We humans are natural-born engineers. As such, we model after machines not only isolated, naturally occurring systems, but also the basic laws of physics, sharing with machines a local-evolution-of-state `grammar'. However, previous work by the author casts doubt upon this mechanistic paradigm, suggesting that it is to blame for the stubbornness of many open problems in physics. Simple experiments are therefore proposed to identify `non-machines'. In one experiment, `non mechanistic correlations' in the spirit of Bell are sought in a pair of separated but previously coupled (macroscopic) chaotic systems. In another it is tested whether chaotic systems could fuzzily `remember their future' in the sense that a future binary perturbation applied to them could be inferred from their present behavior with probability>1/2. Chaotic systems are chosen as candidates because the long-time application of their (deterministic) mechanistic description is conceptually groundless: All scales are significant and mutually coupled in that regime, down to scales governed by QM, yet the quantum-classical transition remains inexplicable---if only due to the measurement problem. Similarly for so-called non-deterministic chaotic systems, modeled as such purely for defying a short-time deterministic mechanistic description. Should a non mechanistic signature be found in such simple systems, the implications for science as a whole and life sciences in particular cannot be overstated.
We humans are natural-born engineers. As such, we model after machines not only isolated, naturally occurring systems, but also the basic laws of physics, sharing with machines a local-evolution-of-state grammar'. However, previous work by the author casts doubt upon this mechanistic paradigm, suggesting that it is to blame for the stubbornness of many open problems in physics. Simple experiments are therefore proposed to identify non-machines'. In one experiment, non mechanistic correlations' in the spirit of Bell are sought in a pair of separated but previously coupled (macroscopic) chaotic systems. In another it is tested whether chaotic systems could fuzzily remember their future' in the sense that a future binary perturbation applied to them could be inferred from their present behavior with probability>1/2. Chaotic systems are chosen as candidates because the long-time application of their (deterministic) mechanistic description is conceptually groundless: All scales are significant and mutually coupled in that regime, down to scales governed by QM, yet the quantum-classical transition remains inexplicable---if only due to the measurement problem. Similarly for so-called non-deterministic chaotic systems, modeled as such purely for defying a short-time deterministic mechanistic description. Should a non mechanistic signature be found in such simple systems, the implications for science as a whole and life sciences in particular cannot be overstated.
We humans are natural-born engineers. As such, we model after machines not only isolated, naturally occurring systems, but also the basic laws of physics, sharing with machines a local-evolution-of-state `grammar'. However, previous work by the author casts doubt upon this mechanistic paradigm, suggesting that it is to blame for the stubbornness of many open problems in physics. Simple experiments are therefore proposed to identify `non-machines'. In one experiment, `non mechanistic correlations' in the spirit of Bell are sought in a pair of separated but previously coupled (macroscopic) chaotic systems. In another it is tested whether chaotic systems could fuzzily `remember their future' in the sense that a future binary perturbation applied to them could be inferred from their present behavior with probability>1/2. Chaotic systems are chosen as candidates because the long-time application of their (deterministic) mechanistic description is conceptually groundless: All scales are significant and mutually coupled in that regime, down to scales governed by QM, yet the quantum-classical transition remains inexplicable---if only due to the measurement problem. Similarly for non-deterministic chaotic systems, modeled as such purely for defying a short-time deterministic mechanistic description. Should a non mechanistic signature be found in such simple systems, the implications for science as a whole and life sciences in particular cannot be overstated.
We humans are natural-born engineers. As such, we model after machines not only isolated, naturally occurring systems, but also the basic laws of physics, sharing with machines a local-evolution-of-state `grammar'. However, previous work by the author casts doubt upon this mechanistic paradigm, suggesting that it is to blame for the stubbornness of many open problems in physics. Simple experiments are therefore proposed to identify `non-machines'. In one experiment, `non mechanistic correlations' in the spirit of Bell are sought in a pair of separated but previously coupled (macroscopic) chaotic systems. In another it is tested whether chaotic systems could fuzzily `remember their future' in the sense that a future binary perturbation applied to them could be inferred from their present behavior with probability>1/2. Chaotic systems are chosen as candidates because the long-time application of their (deterministic) mechanistic description is conceptually groundless: All scales are significant and mutually coupled in that regime, down to scales governed by QM, yet the quantum-classical transition remains inexplicable---if only due to the measurement problem. Similarly for non-deterministic chaotic systems, modeled as such purely for defying a short-time deterministic mechanistic description. Should a non mechanistic signature be found in such simple systems, the implications for science as a whole and life sciences in particular cannot be overstated.
