Breaking Rules of Quantum Mechanics

(I was in a quandary whether to post this in the physics section. I have only done so, because it reflects on our ability to see consciousness as somehow breaking free from normal quantum events, so it deemed a relevant quantum discussion, in my eyes.)

The Entropy of Consciousness Violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics: And
Investigating the Laws of a True Story

My mentor, Dr Wolf, showed me an insight that consciousness can gain or lose entropy of knowledge. There are ways to explain this, but I find this next way the best, and the best in the sense it agrees well with the spacetime theory as a whole.

Consider the entropy of knowledge. We go through the day, gaining knowledge, loosing it, and regaining it again. But we eventually go to sleep, wake up, and it’s as if what we have learned has gone back to the very beginning, where we have to reprocess these memories of experience and knowledge.

Why? Proof?

Well, I might have some idea’s that would help prove this from a metaphysical side of things. Some of you may be saying, in conclusion to my premise

‘’Consider the entropy of knowledge. We go through the day, gaining knowledge, loosing it, and regaining it again. But we eventually go to sleep, wake up, and it’s as if what we have learned, has gone back to the very beginning, where we have to reprocess these memories of experience and knowledge.’’

That it cannot be right at all, because we can continue from a thought not necessarily from the beginning. For instance, in relative to our experiences, we can indeed wake up, and start thinking about a theory we left in our heads and start to conclude about what was being initially thought of… however, a strange process is also involved, which I am going to add.

1) You cannot wake up in the morning, know where you ended without some reflection on how you came to that premise…

Knowledge is derived from knowing that there has been a beginning and an end – in other words, like any true story that agrees well with us to how something has turned out, then we have mentally noted a beginning of something, like a measurement, and the end, the knowledge we come to have from that measurement.

Suppose this very process happens two times, i.e. you read a word, then we process it as a memory/knowledge… then another word, so we can say,

The

Simple

You had to in fact measure the word ‘’The’’, then once that has a beginning and end, your knowledge of ‘’The’’ follows into ‘’Simple,’’ where you measure that word, and the result is knowledge of that word. But since we have measured a word before that, the word ‘’Simple’’ has an added detail of ‘’The’’… So this is ‘’entropy of knowledge’’ as I have come to call it, and have many before me.

But some interesting things follow from this. Our psyche of consciousness and role of subconsciousness, actually take on complimentary roles. A part of our subconsciousness ‘’holds onto’’ the original word we come to process, as we move into the secondary word. Somehow, ‘’The Simple,’’ isn’t enough for understanding, at the subconscious level. Instead, subconsciously, we also process it as backward, ‘’Simple The.’’

Strange? Perhaps, but stop and think about it for a second. We are conscious of one process of gaining knowledge, and yet, even though ‘’The’’ has its own measurement and gaining of knowledge, a beginning and start, the string of words ‘’The Simple,’’ also has it’s beginning and end, and for that to be even possible, there must be a mechanism where subconsciously we reflect on ‘’the negative time direction of knowledge’’ which would be, ‘’Simple The.’’

So in a sense, it is hard to distinguish the beginning as the end, or the end as the beginning, if there can be a distinguishing factor at all. (2) But we can loose knowledge of these words, and in contrast, in the external world, it’s very different, because entropy is the second law of thermodynamics, and shouldn’t be broken very simply, so whilst things continue to displace and continue to get chaotic ‘’out there in the material world,’’ sometimes information ‘’in here can go back to the way they where’’. The Mind has an amazing ability to break free from the laws of physics… Take the uncertainty principle. It was physicist David Albert who first recognized that consciousness breaks the uncertainty principle, because unlike a particles obeying quantum uncertainty when an observer is involved, we know where we are going, and we know where we are.

(2) – The point being made here, is also deeper. There is overwhelming proof that for a finite past to exist, there must be a finite future, if anything is to exist in between. In a bigger cosmic sense, this must also mean the universe must have an Omega Point.

It might be, that consciousness itself breaks every rule in the quantum rulebook. In fact, I would challenge that the mind can only do these things, because the rules themselves of physics cannot apply to our perception of consciousness, but that does not mean that consciousness itself does not depend on actual quantum actions for it to exist, because in my opinion, to consider such a thing, is ridiculous at best. It only through quantum actions, can molecules even exist.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

pardon
what are the rules?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

They are stated in the OP. Rules which somehow consciousness breaks free from. So the rules of quantum behaviour, like the uncertainty principle are somehow does not have an effect, on how we percieve ourselves.

Did you understand this thread at all?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

like....

..that?
explain what is known

 

Read the OP again. It's obvious you have hit and missed.

