Sat, 20 Mar 1999 20:18:43 -0800
Matti Pitkanen wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Mar 1999, ca314159 wrote:
> > Matti Pitkanen wrote:
> > > In QM entanglement is one of the most QM:eish phenomena and plays key
> > > role in quantum compute sciencer. Schrodinger cat provides the standard
> > > example of entanglement. The state of cat and bottle of poison is
> > > superposition of cat dead-bottle open and cat alive-bottle closed states.
> > The states of entangled particles (events) can both be measured, but
> > not so for the dead and alive (states) of a S-cat.
> My viewpoint is that the state of cat can be in principle measured and if
> measurement answers to the question 'Dead or alive?' measurement means
> quantum jump leading to state 'dead' or 'alive'. Moment of
> consciousness is in TGD framework nothing but quantum measurement. Note
> also that Schrodinger cat paradox disappears. In entangled states there is
> no consciousness: when quantum jumps giving information about the state
> of cat happens, it leads to dead or alive state: moment of consciousness
> makes world classical.
This relates to Jung's "The Transcendental Function".
By your definition of consciousness, the wavefunction
collapse is a movement from the purely subjective
wavefunction[s] of possibilities into the objective (conscious)
world where only one of those possibilities (states) remains.
The other possibilities were "objectively not real",
but because of the lack of determinism they had to be in
the origin wavefunction before collapse; just as I would
have a wavefunction of two components for a coin in motion
for the two possible states of the one event "landing" and
that wavefunction collapses into only one state when the
coin "lands" heads or tails.
While the coin is "in motion" the two possibilities must be
For Jung's transcendental function, the unconscious mind
holds such wavefunctions associatively (in a frequency-space)
which sometimes "collapse" into a peak in frequency-space
at which time they become noticeable to the "conscious" if the
peak is sufficiently strong in intensity.
> > The frequency components of a radio wave can be separated, but not
> > so for wavefunctions which are abstract probabilistic waves.
> The separation of wave functions is possible when they are unentangled
> with states of measuring instrument which in turn are entangled with
> states of brain.
Here the word "entangled" seems to be an overused term, what Marshall
McLuhan would call a "Reversal" or over-amplification of an idea.
It is not a "quantum" concept that exists only in quantum theory.
Wavefunctions are an abstract model of what is happening when
we don't know what is happening (not yet measured) It includes
all the possibilities but selects only one of them on measurement.
To use the term "entanglement" shrouds what is happening as in a
high-level computer language when we really want to be talking
in machine code.
Similarly is can be said that "conscious" is just a high-level
term for the determinism (in this case). But this is tricky
because the conscious mind is itself is divided into two parts,
one part that thinks spectrally like the unconscious mind,
and one part that thinks temporally (objectively) with causual order
like a physical wavefunction (radio wave).
That is why I brought up Phi, 61.8% because the sum of the
parts in nature tends to proportion itself as:
A=B+C, A/B = B/C = phi
and this seems very important in terms of what we are studying.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sun Oct 17 1999 - 22:31:50 JST