terms of 'theys', that's fine.  I acknowledge there are 'theys' everywhere.

I have found enough evidence over the years, and quite recently, to finally convince me that my experience of the everyday world is a group construction - constructed by us all.

It's for this reason, that the 'theys', have no more say or ability in what is constructed here, than anyone of us. And because of this, their only way to get us to create what they want, is to influence us to cooperate with them, and compete with everyone else, to create it for them.

On top of what is probably a benign (perhaps even benevolent) fundamental system, an artificial system of influence has been been discovered, and developed by theys over hundreds of years, to steer us in a direction that benefits them.

The layers of influence are so thick, distracting us, and misdirecting us, that it is extremely difficult to discover ones 'self', and realize that we are all equal co-creators of the shared everyday world, who have been influenced to forget our true selves.

I have found enough evidence over the years, and quite recently, to finally convince me that my experience of the everyday world is a group construction - constructed by us all.

It's for this reason, that the 'theys', have no more say or ability in what is constructed here, than anyone of us. And because of this, their only way to get us to create what they want, is to influence us to cooperate with them, and compete with everyone else, to create it for them.

On top of what is probably a benign (perhaps even benevolent) fundamental system, an artificial system of influence has been been discovered, and developed by theys over hundreds of years, to steer us in a direction that benefits them.

The layers of influence are so thick, distracting us, and misdirecting us, that it is extremely difficult to  discover ones 'self', and realize that we are all equal co-creators of the shared everyday world, who have been influenced to forget our true selves.

A bit of an intractable thing to contemplate of course.  What have you learned about who the "theys" are and what their motivation is in having us "create it" for them (whatever that might mean)?

A bit of an intractable thing to contemplate of course.  What have you learned about who the "theys" are and what their motivation is in having us "create it" for them (whatever that might mean)?

For me personally I'd say it's less a group that is like a cabal and more people who have certain desires about how the world should be interpreted. Kastrup once said it's not a conspiracy but more a confluence of individuals who share the same or at least overlapping pattern of belief.

I don't know if all these people feel we can create our reality by group consensus in the sense of literally changing this what is real, but they seem to definitely want us to believe there is no God, no soul, no aspect of life that isn't bound by classical physics...beyond that they seem to think a utopia can be built via technology no matter how many driverless cars ram into cyclists...

I wouldn't even say all these people want all these goals, but enough overlap happens. I mean why is there resistance to the idea that brain processes might be quantum in nature if materialism would still be true? Because you can convince the public that we are deterministic machines with greater ease than you can convince them all science and art is just arising from lucky random blips in the quantum level. 

The silliness of the skeptic movement is another aspect. Why go after palm readers and miss all the shady research practices in science itself, from academia to business? If they are guardians of good science, as they like to claim, seems like missing the forest fire for the sake of pruning a tree here & there...