So anyways. ...about this whole quantum business. HA!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/0f085b1ed75aba41.gif[/atsimg]


Yeah. I know that we have been rolling this around for several weeks (if not forever) on this board. sometimes it is on the metaphysics board and sometimes it is on the science board. I have chosen THIS particular board because i think that it is time to stop being so ashamed and afraid of speculation on the fringes of science.

This is not an "I told you so." thread, nor will any "well, actually...." be tolerated. If at some point in your response you are tempted to say anything of that nature: Please Don't.

My question is this:

What is the quantum state and effect of a magnet?

The evidence is right before your eyes. We keep looking on the scale of sub-atomic particles thinking that somehow if we look "down there", and say that "THIS is the level of uncertainty", we wont have to acknowledge the magic going on right in front of our faces.

Now, dont get me wrong. I know what it means to confuse the quantum-scale with our people-level-scale. I am not here in this thread trying to tell you that YOU can do some kind of magic (booga-booga) and consciousley affect the solid reality around you.

No. I am implying something entirely different.

If you consider that we are living in a magnet. That the entire universe is a huge magnet....and that the planet earth, and its relationship with the Sun is a magnet. That reality is itself composed within a magnet; and that conscious perception (our own personal ability to perceive reality) is not possible in a non-magnetic environment.


Considering this, i will ask the question again:


What is the quantum state and effect of the magnet?


Do you see now? Are you looking up yet, and all around you? You are experiencing the quantum state of the magnet.

You, and the uncertainty and randomness that you encounter all day long from the gas-station to the outdoor range are a tiny contributer (particle) in a quantum system that is so huge it spans Aeons. Yes, Aeons.

What is the quantum state and effect of the magnet? Between the two poles. Two huge poles that are capable of generating the effects of everyday reality as observed by You. Well. Who are You?

Believe it or not, You are the "Quantum Observer". Now again: i am not confusing levels here.....just stay with me. As the Quantum Obsterver of THIS SYSTEM, the system of SunPlanet magnet, You do not exist inside of THIS SYSTEM. In order to be an Observer of a System, by definition, you cannot be a part of that System.

You, the proper you, in the sense of *not the nervous and physical somatic configuration*, are an Observer of this system. YOU ARE NOT PART OF THIS SYSTEM. *YOU* ARE AN observer of it only.

Do you understand who You are yet? Do you understand why it is no longer necessary to look "Down There" in order to understand quantum effects?

....and why (,as distesteful as some may find it,) You are also the "collapser" of the quantum uncertainty at This Level? which, unfortunately for the scientists who built the atom smasher, This Level is the only level at which quantum observation really has any meaning.

yeah. thanks guys, and all, for spending so much of your time and energy looking for the effects of this theory. but the time has come to stop looking "Down There" for the answers and begin working with the quantum effects at our own level.



HAHA!
__________


In the next class, we will discuss how we have come to live on an electrical grid. A grid which has been created for us to live on by those in this world who are capable of doing such a thing. When was the last time you looked around you and seen the modern world for what it is?.......: a chemical-electrical grid which has been fashioned out of the acid-base environment.

Do you know what the difference is, in terms of electrical resonance, between the black-top pavement of your street and, say, a forest-lake. You do understand that these two bodies reflect and absorb Electro-Magnetic frequencies differently, do you not?

reply to post by tgidkp


If we didn't resonate differently we would just fall through each other. Matter is nothing but thick energy.

I'll probably post again later. Actually, I will post again later, but I just wanted to say I like your perspective on this, and I like what I perceive that you are doing. I really like it when people's angles are 360 degrees. And I have noticed vast differences in my relationships with people, both friend and stranger, depending on my internal state. I even notice it before I say anything at all. Our beliefs are quite magical, possibly explained as quantum in effect. I have experienced the ripple effects. It is infinitely moreso when I do not have an angle, when I jump right in, when I feel like electrically charged water, if that makes any sense. Peace, but a dynamic peace at that. I will come back later to post on the quantum effects of a magnet, after some research. I just wanted to say what immediately popped in upon viewing.

reply to post by MissSmartypants


Yeah, but mind sex is fun.
Mind sex is very fun. I believe we both resonate differently and integratively and dynamically interactively and everything inbetween and around and whatever else depending upon core radial perspective, which is much more than fixed, and rather dynamic and pulsating (being deliberately silly and a bit chaotic, but BEING serious nonetheless). This core perspective is something that the observer chooses, even though the observer can often trick itself into being constrained. These words do not come close to even begin to describe this being, however. The map is not the territory.

