Using Me!

Quantum Mechanics, Consciousness, Reality and Computation – Part V

So in this series of posts I have not yet addressed the word in my title … ‘Computation’.

To cut a long story short, it seems to me that what Quantum Mechanics does is what any computer programmer would do when faced with an enormous amount of information that he could not possibly compute in a sensible timeframe.

Why track every particle in the universe if it only matters where it is when you need to know about it?

Could the interference patterns caused by single particles be the result of approximations in the computational algorithms of the universe?

Put it this way… if the universe was in some way ‘pure’. If it existed arbitrarily, independent of anything else, then why would time and space be quantized? Are Xeno’s paradoxes for real? If time and space were not indivisible then I would claim that Xeno’s paradoxes would NOT be paradoxical IF the universe were ‘pure’ and ‘free’ because a smooth calculation over ANY interval would be possible. The paradoxes ONLY become paradoxical if you have to make the calculations! If nothing needs to do any calculations then yes you CAN integrate from 0 to 1 in a finite time. It is ONLY if something has to work something out that an un-quantized space or time will never complete an integral.

So, in the way that I see it, the Universe really works like an enormous computer. There are a huge number of locations, but they are discrete. One planck volume each. And a huge number of times, but discrete. One planck time each. At each time each volume contains information. Nothing more.

And my idea is testable! I learned this in my degree when simulating the n-body problem.

Take two bodies that are falling towards each other under gravity. As they get closer together they get faster and faster. Any computer program that simulates this over discrete time periods will eventually reach a point where the bodies are really close together and the forces on them are enormous, so the accelerations are enormous and so their new velocities are enormous. After one more time period they have passed each other and are racing away at stupendous speeds. You just violated conservation of energy. So you step back one step and you move forwards by a smaller period of time. Now the forces, accelerations and velocities get even higher. And no matter how small you make your unit of time you always face a point where things break down. Even at the planck scale of time and distance conservation of energy will be violated.

So we have a position where either planck scales are real or they are simply descriptive in terms of quantum uncertainty. You can test by conservation of energy which is the case. It may be beyond our detection abilities at the moment but the test is there. If we could prove that energy is not conserved then we would know that time and space are genuinely discrete and therefore we COULD describe the universe as a set of information which is really just like a computer model. Or we would show that energy is conserved and that therefore the planck scales are simply descriptive of our ability to describe the universe using observation. Indeed a place between unit 0 and unit 1 on the planck scale would exist. In which case quantum theory would appear to break down. In fact Xeno would come back to haunt us. After all if you need to make an infinite number of calculations to move an infinitesimal step forward in time and space you could never get anywhere. After all even the tiniest change in the universe requires the propogation of that change to everywhere else in the universe, allbeit at the speed of light of less. In a smooth scaled universe any change, no matter how small, requires an infinite number of propogations of the changes – as per Xeno.

In a way, if I follow this argument to its logical conculsion I have to ask myself again : Why does a single photon interfere with itself in Young’s Double Slit experiment? If I follow this path then the answer is that it does so because the universe doesn’t know where the photon is and therefore it does pass through both slits and that it is not because of intereference with another universe where everything is identical except that the photon went a different way. After all where the bloody hell ARE all these other universes? That’s the hardest question for the multiverse proponents to answer! Myself included!

One answer would be to conclude that the universe itself is a quantum computer but then it would have to exist inside some container which leads to infinite regression.

I’m not happy with any of the answers. How CAN a photon go through both slits? Yet how CAN there be an infinite number of universes (or rather a very very large number representing each possible quantum state)?

I suspect the answer is far more subtle than any of us can realise. I do not want to shed the idea that our universe is mechanistic although including a lack of knowledge that we call the WaveForm, but neither do I wish for a plethora of universes constantly being created.

So it would be so easy just to say the universe is a computer program. But then it’s got to be running somewhere on something and we have to wonder about the rules of the universe in which that computer exists. If that universe was singular and purely mechanistic with not even the concept of a wave-form then where would they come up with that idea from? Indeed without the mechanisms of quantum mechanics what would existence even be like? Everything we know relies on quantum mechanics. Take it away and you are left with a reality that we could not even begin to describe. Could anyone come up with a way to describe a self contained computer that conforms to everything we know? After all… there is such a thing as a wave function that describes the entire universe and if it can be conceptualised (although not solved) inside that universe would it require a larger universe to contain it?

Quantum Mechanics is the most confusing thing human endeavour has EVER come up with.

Jehovah’s witnesses at my door

So yesterday two Jehovah’s witnesses came to my house whilst I was out front having a smoke. I took the time to talk to them while I finished my cigarette and my cup of tea. It was quite fun.

