Quantum Metaphysics

When I say Quantum metaphysics I'm talking about how the study of quantum mechanics points to the metaphysical. Specifically, I'm talking about David Bohm and his hidden variables theory. His hidden variables theory is compatible with Heisenburg Uncertainty Principle and also Copenhagen Interpretation.

First lets start with the Copenhagen Interpretation. You can't talk about this subject without talking about the conversations that took place between Einstein and Neils Bohr. Basically Bohr argued that the position or momentum of a subatomic particle cannot be realized until measured by an observer. What bothered most about this interpretation was how prominent the observer was in Copenhagen. They couldn't define what an observer was, so many were disturbed by the metaphysical implications. Bohr basically said we can't know the state before measurement so there is no need to discuss it, this also matched the Uncertainty Principle. Obviously this didn't sit well with the ego and arrogence of many who study this field. Telling them that this is something they can't know, but they just have to accept it, was too metaphysical for many. Einstein called it "spooky action at a distance", he expected the subatomic realm to work like classical physics. So him and Bohr went at it and eventually Einstein and colleagues came up with the EPR Paradox. This basically said that subatomic particles couldn't communicate after a certain distance without faster than light communication, and this would violate relativity. This would be like two basketballs, one in Chicago and one in Las Vegas, whose moves correlate with each other. Einstein found Bohr's conclusion that a particle's properties don't exist until they are observed objectionable because, it implied that subatomic particles were interconnected in a way Einstein didn't believe was possible. So Einstein, Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen published a paper entitled,"Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Reality be Considered Complete?". Bohr said since subatomic particles don't exist until observed, then you can no longer think of them as independant things. They were part of an indivisible system, and it was meaningless to think of them otherwise. Along came John Bell and Bell's Theorum who was troubled like Einstein. The assumption states that a measurement at one point in space cannot influence what occurs at another point in space if the distance between the points is large enough so that no signal can travel between them. What was indicated by Bells Theorum, that similar correlations would exist even if experiments could be performed where the distance between the points was halfway across the universe. In other words when you made a measurement on one particle it was like it instantly communicated with its twin paricle, so reality is non-local and Bohr was right.

Bohm was troubled also, but he didn't reject this out of hand. Instead he said these particles exist before observation and are held up by hidden variables. In other words there was something hidden and unknown that governed reality. He called this the implicate order and what we see is the explicate order that originates from the implicate order. He went onto say how the microscopic and the macroscopic was part of an interconnected whole and that these subatomic particles were guided by what he called pilot-waves. The reason why this interpretation fits, I believe, is because it works with the interconnection showed with Bells Theorum. That on some deeper level things are interconnected and while we are in the explicate order, or as I believe this is just another way of saying a fallen state, we can't see it. This also fits with the Uncertainty Principle:

dp x dx > h

Simple, it's saying that at a certain level (h, plancks constant), you can know (p, momentum) but you can't know (x, position) and vice versa. At this level we deal with probabilities. So the hidden or unkown variables balance out the uncertainty. I believe we exist on a 3-dimensional p-brane on a massive m-brane. On the 3-dimensiol p-brane it reads dp x dx > h but on the m-brane it's dp x dx > 0. This fits with Minkowski space-time which is like a frozen snapshot of eternity. This is named after Hermann Minkowski one of Einsteins physics teachers. According to Minkowkski the past still exists as well as the future. This ties in with Fractal Geometry and it has Metaphysical implications.

What now takes place is many pushing the many-worlds interpretation to try and avoid the collapse of the wave function to minimize the role of an observer. I was reading a book called "Ghost in the Atom" and there were different interviews and one in particular jumpded out at me. It was with David Deutsch, winner of the Paul Dirac Medal and big proponent of many-worlds, he said many-worlds interpretation is needed to counter the role of the observer. Many worlds basically states that all possibilities are realized. So when you are deciding whats for dinner all possibilities happen but in different worlds. So you eat chicken, steak and fish in three seperate worlds. This is how troubling the role of an observer is for many, it points to the metaphysical. I believe many-histories fits better and also goes with Minkowski space-time. These histories exist in a static or frozen state until observed. This also goes with Fractal Geometry where the third dimension is solid, such as a cube. It contains an infinite number of planes and squares frozen as solids in the third dimension. In the fourth dimension, the infinite number of solids are in relationship with each other through time and energy. The Fourth Dimension moves the Third Dimension to form a wave that travels through space-time. So the first, second and third dimensions are seperated by fractals that are connected by the time and energy in the fourth dimension. This also matches with quantum physics. Benoit Mandelbrots set, z->z^2+c, which shows that in nature fractal patterns are repeated over and over again to form objects we see in nature, it's recursive. For example, if you look at a mountain you will find the same basic shape repeated on a smaller scale. Jonathan Swift summed it up in 1773 when he wrote:

So, nat'ralist observe a flea, Hath smaller fleas that on them prey, and these have smaller fleas to bite' em, and so proceed ad infinitum.

This reminds me of the story of Paul in Athens when he said:

Acts 17:23 For as I passed by and beheld your devotions, I found an alter with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.

THANK YOU, LORD JESUS!