Modern Physics: Biggest Possible from Smallest Possible.

Modern physics is in a state of confusion/crisis described by ChatGPT below. 

The crisis is manifested as a combination of megalomania of Biggest Possible such as Big Bang, and pettiness of Smallest Possible measurements of Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation CMBR and gravitational waves by Laser Inferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory LIGO, while leaving out the World in between.  

CMBR claims to measure variations of radiation from a cosmos at 2.7 K which are $10^{13}$ times smaller than radiation from the Earth at 270 K, with the Milky Way blocking most of input from cosmos asking for heavy post processing as shown in the above image. 

LIGO claims to be able to detect changes in length over a distance of 4 kilometres of size $10^{-19}$ meters caused by the merger of two massive black holes.  

The claimed precision of these measurements is mind-boggling. Is it credible? No.

Big Bang is supposed to be confirmed by CMBR. Einstein's theory of gravitation is supposed to be confirmed by LIGO. Biggest Possible is thus confirmed by Smallest Possible. Is it credible? No.

Viewed the other way around, Biggest Possible is supposed to have Smallest Possible effects. Is it credible? No.

Compare with the famous mathematician Laplace master of the Infinitesimal Calculus by Napoleon promoted to be the Minister of the Interior in 1799, but removed from this post after six weeks, because he brought 

• the spirit of the infinitely small into the government thus showing an incapacity for administration. 

Is there any hope of reducing confusion by avoiding the extreme and staying rational? Maybe. Why not give Real Quantum Mechanics and Neo-Newtonian Cosmology a try.

Modern Physics and Confusion according to ChatGPT:

• Quantum Mechanics: Foundational issues such as the measurement problem, wavefunction reality, and nonlocality remain unresolved. Competing interpretations (Copenhagen, Many-Worlds, Bohmian mechanics, etc.) offer differing worldviews, none universally accepted.
• Quantum Gravity: Efforts to unify quantum mechanics with general relativity have yet to succeed, leading to multiple speculative theories like string theory and loop quantum gravity. These theories are elegant mathematically but lack experimental confirmation, adding to the sense of uncertainty.
• Cosmology: Dark matter, dark energy, and the nature of the Big Bang challenge our understanding of the universe. These phenomena point to gaps in current models.
• Particle Physics: After the discovery of the Higgs boson, the Standard Model remains incomplete (e.g., it doesn’t explain gravity, dark matter, or neutrino masses). The absence of new particle discoveries has led to concerns about theoretical stagnation.

NASASpaceNews vs Neo-Newtonian Cosmology

NASASpaceNews reports on Dr. Richard Lieu's groundbreaking theory that gravity could exist without mass which connects to posts on Neo-Newtonian Cosmology with a new view on the connection between mass density $\rho (x,t)$ and gravitational potential $\phi (x,t)$, which can take two different forms with $\Delta$ the Laplacian differential operator in 3d Euclidean x-coordinates and $t$ is time :

• Given $\rho(x,t)$, find $\phi (x,t)$ by integration: $\phi =\Delta^{-1}\rho$.  (1)
• Given $\phi (x,t)$, find $\rho (x,t)$ by differentiation: $\rho =\Delta\phi$.  (2)

Here (1) represents the standard view with mass creating gravitational potential, while (2) offers a new view with gravitational potential creating mass as the essence of Neo-Newtonian Cosmology. 

(1) requires a mechanism for instant action at distance (global integration), which has not been found.

(2) involves instant local action (local differentiation), which is thinkable.

(1) starts out with positive mass, while (2) starts out with a gravitational potential for which $\rho (x) =\Delta\phi (x)$ can have variable sign as the main idea of Lieu. Negative mass repels positive mass and so acts like dark energy, while dark matter appears as small $\Delta\phi >0$ in regions where $\phi (x)$ is smooth. 

In short, Neo-Newtonian Cosmology is in line with Lieu's theory by NASA presented as groundbreaking. But there is a basic difference, since Lieu adheres to (1) rather than (2). 

The idea of particles carrying mass is fundamental in (1), but no dark matter particles have been identified, nor any particles with negative mass. But with (2) the focus is instead on the nature of the gravitational potential $\phi$, which does not have to be particle-like and so opens to forms of $\Delta\phi$ without particles including dark matter and dark energy.  