Excellent, and well said!

Star and Flag.

There must have been a hundredth monkey threshold passed around the turn of the new year. I wrote a paper on the exact same thing pretty much. I was saying how the reductionist paradigm - or 'looking down' - has expired its usefulness. It is time to understand the reality from a holistic perspective, because the ethics that reductionism breeds is contrary to what we really need right now.

This is what the new age mumbo jumbo is about: A new approach to understanding the connections firsthand, instead of the separations vicariously.

One.

An excerpt from the paper:

This is the philosophy of the perceptual realist: Things exist independent of our perception in this world view. The tree does make a sound when no one is there to hear it. It is this philosophy that most of our society is based upon. Therefore, we as individuals look for ‘truth’ in certain things, and when we think we have found it we push it onto others because of our faith in what we have found empirically. This method seems to have worked, but is there an end goal?

For the most part, the method is associated with reductionist science. The end goal of reductionism is to find the most intrinsic and basic laws and functions of the natural world. This method has been focused on material things - because of our background assumptions in society, or our world view that is perceptual realism. If we were idealists, we would probably not spend as many resources as we currently do towards the reductionist agenda in things like the Genome Project, or the Large Hadron Collider.

As an idealist, other peoples views have just as much validity as our own - because the subjective experience is all that exists. An idealist view respects the lack of hierarchy, and therefore is more tolerant of different perspectives. A reducing realist would believe that there is an objective truth that should be recognized by everyone - which would explain trying to ‘convert’ people or ‘spread the truth’ - policing the world is a good example of how a reductionist idea has transformed into the political arena.

The realist would spend billions towards research to find a fundamental particle, while the idealist could use those same resources for education, local infrastructure, helping starving children, etc. This is an example of how our basic world views affect ethics and morals - and even foreign policy.

And if anyone is interested further, here is the paper. www.scribd.com...

Very well put, OP. Puts it into perspective, like when Nassim Haramein(or whoever) suggested that the universe is just the inside of an event horizon, and we are inside a black hole.

reply to post by tgidkp


A macroscopic magnetic object has no physically relevant quantum properties.

In fact the behavior of a macroscopic object is due to the collective behavior of all of the unpaired electron spin contained within it. If a majority of unpaired electrons are in the same spin state then the object is a magnet. If an object contains atoms that have unpaired electrons (but in random spin states) then the object might be ferromagnetic depending on some other things.


source: physics education

reply to post by sjorges2002


yeah. um. well, before you start talking at me with your "well, actually...." voice, you should be aware that i am a third year biotechnology student and i have taken all of the relevent courses.

i am more than willing to participate in mutual conversation.

but i will not be TOLD whats up.


thanks for your post

It seems to me that many people have this innate desire to find magic in the world that they actually experience. This scale of reality that we live on. The scientific worldview based on a materialist ontology is does not satisfy our appetite for mysticism. Mysticism is not the right word; whatever it is that causes us to give pause when we experience a peculiar coincidence - and even though we may fully embrace the scientific worldview - we feel like maybe there is "more to it all" than what science is talking about. We want there to be something more to us, and the world around us, and our relationship to it.

I just wonder if there is anywhere to go with this; other than expressive discussions on metaphysics on internet forums. What if we fully embrace your perspective? We look for the quantum effects on our level of reality? Embrace the quantum magnet worldview? Is there anything we can do with it? It seems like physics describes our level of reality very well. It does not seem to be lacking. The forces at work in our daily lives and the substances which they act on are well understood; embracing this philosophy you propose does not seem to add anything to our understanding. There doesn't seem to be room; science as it stands successfully explains our normal day to day interactions with the world.

I think that what you have here is something that people innately desire; something that satisfies our appetite for finding more than the material world in the reality that we live in. But I don't think there is anything to it, empirically.

