Sir Roger
Penrose, during a taped interview, said something that has intrigued me for a
long time. He said that, eventually, the
answer to the mystery of consciousness, will be found in the gap between
General Relativity and Quantum Physics.
Such a gap
does exist, and the Holy Grail of physics, of its Standard Model, is to fill
that gap, to reconcile the two main theories of physics. Those two theories clash with each other, and
thus far, no one has been able to bring them together. Both are considered to be valid branches of
physics, and yet, they seem to exclude each other.
There might,
however, be a way, an approach, albeit as radically different from the
conventional paradigm as was Relativity to physics. I will present a conceptual approach to the
problem that might move us closer to a solution. I cannot call it a theory, not even properly
a hypothesis, so I will timidly refer to it as a provisional hypothesis, more a
way of thinking about the problem, than a final answer.
Before
explaining this provisional hypothesis of the reconciliation, of relativity and
quantum mechanics, let us first set the stage by briefly glancing at the
paradigm leap that brought General Relativity into the picture.
Before
General Relativity was formulated by Einstein, the view of physics was much
different than it is now. Space and time
were considered distinctly separate from each other, gravity was considered to
be a “force acting at a distance,” and matter was thought to be entirely
separate from energy.
All of that
changed dramatically with Einstein’s theory. One of his equations, perhaps the most famous
equation in history, is, E=MC2.
What that equation does, is to unify, or reconcile, matter and energy
with each other. In practice, relativity
theory has proven to be wildly successful.
The “E” in
the equation stands, of course, for Energy, and M for Matter (or Mass). But the equation would not reconcile anything
were it simply to say, E = M. If they
already equal each other, then no reconciliation is necessary.
The equation
contains the letter, C. C is the
physical, mathematical constant for the speed of light, with a value of about
300,000 meters per second. The exact
value is not what concerns us here; it is the principle of reconciliation
between two things that were once thought to be totally separate from each
other, that is germane.
To complete
the reconciliation of energy and matter, any value of E is equal to the value
obtained by multiplying the value of the mass, M, and multiplying that times C
times C (or C-squared).
E=MC2.
Let us use
the foregoing as a template for predicting what the final reconciliation of
relativity with quantum physics will look like.
We can begin
with the incomplete equation, R = Q. The
R symbolizes relativity, and the Q is used as a symbol for Quantum (quantum
physics). Of course, neither R nor Q is
a number. They are place-holders for the
eventual reconciliation equation. R will
be the side of the equation involving Relativity, and then of course, Q is the
other side of the equation, involving Quantum Physics.
Just as in
the equation, E=MC2, where E = M would be incomplete, so also is R =
Q incomplete. We need a reconciling
value, or set of values, such as a universal constant in some shape or form.
Therefore,
to move the equation closer toward its final form, let us write it as, R = Q x
C. This is still incomplete, of course,
but we are following the template, E=MC2. So,
R=QC2.
In this new equation,
C is not the speed of light, but rather, a universal constant. It is written here as C – squared, but that
is only for symbolic purposes. It is
unlikely that the final equation will contain C2. We now have a new template, which is, R=QC2.
Bear in mind this is a provisional template only.
Of course,
were matters this simple, someone by now would have moved much closer to a
solution than in fact has been the case.
It becomes apparent that, while the template (E=MC2) got us
started, it needs to be changed quite radically, and this is where the
provisional hypothesis takes off in a new direction.
The part of
the template that needs to be changed next, is not the R, nor the Q, nor the C. It is the equal sign (=).
When the
left side of an equation is equal to, or interchangeable with, the right side,
then of course the equal sign denotes this.
That is what makes it an equation.
When the two sides are not equal, then we have an “inequation,” and the
equal sign is replaced by another symbol.
If the equal sign has a diagonal line through it, this indicates
inequality, but with no indication as to which side is greater than the
other. If it is known which side is
greater, then either the “greater than” sign (>) or the “less than” sign
(<), is used, for example to denote that A > B (A is greater than B) or A
< B (A is less), or some combination which may include the equal sign, as in
A is greater than or equal to B.
There are
also modifications to the equal sign that indicate that, while the two sides
are not equal, they are a close approximation of each other. A “wavy” equal sign can indicate this.
What there
is not a “sign” for, is quantum uncertainty.
In this commentary, we will suggest such a sign, and because of printer
limitations, let us design it as, [?], a bracketed question mark.
With this
innovation, we can now further modify our template to look like, R [?] QC2.
The quantum
uncertainty sign [?] indicates not only that it is unknown which side of the
inequation is greater, but more importantly, it indicates oscillation. One side can be greater, then become less. For example, the spin of an electron may be
plus one (+1) or minus one (-1) in one instant, and may reverse in the next
instant. The exact value of the spin is
indeterminate, until it is measured, and this is what the uncertainty sign [?]
signifies.
Now then, is
there anything more that will direct the reconciliation? Yes.
The symbol C, in the equation, stands not for the speed of light, but
for Consciousness.
Unlike the
speed of light, consciousness does not have a mathematical value, yet it is
very likely a factor in quantum mechanics, which is why it is placed on the Q
side of the inequation.
Here, we
have radically changed the template of E=MC2. The
new template is hardly recognizable, but the old template did help us to form
the new one, which is, R [?] QC2.
R [?] QC2.
We should
now get rid of the 2 super-script, and replace it with an indeterminate symbol,
X.
R [?] QCx.
The X is not
necessarily a power to which C is raised, but rather, a place-holder for a
further modification yet to be devised.
As you see,
this is all murky, possibly with none of the mathematical precision that the
Standard Model of physics demands. What
else, however, can we expect? We are in
unexplored territory, trying to peer through the fog in search of a path
forward. Such a search cannot be
restricted to methods that, so far, have not borne fruit. At the same time, we wish not to stray any
further from conventional searches than is necessary.
This new
template may be somewhat along the lines of what Penrose was suggesting in the
opening paragraph of this commentary, with quantum uncertainty filling the gap.
Whatever the
final reconciliation between Relativity and Quantum Physics will be, it
probably will not follow the template of E=MC2. What will be needed is new physics, perhaps a
new innovation in mathematics, and a new paradigm in which consciousness is not
an outcome of physics, but a fundamental reality that underlies physics, both
relativistic and quantum.
If the new
paradigm includes spiritual influences, why should that be a problem, if the
solution turns out to be useful?
There is
also, the possibility that the final description of reality will be something
for which the human brain may be inherently and forever inadequate to sort
out. This does not necessarily mean,
however, that the human mind, apart from the brain, cannot make sense of it
all, at least enough sense to fulfill its needs, and its purpose, in the grand
scheme of things.
-
No comments:
Post a Comment