CNP talk on 2nd Law

Outline of talk Nov 9 at 10 am EST at Chapell Natural Philosophy Society Saturday Session.

Questions: 

• Why are certain systems actually irreversible when basic physics is formally reversible?
• Why is there an Arrow of Time?
• Why is Entropy S never decreasing?
• What is Entropy?
• Boltzmann Statistics S = k log W with W number of microstates
• Statistics is not physics. Statistics is something done by Insurance Companies.
• Classical 2nd Law: TdS = Q > 0

Answers from Computational Thermodynamics:

• New 2nd Law: Q = Turbulent Dissipation = Loss > 0
• Turbulent Dissipation: Large scale kinetic energy K transformed to small scale K = Heat Energy E from increasing gradients created by reorganizing convection (instability).
• Irreversible because small scale K cannot be organized to large scale K because of finite precision.
• Competition: Increase Difference vs Decrease Difference.
• dE + W = Q with W = pdV work < 0 in compression 
• dK - W = - Q
• Classical: Q=TdS not needed. Q > 0 and dS > 0 same thing.
• Summary: Finite Precision Computation + Instability
• Applications: Joule experiment. Newtonian cosmology. Life: anabolism vs metabolism.
• Reality = formal laws of physics + finite precision computation = Computational Euler Equations.

Aether Come-Back

Modern physics was initiated in the late 19th century in a search for an immaterial medium as aether/vacuum carrying light as an electromagnetic wave phenomenon described by Maxwell's equations. But no such aether/vacuum could be identified, which opened for Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity simply denying any need of an aether.  

But the search of an aether has continued with today the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation CMB emerging as a possible candidate, but without conclusion.

Maxwell's equations are formulated in terms of electric and magnetic fields depending on a spatial coordinate in a Euclidean coordinate system effectively serving as an aether, and a time coordinate.

There are then as many aethers as Euclidean systems, each system being specified by origin and orientation, thus opening to a many-aether theory (suggested by Cunningham in  the 1910s) as a possibility when no unique aether can be identified.

This idea is investigated in Many-Many Relativity assuming coordinate systems to be fixed at receivers of light. 

This connects to the analysis of radiative transfer of heat from (warm) source to (cold) receiver as a resonance phenomenon with temperature dependent high-frequency cut-off. This is the essence of light communication between source and receiver as analysed in Computational Black Body Radiation. 

Note that Maxwell's equations require specification of a Euclidean coordinate system and that the choice captures different physics. The basic idea is to connect coordinate systems to receivers. This is natural in particular when light sources are distant, like collecting the light from a distant star in a telescope.  

The essence is resonance between source and receiver carried by standing electromagnetic waves in a vacuum as a coordinate system fixed to the receiver (allowing moving source). In particular, this means that the speed of light is independent (same Maxwell equations) of motion of both source and receiver. 

In a system with many sources and receivers possibly moving, there will be no unique coordinate system and thus there will be a need to harmonise different descriptions, see Many-Minds Relativity.

Note that electric and magnetic fields which are immaterial do not ask to be carried by a (material) medium, nor does a gravitational potential as discussed in posts on Neo-Newtonian Cosmology.

The idea of many-aethers as many coordinate systems is compatible with experiments indicating non-existence of a unique aether, and thus resolves a conundrum of modern physics. 

Body and Soul Project vs Consciousness

Recent posts on the nature of consciousness lead back to the mathematics education reform project Body  and Soul complemented by Leibniz World of Mathematics based on unity of mathematics/soul and computation/body, which connects to trinities of 

• Circle enclosing Yin and Yan. 
• Sat enclosing Chit and Ananda in Hindu tradition. 
• Brahma enclosing Vishnu-Krishna/soul and Shiva/body.
• God enclosing Father-Son/soul and Holy Spirit/body.

More specifically, the book Being You: A New Science of Consciousness by Anil Seth gives a many-faceted survey of the science of consciousness with focus on the subjective experience of Being Me as phenomenology rather than functional/behavioural aspects, as the real problem of consciousness:

• What is subjective experience of e g "redness"?

The central message is:

• Consciousness has more to do with being alive than with being intelligent. 
• We are conscious selves precisely because we are beast machines. 
• The experiences of being you, or of being me, emerge from the way the brain predicts and controls the internal state of the body. 
• The essence of selfhood is neither a rational mind nor an immaterial soul. It is a deeply embodied biological process, a process that underpins the simple feeling of being alive that is the basis for all your experiences of self, indeed for any conscious experience at all. 
• Being you is literally about your body.

