WEIRD
September 14th, 2006 | No Comments »I dislike using this word in a scientific context although one frequently sees it used to describe quantum physics implying that no physical understanding of the effects can be reached (an oft quoted statement is that “the mathematics work, don’t bother with any physical interpretation”, i.e., an understanding expressed in words). David Bohm spent a great deal of time in his later years on this subject believing that “underlying variables” existed that might lead to a physical explanation for quantum effects. Bohm concluded, interestingly, that an entirely new language had to be devised to explain these effects. This is how far things have gone. I do not believe that anything is beyond physical understanding. But I find myself thinking of the dreaded word in conjunction with the vision process.
Following from the last posted Comment regarding the quantum limit of vision, it occurred to me that an entirely new paradigm for the process is possible ( or evident?). I suddenly came to visualize the brain (the “mind”, “I”,“ consciousness”) as “ looking out” from the visual cortex of the brain through the coherent bundle of fibers of the optic nerve to a high speed, continuously changing, view of the external world impressed on the retina of the eye. I had termed this view, being in picosecond time, as “instantaneous” but upon reflection it should more properly be termed “near instantaneous”. This view is in contrast to the traditional one (the “other way”) where an image is impressed on the retina of a passive “camera-like” eye that views the external scene and transmits that image information to the brain for “processing”. Might the processing precede - or ultimately be found to be coincident with - the external viewing?
And what might follow here are my preciously expressed comments on vision as an “active” rather than the assumed “passive” process with the eye (at the level of single quanta) actively “interrogating” or “in communication with” external reality? (See my comment of Feb.12,2006 “Previous Thoughts on Consciousness and Time”). In this context I have proposed that the retina possesses the properties of a phase conjugate mirror which would be a necessary component of an “active system”.
And therein I believe lies the crux of the matter - the time domain. My proposal, based on what I believe are sound physical principles, brings the vision process closer to the “instant”, or what might be termed, the “quantum instant”. I would note that even if the vision receptors that I propose are able to react in picosecond (10-12 sec) time there are left some two to three orders of magnitude between this time and the frequency of light. Might even more information be contained in this even faster time domain?
GCH
9/14/06