I made it clear when they asked right at the start that I was an Atheist who had once been a Christian so we had a solid understanding of our starting points. Their first question to me was how I felt about the recent comments from scientists about God in the media. I immediately felt that they did not actually know what was being said by whom especially when they couldn’t remember Richard Dawkins’ name and for the fact that it was actually Hawking who made the press this week with his belief that M-Theory closes the gaps that he said MIGHT exist in ‘A Brief History of Time’. So I didn’t lambaste them for this I merely stated that I broadly agreed with them.

So instead they asked me why I didn’t believe in God. I decided to go with something simple and stated infinite regression as one reason. Unfortunately they couldn’t grasp the idea that if you decide to complicate matters by requiring a God to create a universe then you can equally require a god to create the god and so on… They were quite sure that the God who created this universe doesn’t require a creator. I was getting nowhere so I didn’t even try invoking Occam’s Razor which would just have confused them further.

The lady who was leading the conversation from ‘their’ side pressed me on the fact that God’s word is there for you to see in the bible. I did not mention that their God only represents a tiny proportion of the people on the planet although when pressed I did point out that their version of truth is only as old and only as reliable as the versions espoused by other people. However I did point out repeatedly that this bible was concocted by the Roman Catholic church during various councils from a MUCH larger canon that already existed at the time. They both seemed entirely unaware of the existence of other forms of christianity and neither of them had read any of the other gospels which exist.

In fact they went so far as to say that through God’s influence the proper content of the bible had been formed despite being ignorant of the fact that other versions had existed. I even told them that gnostic christianity seemed much more appealing to me. A religion based on enlightenment seems far more appropriate than one based on sin. Again they had no answer.

When I pressed them on contradictions in the bible they demanded that I find one. Since I didn’t have one at my immediate recall, although there are dozens, I turned the conversation to rules in the bible. I asked if they ate pork or shellfish and when they said yes I pointed out that both are disallowed in the old testament. They said that times had changed and that the bible had to be interpreted in the times we live in. I pointed out that the bible doesn’t say ‘Thou shalt not eat shellfish until such time as you have invented the refrigerator’ and they seemed to shrug this off as inconsequential. They made some mention of the ‘law on blood’ hasn’t changed because it was ‘renewed in the new testament’ and therefore ‘is valid’. In which case why not ignore the WHOLE old testament???

I was really close to asking whether they went to church when they had their periods since the same parts of the O.T. mention not allowing your women to go when they are menstruating but I didn’t want to be offensive to that degree!

I asked them by what mechanism that hypothesised God could work in the Universe since he is outside of it. Indeed I challenged them. They claimed that God works in the world so I claimed that therefore there must be a mechanism that he does so by. Therefore one can hypothesise what that mechanism is and scientists can test it. They quite simply did not understand, even when I promised that if they came up with this hypothesis and proved it then I would accept everything they said.

To move things on a bit I then suggested that in order to be a Christian one would have to have genuine free will. I told them that I was a materialist and that they must be dualists or pluralists. Therefore a simple proposition for them would be to provide a testable hypothesis by which the mechanism of dualism or pluralism could be proven. By this point both looked ready to leave.

And with a few words about how no-one can do anything without hope and how we were clearly ‘coming at the debate from opposite sides’ the Jehovah’s Witnesses gave up and left me to my sin and my damnation.

Next please!!

Quantum Mechanics, Consciousness, Reality and Computation – Part IV

This post follows on from my much earlier musings on Quantum Mechanics, here, here and here.

It does not sit well with me to think that a conscious observer is required for QM to work and therefore for the Universe to exist.

Which of these two would you say has a fundamental existence? The understanding of Mathematics or the concept of Mathematics? I would insist that Mathematics exists regardless of the ability to understand it.

Mathematics can describe any geometry, any equation, any self-consistent ‘thing’. We can create a perfectly valid set of rules that describe a universe that differs from our own. Physics describes the universe we live in – and sometimes a universe we don’t live in – but it only does so through mathematics.

Yet how could you possibly think that these mathematical frameworks only exist when there is a consciousness to observe their operation? Since the early universe clearly did not have any consciousness in it the only way you could believe this would be to create a God. But a god would have to be outside of the Universe to be able to observe the point where time began but being outside the Universe he would be outside the mathematical framework of QCD and therefore unable to interact with it. Occam’s Razor makes a clean cut here. It is far simpler for the Universe not to have to require a conscious observer than it is to create an observer who is outside of the Universe and can observe it without breaking QCD (or indeed to extend QCD into some extra dimension or concept to explain how this can be).

That is to say that “The Universe exists as it is, as we understand it, as anyone understands it, and as anything will ever understand it, regardless of whether we do so correctly or not or indeed whether we or any other conscious being exists to be capable of understanding it”.