I believe this captures something essential. It seems to me that feeling of being alive ultimately arises from tactile sense/touch input from the body appearing as feelings of pain and pleasure allocated to bodily origins with finger tips and erogenous zones extra sensitive. This is also the experience of a person blind from birth showing that feelings of "redness" may be secondary as some form of derivative of touch feeling. All feelings would then ultimately be some form of transcriptions of the sense of touch on the exterior of the body defining the subject.  

A machine equipped with AI or AGI would then not be conscious because feelings of pain and pleasure from sensory inputs would be missing, and so would be a arobot and not a replica of a human being. The other way around, a human being without feelings would not be a true human being.

On the other hand, all living things capable of of feeling pain and pleasure would be expected to have some form of (primitive) consciousness. 

For a human being consciousness also includes higher order cognitive capacities of speaking and "thinking" as derivatives of feelings.  

The Body and Soul project can be seen as machine with AI/AGI, but directly connects to human consciousness by opening to "understanding the world".      

Self-Consciousness: Body Image from Feelings

                                                                  Self-awareness.

Israel Rosenfield presents in his book The Strange, Familiar and Forgotten a view of consciousness emerging from self-awareness as body image:

• My memory emerges from the relation between my body (more specifically my bodily sensations at any given moment) and my brain's "image" of my body (an un­ conscious activity in which the brain creates a constantly changing generalised idea of the body by relating the changes in bodily sensations from moment to moment). It is this relation that creates a sense of self.

John Searle captures this idea in his book The Mystery of Consciousness as follows:

• Our sense of self is sense of experiences affecting the body image, and all experiences involve this sense of self, and hence involve the body image. This is what he calls the "self-reference" of all consciousness. All of our conscious experiences are "self-referential" in the sense that they are related to the experience of the self which is the experience of the body image. The coherence of consciousness through time and space is again related to the experience of the body by way of the body image, and without memory there is no coherent consciousness.

This makes a lot of sense to me connecting to recent posts. No doubt the sensations in your own body has a special meaning to you. Your mind is thus connected to your body through sensory input to the brain and then projected back to their bodily origin as part of a body image, as feeling of pain in your thumb when hit by hammer, or the feeling of your feet meeting the ground, or the warm feeling in your breast when hugging a loved one. 

Feeling are supported by persistence of sensations over time carrying a memory giving meaning, like listening to music as a flow of new tones with memory of old.

This supports my intuitive feeling expressed in this post, that consciousness is closely connected to a body image carrying bodily sensations including feelings of pain and pleasure, something which is beyond the capacity of an AI robot. 

Maybe consciousness acts like a very compassionate agent/mind for an artist/body seeking to find new engagements, continuously updating an artist image including the mood swings of the artist.

Maybe this says something about the hard problem of consciousness to explain subjective experience, in the sense that each body carries a unique body image/subject rooted in bodily sensory feelings.  

 

Consciousness: Preparation to Action

This is a continuation of the post Picasso and his Model: Feelings.

Henri Bergson summarises his view on consciousness exposed in Matter and Memory as follows : 

• The idea that we have disengaged from the facts and confirmed by reasoning is that our body is an instrument of action, and of action only. 
• In no degree, in no sense, under no aspect, does it serve to prepare, far less to explain, a representation. 
• Consider external perception: there is only a difference of degree, not of kind, between the so-called perceptive faculties of the brain and the reflex functions of the spinal cord. 
• While the spinal cord trans­forms the excitations received into movements which are more or less necessarily executed, the brain puts them into relation with motor mechanisms which are more or less freely chosen; but that which the brain explains in our perception is action begun, pre­pared or suggested, it is not perception itself. 
• Consider memory. The body retains motor habits capable of acting the past over again; it can resume attitudes in which the past will insert itself; or, again, by the repetition of certain cerebral phenomena, which have pro­longed former perceptions, it can furnish to remembrance a point of attachment with the actual, a means of recovering its lost influ­ence upon present reality: but in no case can the brain store up recollections or images. 
• Thus, neither in perception, nor in memory, nor a fortiori in the higher attainments of mind, does the body contribute directly to representation. 
• By developing this hypoth­esis under its manifold aspects and thus pushing dualism to an extreme, we appeared to divide body and soul by an impassable abyss. In truth, we were indicating the only possible means of bringing them together.
• All the difficulties raised by this problem, either in ordinary dualism, or in materialism and idealism, come from considering, in the phenomena of perception and memory, the physical and the mental as duplicates of one another.