The following is undisputed: 1. The conceptual relation between QM, describing microscopic physics, and macroscopic irreversible physics, is as mysterious today as eighty years ago. 2. When propagating chaotic equations, arbitrarily small scales gradually become significant at arbitrarily large scales. It follows that, the long-time behavior of chaotic systems is as mysterious today as eighty years ago. Previous work by the author sheds new light on the quantum-classical riddle, suggesting that quantum weirdness is a signature of a non mechanistic ontology, viz., one not describable by some generalized state-vector plus evolution rule thereof. It is argued that neither an empirical nor a theoretical case exists against such non mechanistic ontology manifesting in certain macroscopic chaotic systems. Bell's inequality violation by separated but previously coupled such systems is one example. More radically, it is hypothesized that certain systems could fuzzily `remember their future' in the sense that, a future perturbation applied to them could be inferred from their present behavior with probability>0.5. Experiments utilizing machine learning are proposed for testing such hypotheses.
The following is undisputed: 1. The conceptual relation between QM, describing microscopic physics, and macroscopic irreversible physics, is as mysterious today as eighty years ago. 2. When propagating chaotic equations, arbitrarily small scales gradually become significant at arbitrarily large scales. It follows that, the long-time behavior of chaotic systems is as mysterious today as eighty years ago. Previous work by the author sheds new light on the quantum-classical riddle, suggesting that quantum weirdness is a signature of a non mechanistic ontology, viz., one not describable by some generalized state-vector plus evolution rule thereof. It is argued that neither an empirical nor a theoretical case exists against such non mechanistic ontology manifesting in certain macroscopic chaotic systems. Bell's inequality violation by separated but previously coupled such systems is one example. More radically, it is hypothesized that certain systems could fuzzily `remember their future' in the sense that, a future perturbation applied to them could be inferred from their present behavior with probability>0.5. Experiments utilizing machine learning are proposed for testing such hypotheses.
ABSTRACT Sanna-Maria Salmi Quantum phenomena changing the world? ̶ A descriptive literature review 116 p. December, 2018. Diaconia University of Applied Sciences Master’s Degree in Health Care Master of Social Services Master’s Degree Programme of Community Development, Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Quantum physics revolutionized our understanding of reality approximately a hundred years ago. The Newtonian classical, mechanistical paradigm was challenged by the quantum theory. The development in physics has often been unnoticed in the other sciences. It has been said that the mechanistical paradigm cannot solve the problems that humanity is facing. It has even been said that many of today’s problems are caused by the dualistic understanding of the human, society and reality. The aim of this research is to find out in which ways the paradigm shift in quantum physics has inspired the development of new ideas in social sciences and healthcare and in which ways these ideas could be used to shape the future. The goal of this thesis is to produce a concise, easily accessible, general view for the reader to gain an understanding of the “quantum” phenomena. If one so chooses, this could also provide tools for reflecting on one’s own worldview, the general western worldview, identity, work and organizations from this perspective. It could even provide inspiration to start working as a transformation agent in one’s own environment, in order to question the existing structures. The research was carried out using the descriptive literature review method. Research material was gathered from the several databases, and manual searches were also performed. The research material consists of one book, one book chapter a, doctoral dissertation and four articles. The material was analyzed using content-based content analysis. The results were separated to different categories: Quantum in social science, quantum in healthcare, quantum leadership, quantum theory in psychotherapy, quantum theory and human rights and the new holistic paradigm. Finally, a model of society, based on the unity, was created. The “quantum” has inspired researching new perspectives on almost everything in social sciences and nursing science. It could provide a new philosophical foundation, based on the unity of all. It personally challenges everybody to reflect on one’s own worldview, which builds a foundation in developing our society and institutions, which are basically created by human intentions. Consciousness is in a central role. When change is understood to be the nature of life, the perspective needs to change from processes to relationships. Leadership principles need to change accordingly, as leaders have a central role in the changemaking process. The concept of nature also gets a central role, as human beings are now a part of a system, instead of being the ruler of all. Keywords: Quantum, quantum theory, quantum entanglement, quantum social science, quantum leadership, quantum nursing, new paradigm, development, human rights, organisational change, self-awareness, global change, holism, dialogue, literature review.
The relationship between chaos and quantum mechanics has been somewhat uneasy--even stormy, in the minds of some people. However, much of the confusion may stem from inappropriate comparisons using formal analyses. In contrast, our starting point here is that a complete dynamical description requires a full understanding of the evolution of measured systems, necessary to explain actual experimental results. This is of course true, both classically and quantum mechanically. Because the evolution of the physical state is now conditioned on measurement results, the dynamics of such systems is intrinsically nonlinear even at the level of distribution functions. Due to this feature, the physically more complete treatment reveals the existence of dynamical regimes--such as chaos--that have no direct counterpart in the linear (unobserved) case. Moreover, this treatment allows for understanding how an effective classical behavior can result from the dynamics of an observed quantum system, both at the level of trajectories as well as distribution functions. Finally, we have the striking prediction that time-series from measured quantum systems can be chaotic far from the classical regime, with Lyapunov exponents differing from their classical values. These predictions can be tested in next-generation experiments.