And that “Mathematics exists as a framework for describing any possible reality regardless of the existence of any particular reality that it can describe”.

And so, applying this to QM, it would be easy to say that I must therefore believe that one of the Many Worlds interpretations is the choice for me. But that seems so excessively complex as to beggar belief. So what am I to think?

To go back to Schroedinger’s Cat… this thought experiment relies on something very crucial. The box itself is isolated from the rest of the Universe. The inside of the box must be interacting with the outside of the box and thence with the rest of the Universe. So information is flowing out of the box at all times. The wave function must be collapsed at all times! That is, you cannot perform this experiment and so why should it have any relevance to which form of QM might be right or wrong?

Also, just to backtrack for a moment, the requirement for a consciousness makes ‘consciousness’ special. I am a materialist, not a dualist or pluralist, so I do not believe that there is any ‘thing’ that cannot be described by the laws of physics. To me the ’self’, ‘id’, ‘ego’, ‘mind’, ‘consciousness’ or whatever you want to call it is nothing more than the complex macroscopic expression of fundamental physics. There is no extra ingredient that makes life alive or the mind ‘mind-ly’. Therefore even if the requirement didn’t make sense to me in a purely logical way I would have to deny it.

So here’s what I believe the correct interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is:

1. I believe that the Wave Function describes the lack of information about a system, not a lack of determinism in the system.
2. I therefore have to believe in a Many Worlds version of the theory. No other interpretations will work, given point 1, with the majority of the features of QM.
3. I can find no other way to explain single photon interference given 1 and 2 other than to agree with Deutsch that it must be caused by interference between universes (see his book The Fabric of Reality).

The strange thing is that is not the conclusion I thought I would come to. But having spent so long researching and thinking about it that’s where I ended up!

Origins of Christianity

I found this wonderful and astonishing website with a timeline of the major events in human history, called MacroHistory and World Report. There are sections on specific regions or time periods but I was just browsing my way through the whole timeline when I found this interesting piece on the origins of Christianity.

25CE : Since 150 BCE, Jews called Essenes have denounced the Jewish majority as apostate and temple worship in Jerusalem as polluted. They describe the majority of Jews as the “sons of darkness” and themselves as “the sons of light.” They live in communes, share, and look forward to Armageddon — God’s day of judgment.

28 CE : Like the Essenes, John the Baptist has seen perversity in Jewish society and has envisioned the coming of an Armageddon that will bring a new Israel under God. But rather than stay separated from others as have the Essenes, John joined various others who traveled about Galilee preaching. John made verbal attacks on the Judah’s king (who is subservient to the Romans), Herod Antipas — the son of Herod the Great. John around this time, give or take a year or two, is imprisoned and executed.

30CE : A young man whose name in Greek is Jesus has created a following of his own, while recognizing there is none greater than his former leader, John the Baptist. This year, give or take a year or two, he goes to Jerusalem for Passover and there creates a disturbance. He is executed — by stoning if convicted of blasphemy and by crucifixion for some other offense.

37CE : Followers of Jesus keep his movement alive. Among these followers, John the Baptist has been relegated to second standing. The followers continued to worship at Jerusalem’s temple, “the House of the Lord.” They call themselves the “The Poor” or “The Saints.” They look forward to Jesus returning and bringing a New Order. Some among them draw attention to themselves by arguing with other Jews. Some are expelled from the city, and one of them, Stephen, is executed.

I had not heard before that Jesus considered John to be his leader and I’m not sold on the evidence that Jesus even existed but given the amazing amount of information on this site that, in my casual browsing, otherwise appears to be correct to the best of my knowledge, I thought it bore pointing out.

Interesting indeed.

Vaccination Immunity Duration

You may have seen in the media that skepchick.org has a campaign to give people boosters to their Pertussis (Whooping Cough) vaccination immunity. At the recent DragonCon free injections were being given out.

Over the past year or two I’ve been doing a lot of research into vaccines and the anti-vax movement. One thing I did not know was how long the immunity you gain from vaccination can last. With a new baby in the family who is just approaching his first vaccinations and the recent re-emergence of Pertussis (particularly in California) I have become concerned whether my immunity is up to scratch and whether I or anyone else my son might come into contact with might even be a carrier of diseases that he could catch.

I had to visit my doctor yesterday so I asked him “Why we don’t have continual boosters throughout our life for Pertussis or Tetanus for example?”

He said that the perceived wisdom here in the UK is that after your childhood course of 5 vaccinations for each condition you are as good as protected for life. Now my doctor is pretty good and quite the skeptic himself. We recently had a good chat about Andrew Wakefield being struck off. So he didn’t state this as fact. He stated it as the NHS’s position.

