Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

A few questions

  1. Feb 3, 2009 #1
    if you can answer any of these, thanks
    1 what is a probability wave and how does consciousness influence it?
    2 what is a quantum monad - how are things quantumly recorded and what is recorded?
    3 what is the part of us that can override emotional and mental recorded tendencies/habits?
    4 what kind of influence might a monad have on a new soul?
    5 what are imaginary numbers used for?
    6 how does a new universe stem out from each possible motion of each quark/particle?
    7 how might the genes of a unicelled organism record its instinctual decisions, eg moving away from danger to a favorable environment?
    8 what does it mean for a cell or a brain to interact quantumly (word?) with something?
  2. jcsd
  3. Feb 4, 2009 #2


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    1. What it "is" or how physicists use that concept? There are many interpretations of QM, one of them which is that it takes a "consciousness" to collapse the wavefunction, i.e make the probability wave to attain one of its possible values. But that is just one philosophical interpretation out of many.

    2. I don't think the term Quatum monad is used in real physics, only in speculative interpretations of QM.

    3. That is a philosophical and neuroscience question, not physics. What you are asking is 'how does our consciousness work'? If it is only 'matter which obey laws of nature' then we can not know anything is true since what our mind tells us is just what the laws of nature makes up in our mind. Free will is then a ghost, and so is truth. But that

    4. That sounds like religion question ;-)

    5. Many things, like solving algebraical and analytical equations,

    6. Who says it stem out a new universe - well- the many world interpretation of quantum mechanics, which is NOT the paradigm of todays physics.

    7. I don't know, maybe we should ask it?

    8. sigh, what book did u read to get all of these questions on your mind? You are asking about things which does not exists. It is like I asked "what kind of cheese is the moon made out of?"
  4. Feb 4, 2009 #3
    Nice questions...but unfortunately I think scientific world needs many other decades to get answers to them. Or probably...it will never answer
  5. Feb 4, 2009 #4


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    almost all of them are metaphysical/philosophical and can not be answered by science.
  6. Feb 4, 2009 #5
    Well not now for sure, but science has the power to evolve also at a level which now we call "philosophical or metaphysical" . Anyway let's talk about that some years from now :)
  7. Feb 4, 2009 #6


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    You are overestimating the "power" of science. Science has limits, pick up any textbook on philosophy of science.
  8. Feb 4, 2009 #7
    That's not a proof :) You ask me to read books written by people which in this era believe that :) Nothing can stop science growth and understanding of the world...of course it is possible that we will never reach the limit, I do not know the answer but as a scientist (maybe a beginner but still scientist) I do not feel confortable to apriori exclude that possibility..
  9. Feb 4, 2009 #8


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Then maybe you should study what science is, you might take things for granted.

    As a scientist, you should also learn what science is and what questions it can ask and answer- otherwise you are fooling yourself.
  10. Feb 4, 2009 #9
    I do not take anything for granted. Sorry if you understood that from my words.
    The only thing I believe is that you never have to exclude things a priori. And stating that science has limits is excluding something a priori.

    The greatest revolutions in science happened thanks to people who pushed beyond barriers you call "limits".
  11. Feb 4, 2009 #10


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Then you are the one being ignorant if you ignore plain logic and philosophy. If you don't know what something is, then you can not fully do it.

    You are missing quite many points here, there is/was nothing a priori against the discovery/invention of quantum mechanics or special theory of relativity. It is a difference to push the limits of what is known and what CAN be known.

    You really need a course in both philosophy and history of science, and a course on scientism. I am glad to give advices regarding literature.
  12. Feb 4, 2009 #11
    As I said i do not take anything for granted. So I will be pleased if you can indicate me some reference about.

    Something a priori against special relativity: do you think it wasn't a barrier the concept of absolute time? It wasn't a barrier thinking about non-classical, non-local correlations? It wasn't a barrier the one put by Schroedinger saying that it is impossible to deal and make experiments with single particles? Well...there were barriers for me, maybe not for you...
  13. Feb 4, 2009 #12


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Then you should not take for granted that you know what science is and:

    you should not take for granted that some things can be taken for granted (application fo the transcendental method)

    Absolute time was just a human convention of science, it was a physical concept (not a metaphysical) and can thus be questioned. And today, there are some discussion about how to get back to absolute time again. Same with quantum mechanics.. There was nothing deductively a priori against it, it was just against current paradigm of physics and its axioms.

    The concept of relativity of time is SR comes from the two axioms of SR. Axioms can not be proven (Gödels theorem). So we can't prove scientific theories in deductive way.

    You must learn how do differ first from what is physical and what is metaphysical. Science deals with the physical world. You don't use a thermometer to measure to find out what character a person has. Secondly you must learn what is fact and what is truth. Science makes progress, yes, but does that automatically mean that we 'know' more? If you study philosophy, you will even encounter that "knowledge" is not even well defined.

    I like this quote by Indiana Jones: "Remember that archaeology is about fact, not truth. If you want to learn about truth, you should take the philosophy class".

    Good introduction reading should be

    Rationality and Science by Roger Trigg
    Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction by Okasha
  14. Feb 4, 2009 #13

    Math Is Hard

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    My guess is that some of the questions were motivated by a book by Amit Goswami, who was featured in the "What The Bleep" movie.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook