TWO RECENT PAPERS
March 9th, 2009 | 3 Comments »A number of recent papers that are truly provocative … and that, if one carries the model of this vision work to its conclusion, bear directly upon it. I have previously noted the work of the Fleming group at UC/Berkeley (“Evidence for wavelike energy transfer through quantum coherence in photosynthetic systems”) finds, using femtosecond spectroscopy, a quantum coherent “beating” in the near field of light interaction with a biological photosynthetic apparatus. My explanation for light interaction in the vision process posits such a near field interaction and the mechanism for this to occur (and, in support of my thesis , I will note again that the vision field is aware from femtosecond spectroscopic measurements that isomerization of the retinal molecule in retinal receptors, i.e., the “signal producing” event occurs in this same very fast time frame).
The defining point of the process of vision occurs in light interaction with the outer segments of retinal receptors and involves classical wave-to- quantized electron particle transition at each receptor in the near field of the wavelength of light.
(A provocative proposal that occurs to me - the quantum beating observed in light interaction with the biological photosynthetic structure is regular (i.e., beats are of the same intensity). This seems to me as it should be in a regularly defined (i.e., granal and stromal) evolved biological structure. Might the structure of this beating be associated with the shape of a Wien/Planck black body cavity?)
A second new paper “Is Time an Illusion?” is reported in New Scientist. This is truly magnificent stuff! I have previously written on the relationship of time to the vision process noting that quantum thought enters as one proceeds to the domain of shorter times.
Excerpts from the piece (with my emphasis):
“Their idea, called the thermal time hypothesis, suggests that time emerges as a statistical effect, in the same way that temperature emerges from averaging the behaviour of large groups of molecules”
“Imagine gas in a box. In principle we could keep track of the position and momentum of each molecule at every instant and have total knowledge of the microscopic state of our surroundings. In this scenario, no such thing as temperature exists; instead we have an ever-changing arrangement of molecules. Keeping track of all that information is not feasible in practice, but we can average the microscopic behaviour to derive a macroscopic description. We condense all the information about the momenta of the molecules into a single measure, an average that we call temperature.
According to Connes and Rovelli, the same applies to the universe at large. There are many more constituents to keep track of: not only do we have particles of matter to deal with, we also have space itself and therefore gravity. When we average over this vast microscopic arrangement, the macroscopic feature that emerges is not temperature, but time. “It is not reality that has a time flow, it is our very approximate knowledge of reality that has a time flow,” says Rovelli. “Time is the effect of our ignorance.”
“That Rovelli’s approach yields the correct probabilities in quantum mechanics seems to justify his intuition that the dynamics of the universe can be described as a network of correlations, rather than as an evolution in time. “Rovelli’s work makes the timeless view more believable and more in line with standard physics,” says Dean Rickles, a philosopher of physics at the University of Sydney in Australia.”
I must note that this thesis essentially corresponds to the ideas of Ernst Mach that reality is composed of (parallel) “sensations” rather than the passage of time. One might see, for example, Mach’s work “THE ANALYSIS OF SENSATIONS and the Relation of the Phsyical to the Psychical”, published initially in 1886 and revised in 1905
Gerald Huth,
Ojai, CA
The article revolves around some circular reasoning:
“In principle we could keep track of the position and momentum of each molecule at every instant…We condense all the information about the momenta of the molecules into a single measure, an average that we call temperature…When we average over this vast microscopic arrangement, the macroscopic feature that emerges is not temperature, but time.”
“at every instant” ? Either it’s very poorly explained or it’s bad logic.
March 12th, 2009 at 6:15 amI like “revolves around some circular reasoning”…!!!!
I certainly cannot comment on the validity of their thesis. I simply find the analogy between the statistical basis underlying the (shorthand) concept of temperature and time intriguing.
The important connection that I would make is between time (or the absence thereof) and the quantum nature that I find for light interaction with the retina.
Thanks,
GCH
March 12th, 2009 at 7:40 amMATTHEW’S COMMENT:
“The article revolves around some circular reasoning:
“In principle we could keep track of the position and momentum of each molecule at every instant…We condense all the information about the momenta of the molecules into a single measure, an average that we call temperature…When we average over this vast microscopic arrangement, the macroscopic feature that emerges is not temperature, but time.”
“at every instant” ? Either it’s very poorly explained or it’s bad logic.”
GCH’S COMMENT:
My initial answer still stands - this is an incredibly difficult subject that I really do not want to get into feeling that it distracts from my basic explanation for the process of vision. I do, however, have an interest in thoughts about the concept of time (or absence thereof). I have studied the (always lucid ) work of David Bohm (who lectured here in Ojai) and I have been impressed by the ideas of Julian Barbour (“THE END OF TIME.. THE NEXT REVOLUTION IN PHYSICS“). Again in this regard, Bohm even made the startling proposal that an entirely new language would be necessary to move forward.
As to your comment above, the evocation of a time “instant” is unfortunate with Barbour even succumbing to this. B., however, does succeed in painting a timeless landscape based purely on probability that I feel is very appealing and provocative. Perhaps the most interesting backdrop to all of this, however, are the thoughts of Ernst Mach who seemed to see early in the last century that reality was composed of timeless “sensations” or configurations. Mach’s papers on this subject are sometimes difficult to follow but it is clear that he really believed in this view.
Random thoughts!
GCH
March 13th, 2009 at 8:32 amOjai, CA/USA