We spend a lot of time trying to develop a satisfying undersanding of ourselves, the world, and our relationship to it. I think that perhaps what you propose is a satisfying interpretations of those things; without empirical validity, but perhaps beneficial psychologically. It is a tolerable perspective to take on reality, which is something that we all spend a lot of time looking for.

reply to post by tgidkp


Well actually lol! Sorry about my earlier oblique response.

Do you have some other post where you define terms? After rereading your thread I realized the point was a bit more philosophical and that the 'magnet' you were speaking of might be a metaphor for all of the elements of reality that 'align' within our subjective experience, but maybe we provide the aligning field in our minds as observers and creators?

What I think you are alluding to reminds me of an ancient idea called virtue by the romans and greeks. It boils down to conscious choice and the fact that it is an active process that defines our observations, perceptions, and actions.

reply to post by OnceReturned


i am not so concerned with usurping physics, or any other science. i agree that they have accomplished a great deal in terms of explaining everyday phenomena.

nevertheless, i must reassert that there is indeed a great deal that can, and must, be learned from a synthesis of these disciplines...and perhaps the formation of a new science.

as it presently stands, science is not terribly interested in the subjective experience of living. and as a science, consciousness is a hard nut to crack. science ignores it and says that it is merely an epiphenomenon.

you say that science has given us a satisfactory explanation of "everyday" interactions? what could be more "everyday" than conscious perception? and yet, science cannot even touch it. Yet.
__________

if you really want to understand the model that i have set up in the OP, go ahead: try it. you have all the tools that you need at your disposal to discover the perspective that i am describing. if you think that my model is wrong, i must first ask that you get inside of it and tell me what it looks like from the inside.

only THEN are you qualified to dismiss it as fantasy.

if you cant keep up, get out of the kitchen.

reply to post by sjorges2002


i attempt to adhere as strictly as possible to the scientific terms as already defined. but i can tend to get a little carried away.

i realise that many people are tempted to state that i am being too liberal with my interpretations, and that is a valid perspective.

when i say magnet, i mean just that: an energetic system with two distinct poles of opposite charge which create an entire spectum of action across some length of distance.

to the degree of coherence (using a term from your own post) that an interactant has with one, the other, or neither of these poles, information can be exchanged. because of the scale of the magnetic system which i propose, we can use our own scale, This Level, of existence to observe quantum interactions within this magnetic system and come to a better understanding of what is meant by "uncertainty".

some of my other posts on ATS concerning my hair-brained interpretations:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


...best

reply to post by tgidkp


I fully I agree that the problem of consciousness is the greatest problem facing science and philosophy. I have devoted my professonal life - and much of my personal life - to studyng it.

Consciousness cannot be epiphenomenal. An epiphenomenon is a phenomenon that occurs with and seems to result from another but has no reciprocal effect or subsequent influence. That means that epiphenomena cannot cause anything. Yet, here we are talking about consciousness. Clearly we would not be talking about it if it did not exist, and we did not experience it(at least this is clear to me, some people would argue this point). Therefore consciousness caused us - in one way or another - to talk about its very existance. Therefore it cannot - in principal - be epiphenomenal.

I respect what you are trying to do here, because any systematic approach or paradigm in which to approach consciousness is worth considering. The field is wide open; we have no idea how to deal with this problem.

There seem to be two schools of thought: one is the conventional materialist perspective - which I believe is taken be people who don't really understand the problem. These people attempt to explain consciousness in terms of brain activity, or in terms of how consciousness fits into our cognitive structure. Then there is the other school of thought which says that science as it stands today has no room for consciousness. We need a completely new way of understanding reality in order to even address the problem. I tend to agree with this latter view.

One problem though, is that it is hard to propose a new paradigm or worldview that doesn't suffer from the same fundamental deficiencies when attempting to explain consciousness. Quantum phyics is still physics; equations and materialist science. Magnets are part of that same paradigm. Undersanding the world as a magnet and in terms of quantum mechanics doesn't really bring us any closer to an acceptable answer to the problem of consciousness. This is just mystery mongering; consciousness is mysterious, and quantum mechanics is mysterious, so why not explain consciousness in terms of quantum mechanics? It doesn't work; quantum mechanics is still too much a part of the standard materialist world view in order to be helpful for understanding subjective experience.