 

perhaps....
you take the peculiarities of our biology and hold it to be in a stasis.
you talk about data retrieval in an information system
i do not see how entropy applies to an abstraction aka "knowledge"
knowledge is ultimately data stored in a medium and this "entropy" is counteracted by refining the medium and doing hash checks

that stuff is merely objects of our consciousness. a work in progress

furthermore, your "beginning" is only trivially true. the regression is potentially infinite if one cares to look

is the 2nd law, a quantum law or newtonian? is'nt entropy something that actually gives us a notion of time which in other schools of thought is held to be wholly illusory. (realtivity and quantum theories)

pardon my stupidity

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

if you do not enlighten me, i will beat the shit out of you

 

''perhaps....
you take the peculiarities of our biology and hold it to be in a stasis.''

Not sure what you mean.

''i do not see how entropy applies to an abstraction aka "knowledge" ''

It's not an abstraction. Knowledge is information and the outside world is made up of similar if not identical information that agrees to our beings of understanding. So, if you call the inside an abstraction, you must be calling the information outseide somehow an abstraction as well.

''that stuff is merely objects of our consciousness. a work in progress.''

Yes, the stuff of the world is mind-stuff... but we cannot detatch totally from the material influence of let's say... the brain...

''furthermore, your "beginning" is only trivially true. the regression is potentially infinite if one cares to look''

No.

''is the 2nd law, a quantum law or newtonian? is'nt entropy something that actually gives us a notion of time which in other schools of thought is held to be wholly illusory. (realtivity and quantum theories)''

Entropy gives us an EXPLANATION to why a psychological arrow exists, not how we find that arrow to operate.

And you're not stupid... you are just reading my content totally wrong.

 

heh
your threads are ultimately situated on the whims of others. screw the quandary.

 

Well, it's best to reflect first on how others might percieve this, instead of acting on impulse.

 

I don't see how any of what you've said connects to entropy. In order to do so, you'd first have to have a physical model of every cell and atom in a human brain, before you could even begin to consider calculating the entropy. And as you know, scientists hardly understand a single neuron, let alone the interactions of billions. So to say anything about consciousness at this stage is philosophical speculation at best, and has no connection to anything in physics.

I think the philosophy section is a far more appropriate place to muse on subjects like this, because physics as we know it is nowhere near dealing with such complex interactions between so many different parts. So if there's no sound way to approach this problem from a physics point of view, anything you say about it is at least as likely to be garbage as it is to be true. So why not post it in Philosophy, where speculation is the name of the game?

 

I see no quantum mechanics in your post. I see no statistical mechanics in your post. I see a bunch of assumptions about connections, unsupported claims and the delusion of doing viable physics.

Ask yourself, would that get published? Nope.

 

I ask, is there a reference to how we gain knowledge?

If someone says entropy, then consciousness breaks free from such effects.

Isn't it afterall, the entropy that we insideously say that gives rise to a passing of moments, even when we are involved?

I was applying the notion that scientists have before me considered such defience against quantum rules... again... i refer you to Dr. Alberts' work stating that consciousness ''escapes such rules,'' in his case, the uncertainty principle.

 

And if you ask published, then yes. Albert's was published was it not?

 

''I think the philosophy section is a far more appropriate place to muse on subjects like this, because physics as we know it is nowhere near dealing with such complex interactions between so many different parts. So if there's no sound way to approach this problem from a physics point of view, anything you say about it is at least as likely to be garbage as it is to be true. So why not post it in Philosophy, where speculation is the name of the game?''

Because the name and game of physics, ends up with philosophical questions like...

''why did the universe come to be?''

Which as of yet, CANNOT BE ANSWERED FOR, so we should leave it as a philiosophical question...??? Many here in the physics section, have pondered such philosophical questions, and yet when i raise them, they are blown ot of proportion.

 

If consciousness is said to somehow violate the Uncertainty Principle, I'm presuming in the sense that we can remember things, then wouldn't this argument apply equally well to storage mediums such as hard drives, that accurately preserve data down to the last bit? And yet hard drives wouldn't even exist without the quantum mechanics foundation from which they are understood.

 

No. It argues, that ''we know where we are going, and we know where we are...''

This is showing that the overall conclusions of consciousness breaks free from quantized behaviour.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Albert

The article states that Albert granted the filmmakers a near-four hour interview about quantum mechanics being unrelated to consciousness or spirituality.

And what is an omega point?

 

look up, Omega Point. It refers to the end of time itself, where time itself reduces back to whence it came. For instance, it is akin to the Crunch speculations.

''The article states that Albert granted the filmmakers a near-four hour interview about quantum mechanics being unrelated to consciousness or spirituality.''

He still published a scientific paper on it, and the unrelated nature, is akin to exactly what is meant. Consciousness breaks free of quantum behaviour, and is therefore, unrelated to quantum behaviour.

 

Your ego is astounding. It is so astounding, it has become flaming, just to hide your inner hatred desires of self-dillusion. Again, you posted the same ''shit'' so to say, and mind the pun, in two totally different posts.