Bergson thus refutes one of the ideas expressed in the post of mental models of the physical world naturally connecting to mathematical models of the physical world.  

But the other idea in the post is in line with Bergson's view of the importance of feelings to guide actions as responses to the world supporting intuition and transforming intellectual deliberation into lived experience. 

Both aspects connect to AI viewed to offer mathematical models of the world while lacking feelings, which is not at all in line with Bergson's view on consciousness or Human Intelligence HI. 

Bergson points to limitations of mathematical models of his time as static and unable to capture the complexity of the world. Today mathematics + computer offers a very rich world of dynamic simulations expanding reality to virtual reality, while human consciousness remains the same.  

Notice that Bergson connects matter to memory instead of body to soul, thus emphasising memory. 

Bergson offers some hope that HI will continue to have a role. 

Euclide vs Big Bang vs Standard Model

• ESA's Euclid mission is designed to explore the composition and evolution of the dark Universe. 
• The space telescope will create a great map of the large-scale structure of the Universe across space and time by observing billions of galaxies out to 10 billion light-years.
• Euclid will explore how the Universe has expanded and how structure has formed over cosmic history, revealing more about the role of gravity and the nature of dark energy and dark matter.

Big Bang is a cosmological theory stating that the Universe was created from a very hot very dense state of temperature $10^{32}$ Kelvin and size of a pinhead after $10^{-44}$ seconds, and then inflated/expanded into it's presently observable size of 10 billion light-years and average temperature of 3 K. Big Bang was invented by modern physicists in the 1960s searching for a mission after having completed the Standard Model of elementary particle physics, and is today accepted by almost all physicists. 

The previous post recalls that Leonard Susskind as leading theoretical physicists today, has come to the conclusion that the work on the Standard Model has to start over again, and so also the cosmological theory including Big Bang based on the Standard Model. OK?  

The main weakness of Big Bang is that no explanation is even attempted for the existence of a very dense very hot initial state: Creation of a 10 billion light-years Universe from a pinhead lacks physics. Of all Creation Myths in world history, Big Bang must be the most nonsensical.

So we have to start over again. I have been led to a model described in these posts as Neo-Newtonian Cosmology based on viewing gravitational potential $\phi (x,t)$ with $x$ a Euclidean coordinate and $t$ a time coordinate, as primordial role from which mass density $\rho (x,t)$ is "created" by the local action of the Laplacian differential operator $\Delta$:

• $\rho (x,t) = \Delta \phi (x,t)$ for all $x$,         (G1)

assumed to act without time delay for all $t$. Mass of variable sign is thus created locally for each $x$ by differentiation of a fluctuation as an instant local operation acting at each time instant $t$.  

The model is complemented by viewing electric potential $\psi (x,t)$ with $x$ a Euclidean coordinate and $t$ a time coordinate, as primordial from which charge density $\epsilon (x,t)$ is "created" by the local action of the Laplacian differential operator $\Delta$:

• $\epsilon (x,t) = \Delta\psi (x,t)$ for all $x$,         (G1)

assumed to act without time delay for all $t$. Charge of variable sign is thus created locally for each $x$ by differentiation of a fluctuation as an instant local operation acting at each time instant $t$.  

Let us collect basic elements of Neo-Newtonian Cosmology:

1. Mass/matter (ordinary and dark) and charge densities of variable sign are created by the Laplacian acting on fluctuations of zero gravitational and electric potentials. 
2. Attraction/repulsion of mass of same/different sign and charge of different/same sign creates microscale charges of different sign (Hydrogen atoms = proton + electron) and macroscale mass Universa of different sign moving away from each other (dark energy).
3. Kinetic energy in each Universe created by gravitational collapse. 
4. Start from 0 mass. Split into 0 = (+mass) + (-mass). Separate macroscale (+mass) from (-mass).
5. Start from 0 charge. Split 0 =(+charge)+(-charge). Combine microscale (+charge) with (-charge).