A more emprical argument is this: We know consciousness is bound to the brain. We know brain states = mental states and vica versa. Quantum effects are not relevant to brain activity. Wave functions collapse to quickly and in too small an area to effect brain states even at the cellular level.

The main argument against the quantum mind proposition is that quantum states would decohere too quickly to be relevant to neural processing. Possibly the scientist most often quoted in relation to this criticism is Max Tegmark. Based on his calculations, Tegmark concluded that quantum systems in the brain decohere quickly and cannot control brain function.

A decent discussion here.

reply to post by beebs


thank you for your post.

i very much disagree with your premise in the paper you wrote about the "idealist". this is a concept more properly termed "pluralistic relativism", where all perspectives and philosophies are given equal value.

granted, the relativistic approach goes a good length beyond its predecessor, what you have called the "realist". but with the rate of progress we are currently at, both of these systems of thought are being superceded.


the two must be integrated.

reply to post by OnceReturned


okay then.

the only objection that i have to what you are saying is this: my OP is clear and purpose driven.

the clarity and purpose is informed by my own DIRECT experience. i am merely attempting to describe to you my own observations over the span of more than a decade of exploring the landscape.

although i agree that it is always a temptation to gravitate (pun) toward the mystery and awe that the word Quantum can inspire, i can only assure you with my word that i am attempting to descibe ACTUAL phenomena as they have been ACTUALLY experienced by myself.....and "Quantum Mechanical interactions within a magnetic field" is the absolute best that i can come up with.

considering that i am not your average fool when it comes to the subject matter, is it not worth extending my model at least the tiniest bit of credit? i am not looking for mental masturbation. ultimately, i am attempting to outline useful concepts.

reply to post by OnceReturned


There's been a couple more quantum consciousness in life papers -- not just the photosynthesis one mentioned in the link you gave. There's also the "bird migration" quantum consciousness model and the recent algae quantum coherence -- superposition, entanglement discovery.

naturalresonancerevolution.blogspot.com...

I think Dr. Mae-Wan Ho's model is probably the most perceptive as she clearly understands quantum chaos -- which is also what is used at Los Alamos, Sandia and Santa Fe Institute -- as per Professors Ian Stewart and Steve Strogatz' quantum chaos research:

www.ratical.com...

The life cycle, with its complex of coupled cyclic processes, forms a heterogeneous, multidimensional and entangled space-time which structures experience. In the ideal, it is a quantum superposition of coherent space-time modes, constituting a pure state that maximizes both local freedom and global cohesion [7, 12, 13] in accordance with the factorizability of the quantum coherent state [20]. Quantum coherence gives rise to correlations between subsystems which resolves neatly into products of the self-correlations so that the sub-systems behave as though they are independent of one another. One can also picture the organism as a coherent quantum electrodynamical field of many modes, with an uncertainty relationship between energy and phase [21], DnDf e h So, when phase is defined, energy is indeterminate, and vice versa. That may be of fundamental importance to the flexibility and adaptability of the living system.

reply to post by tgidkp


Hi thanks for the links. I read dianetics when I was a kid many years ago and found some interesting ideas in Hubbard's writing. Later it seemed to me that he was reinventing the wheel so to speak, and that Scientology represented a modern attempt to realize the fundamental nature of humans and their place in the world.

Many individuals seem to lose their humanity in reality constrained by an unconscious set of conditioned responses that cause them to impose limitations upon the range of their experiences and thoughts- memes.

I recognize the non-exploitative ideas of hubbard as a sort of rediscovery of the old ideas about the nature of a human being's true character as a creative being that has true choice as opposed to conditioned, trained responses. "Virtuous" humans define their existence moment to moment- not merely reacting. To me, this is why the oracle says Know Thyself. Vigilance is required to ensure that conditioned reactions don't rule over the conscious choice of one from many possibilities at any given moment.

There are many paths to Nirvana!

A bit off topic, but not really:
Have you ever read anything by Jorges Luis Borges? He was a contemporary of the guys who gave us the statistical description of subatomic particles and wrote some amazingly prescient short stories that are like philosophical vignettes about the true implications of quantum mechanics and information age technology.

If not, I think you might enjoy his writing immensely. One of his stories is about an infinite library- reminds me of Escher. Another is called the garden of the forking paths and is about possible outcomes.