Since then I’ve been looking for research articles on the duration of vaccination immunity and so far this is the kind of evidence that I’ve found:

Pertussis vaccination immunity wanes in 4-12 years
Natural immunity can last up to 30 years
There are also articles which discuss the need to re-vaccinate the elderly against diseases including Pertussis.

So it seems on the surface at least that the NHS is wrong. If the last vaccination is given in the mid teens then by the age of 30, possibly even by the age of 20, people will have lost their immunity to at least some of the diseases they were vaccinated against. Those diseases may no longer pose a significant threat to their lives but they do still pose a risk to the lives of the young and old they come into contact with.

Now I am thoroughly confused about why we let this risk exist and I draw no firm conclusions at this point as to the level of the risk or the accuracy of the links above in relation to the specific NHS vaccination schedule. More research needs to be done but my opinion is clearly moving towards there being a real risk as a result of this vaccination policy.

Change in online advertising

Just announced, the Advertising Standards Authority will now have online advertising in its scope of authority. As I have pointed out before any complaints about adverts on a company’s own website were, until now, under the authority of the Trading Standards Authority.

This change makes a lot of sense and will mean my future complaints about woo and bullshit will be easier to initiate.

Full story at the BBC.

Update:

I just spoke to the ASA and found that the change to their remit takes force on 1st March 2011.

The next bracelet phenomenom

Funny conversation at the golf course last night…

Man at front of queue gestures at bracelets on sale at the counter. The packaging says “Embedded Holographic Technology” and “May improve your strength and swing” etc.

Man at front of queue: Do those really work then?

Boy behind counter: Yeah, I wear one all the time.

Me: Yeah, wearing a hologram on your wrist will really make you better at golf.

Boy behind counter: Well I play off 4.

Man at front of queue: [With slight sarcasm] There must be something in it then.

Me: Yeah, Confirmation Bias.

Anyway I looked these things up and the company behind them is EFX. They have websites for many different countries. I stumbled across the US, UK and Hungarian sites in my top few google hits.

I decided to make a new Trading Standards complaint about it. And here’s my complaint sent to Consumer Direct:

Please would you forward this complaint to Kent Trading Standards, as the body responsible for applying the law in this company’s region.

The company detailed in this complaint is selling a range of products for which there exists no evidence to give backing to the claims they make for their ‘Embedded Holographic Technology”. The products are sold by many websites and shops around the country and are no more than snake-oil.

Allowing such blatant rubbish to be pedaled at the expense of those without a basic understanding of medicine and physics is shameful.

The claim on their website follows – ALL this from a mylar ‘holographic’ device???

A side note – their main US website claims that Mylar is a ‘metallic substance’ when in fact it is a polyester (plastic)… they can’t even get THAT right!

—

Q. What is the major benefit of EFX?

A. EFX helps restore natural in harmony to the body.

The effect is believed to stabilize and harmonize the body’s bioelectric current. When the body is in harmony, the muscles relax, cells un-clump, and blood circulation increases, allowing for greater stability, easier movement and pain relief.

EFX energetic power works instantly. The immediate effects experienced are; increase strength, balance, flexibility and range of motion. EFX products have also been reported to help relieve joint and muscle pain, improve blood circulation, reduce swelling, keep muscles conditioned and flexible, alleviate stress, boost endurance, and prevent motion sickness.

I am still waiting to hear back from the Trading Standards Office in Manchester about the ‘minus-ion’ bracelets I complained about previously. They aren’t obliged to contact me unfortunately but the chap I spoke to there did say he would try and call me when he had something to report.

The 4-Chord Song

This has nothing to do with critical thinking or politics et al. except that there is a tiny moment of Tim Minchin in it. However it’s funny, it’s clever and it’s genius.

May I present Axis of Awesome:

This is a bit more on theme for the blog though…What would Jesus Do?

My favourite lyric “He’s a Zombie Wizard…”.

New Site

After a brief hiatus I am back up and running on a new hosting provider. If you are reading the RSS feed hopefully you won’t get a second copy of every old post but if you do, I’m sorry.

The new theme might take a bit of tweaking but I think this is a bit easier to read and less gloomy than the old one.

Anyway, let the posts recommence!

Electoral Reform Addendum

The BBC has published a page on the electoral reforms that I was discussing yesterday. They explain the systems quite well but please please don’t take any notice of the figures they give for the number of seats in the election under the different systems. This is only guesswork as I tried to explain because we have no way of knowing who would choose what second preference or how having a second preference would change tactical- or non-voting.

It’s just typical of recent BBC trends… unattributed articles with not even a mention of assumptions that are made in them.

At least I tried to explain what changes might happen and why!